You really are off the deep end.
Kookie Charlie.

Charles,
What you are saying is totally wrong and total nonsense. First, I AM NOT A CLIMATE SKEPTIC. Why do you continuously repeat that inflammatory untruth? Global warming is a serious threat to our environment/planet and its effects are already being felt. The science is clear. I have published about global warming in the peer-reviewed literature about it. How many times do I need to ask you to stop lying about my position. Second, I am NOT saying that we can continue with the same approach. I have pushed for a carbon tax, WHICH YOU OPPOSED. I am a strong advocate of movement to renewable energy, such as solar and wind. And I walk the walk, by bicycling to work everyday and reducing air travel. Finally, I am not a weatherperson but an atmospheric scientist. Charles, journalists need to communicate the truth and not make up "convenient lies" like you are doing. ..cliff mass

Sounds like someone is still upset they didn't get a Teddy Ruxpin when growing up.

@2
Thanks for saying it as Charles is really going way beyobd into opinion and into lying.

@2 I am afraid, Dr Mass, that it is the color of your skin that got Charles stuck on his lie. If you were darker he might drop it.

this sure is a heck of a lot of words just to say, "I'm mad that I got roasted in a debate where I was required to present facts".

the folks at the stranger that are actually attempting journalism should be embarrassed you were allowed to publish this.

Charles,
You are in danger of becoming a total liar and fool.
You have a duty to make your case to show that Mass is a "climate skeptic".
Speak -- or hold your peace.

And yet you buy wine from a gas station. Hypocritical much?

Ok Charles, I'm a big fan of yours and even I'm at the point where I'm starting to think you need to, wait for it...cool it.
Puns resoundingly intended.

No cliff, you aren't a skeptic. You are far worse. You know climate change is happening and you know extreme change is needed but you can't stomach the change so you sit and wish for a miracle while trying to lull everyone else into complacency. Fuck you.

Charles, you are off-base in the sense that Cliff Mass isn't motivated by a desire to maintain the middle-class status quo. He is motivated by something significantly more dangerous.

The most important thing to remember about Cliff Mass is that he is more concerned about a scientific misattribution in a Seattle Times article than he is about an entire political party systematically pushing our planet toward a mass-extinction level event as part of its core platform.

Cliff Mass believes that mildly alarmist news articles pose a significantly greater danger to the future of the planet Earth than an outright refusal by a political party to even acknowledge the very existence of climate change.

Cliff spends almost all of his opportunities when talking about climate change to excoriate liberals for being alarmist. To him, this is the greatest danger our planet faces in its future: Seattle Times articles.

Hey, Cliff: I dunno. I might be wrong, maybe I'm a little off base, but I'm pretty fuckin' sure Donald Trump didn't back out of the Paris Accords because of the article about the stupid tree in the arboretum in Seattle or the mayor being concerned about snowpack. But, you know, maybe you can keep dedicating all your energy to making sure the "leftists" aren't hurting anybody's feelings. That seems to be what makes you most upset.

And, Charles, I would begrudgingly admit that you're wrong: Cliff Mass is not a climate change skeptic. His issue is one of tactics.

He genuinely, honestly, truly believes that Republicans do not accept the facts of climate science because the liberals hurt their feelings too much with alarmist Seattle Times articles.

He doesn't need to be a denialist or a skeptic to be dangerous. He's far more dangerous by believing that the barrier to all climate change progress rests solely in the hands of liberals and alarmist news media. This is what he dedicates nearly all of his public energy toward fighting.

If anybody here has an accusation/claim must present evidence/facts/documentation.

If not, STFU

@11, @12 You haven't read a single word of Mass's opinion on this subject, have you? If you have, only little wit can excuse you. What load of drek.

@14, I've read almost everything Cliff has written in the last few years on this subject in his blog and in his comments. Even a casual reading would easily reveal that Cliff Mass dedicates significantly more energy and time refuting climate alarmism rather than fighting climate denialism. If the words Cliff Mass writes are an indication of what he feels is important to discuss, than Cliff clearly believes it's important to fight back against the Seattle Times, the left, environmentalists, and so on.

This is why it's easy for people to be mistaken when they call Cliff Mass a climate denialist: it's because he never has a bad thing to say about the Republicans and right-wing approach to climate change. Instead, he almost always prioritizes his critical energy for arguments against the "alarmist" left and the media.

But, you know, the rest of us in the real world don't struggle as much with realizing that the real threat to climate action isn't coming from liberals who get a little too eager in Seattle. We know that the real threat comes from an entire political party that will happily march us into extinction because they refuse to believe in the very existence of climate change.

If I were a university-employed weatherperson like Cliff Mass, I would maybe think about how I could use my influence and knowledge to combat the denialists, since they're the ones who are doing real and actual harm, and not the alarmists, since -- worst case scenario -- they're wrong and we end up spending a bit more money to have a healthier, cleaner planet anyway.

Additionally, I won't get into the psychological explanations for why Cliff does these things, as Charles often does. Instead, I'm going to stay focused on the facts, and the facts are clear: Cliff Mass dedicates the majority of his influence and energies to fighting climate alarmism at significantly greater levels than fighting climate denialism.

Cliff's reasons for this prioritization are that are his own, but it's important that we work from a basis of "FACTS," as Cliff and his defenders might say.

@16
OK that's a start but now we need some specific citations and links otherwise you're still talking bullshit.

@16
And no I'm not going to do the work for you
-- you go look it up and show us the links

I'd say some here dedicate too much of their energies attacking each other rather than focussing on getting some real, tangible, beneficial changes made at our state and local levels.
There's a lot we *could* be doing to reduce emissions AND clean up the environment, rather than spending time online warring with strangers. We might actually improve our quality of life!
For starters:
Banning plastic water bottles
Implementing and enforcing stricter vehicle emissions
Banning wood burning fireplaces
Raising the gas tax
Raising the cigarette tax

@18, here are links from the first four pages of a Google search of Cliff's site for the word, "Climate"

May 13, 2007: http://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2017/05/se…

March 21, 2016: http://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2016/03/th…

March 16, 2013: http://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2013/03/cl…

August 9, 2012: http://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2012/08/cl…

July 29, 2012: http://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2012/07/cl…

April 9, 2015: http://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2015/04/hu…

August 28, 2016: http://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2016/08/wi…

April 21, 2017: http://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2017/04/wh…

November 8, 2016: http://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2016/11/el…

April 22, 2012: http://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2012/04/ex…

January 6, 2014: http://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2014/01/do…

July 15, 2012: http://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2012/07/te…

October 26, 2015: http://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2015/10/gl…

January 13, 2016: http://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2016/01/wh…

February 13, 2016: http://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2014/02/wh…

@15 Well, you certainly said one that that is accurate and (IMO) indisputable; "...the real threat to climate action isn't coming from liberals who get a little too eager in Seattle."

Also, just so it's clear; I dislike Mudede's lying and the incessant race baiting that permeates all his writing. That he is oblivious to it is especially irksome. But in his thrashing the other day he did (as he has in the past) said a number of things that were right and Mass was wrong(ish) - mostly Mudede's argument that attitudes CAN change and that is where much hope lies. I agree. We can change whole populations' minds on things. The women's rights and civil rights movements showed that (I don't want to hear any shit about how racist and misogynist the U.S. is today. You want real misogyny and real racism, go back before the CR and WR movements). The environmental movement was a paradigm shift in the thinking of entire countries and was diametrically opposite to common thinking before. So the lying racist is right about that part of the issue and Mass isn't quite there.

Let's say there's a home in Seattle and it's soaked from roof to basement in diesel fuel, and there's a man walking toward it with a lit match.

A Republican would tell the man, "it's OK. It won't burn. Fuel doesn't burn." A Democrat would tell the man, "Oh my god, are you CRAZY! That house is covered in gasoline! You need to stop!"

Cliff Mass would be tsk tsking, in a series of lengthy, years-long blog posts, the Democrat, because they said "gasoline" instead of "diesel."

@20
Thanks and I have only had a chance to read one which is the last one on your list, the very latest one, and I guess I don't understand how it says that he doesn't believe in climate change… Let me put it another way to make sure --- that article does not show rejection of climate change. So far as I understand it, he says that this particular phenomenon of cold waves and is not clearly connected to climate change.

Just an aside even if you and I agree that climate change is real and a major serious problem, we still have substantial differences of opinion about what to do by way of individual and public policy. So accepting climate change as a scientific phenomenon in reality is just the start of a much larger discussion of what to do.

I hate to see Cliff Mass engage in partisan politics. It's bad for scientists to engage in politics because the search for truth should be independent of political concerns. Just kidding, Cliff Mass needs to grow up and pick a side.

@12 15 16 20

yep

Seriously, if Cliff Mass is not a climate skeptic, then we need to broaden the definition to include those who encourage skepticism.

Charles,
Maybe we can widen definition of "racism" to include your approach and opinions?

Bunch of right wing assholes spread false news and charles cries #fakenews.

Scientist wants to go on facts, data and statistical models and charles constantly ridicules him for it because charles "believes" and has "faith" and feels the situation justifies him jumping to conclusions without data.

Cliff, I listened to the debate and you seem like a perfectly reasonable man, and a good scientist. Charles is trolling you and you're falling for it. Trolls are going to troll.

I recently came to the conclusion that while charles likes to present himself as a scholar, philosopher and scientific thinking, he is in fact a politician. He'll use scholary/scientific/philosophical practices as long as they support his beliefs. When they contradict his beliefs he'll ignore them. Often he'll refuse to reduce things to first principles because it would show his logical fallacies.

For example recently charles stated trees hate dogs because dog pee hurts trees, inferring dogs are bad because they hurt trees. This is only true if you believe it is wrong to hurt trees. But once you believe that you must then come to the conclusion it is wrong to use paper since a tree must be destroyed. Yet charles works at a paper and his words have been printed on many dead trees...

Anyways Cliff ignore charles.

Also shoutout to Eli sanders, he did an amazing job moderating that debate.

Also what the fuck is a climate skeptic? I'm pretty sure cliff believes there is a climate.

Also i want to clairfy since charles gets a lot of unfair hate, charles does have a lot of great thoughts and posts, its just often he's more of a politician than a scholar. Anyways i'm glad charles is still at the stranger causes I've learnt a lot from his writing, but the stuff with cliff is just getting abusive at this point.

"The American Way of Consuming and Wasting Energy" .... says the guy who lives in a single-family home in a residential neighborhood.

So Charles, since we're talking about racism, what's your opinion of what's happening in Olympia? You know at the Evergreen school. Is that professor a racist? Or the kids stupid?

I believe the only way forward on climate change is a bipartisan one. Those of us concerned about global warming must reach out to moderates and build a coalition. This can not happen if folks on the environmental left hype and exaggeration GW effects and combine GW with their social issues. As this week and Trump's election has proven, we need to find a way to work together with Republican moderates.

I believe Mr. Mass should be terminated from "weather reporting" so he can go to an accredited institution where they can surgically remove his head from deep within his anus. It is a terrible tragedy that someone who alleges an education in climate science would cling to neo-luddite fascist delusions about whether or not "we are safe here in the northwest".

This is the happy place of the scum of the earth. The "hurray for me and F*** the rest of the world". A self centered egotistical "real man" of the Infowars variety has no business or right to broadcast his bile or, God forbid, teach youth.

With repsect to his denial wrapped around carefully harvested facts of convenience completely ignores the FACT that WEATHER IS NOT CLIMATE. Someone this irresponsible and self serving should not be allowed to broadcast to the public. The only solution to climate change is the global green energy revolution. To even entertain the filth and lies of big energy is to be willfully ignorant to the fact that it has been clearly exposed that big oil has known for over a quarter of a century they were destroying the planet.
KPLU: get rid of this reich wing looney tune and recover some public respect.

Thank you, Cliff, for confirming and agreeing with my assessment of you. You believe that climate alarmism is what's holding back political progress on global warming policy. I suppose that, in your mind, the reason Republicans don't even believe in the very concept of climate change is because the Seattle Times published an article about a tree dying.

If only those liberals hadn't made republicans so, so mad with their alarmism, maybe they wouldn't have been forced to believe that climate change doesn't even exist.

Again, thank you for confirming my assessment of your mindset: you believe that the greatest roadblock to policy progress on global warming is from environmentalists and the news media. That really, truly does say a lot about you.

Charles Mudede said: "Seriously, if Cliff Mass is not a climate skeptic, then we need to broaden the definition to include those who encourage skepticism."
Well Charles...that is a pretty strange definition. But using it, I would suggest that you are a major skeptic. Nothing encourages skepticism more than folks like you, who transparently exaggerate and make up GW effects and try to push your political agenda. You are doing all you can to undermine attempts to really deal with the problem--such as carbon taxes....

JortSandwich... you have completely distorted my position. Climate alarmism is certainly a problem...but not the only one. There is plenty of blame to go around.

So Tired of Trolls....is is REALLY necessary to use crude language and call names? Can't you express yourself in a more constructive way?

@39, of course Cliff, and thank you, once again, for so clearly agreeing with my assessment of you. It is extremely helpful and validating to have my thesis proven right so easily and readily by my subject.

You dedicate almost the entirety of your critical energies and efforts at fighting climate alarmism, rather than denialism. This can lead one to very understand, very simply, that you believe you believe that climate alarmism is a greater threat to fight than denialism.

Guess what, though? Alarmism isn't going to kill our planet. Denialism will, though, so, I dunno -- maybe I would spend more of my time trying to fight that, instead?

Just to clarify, because I think this is really important to understand: Cliff Mass, you believe that liberals and environmentalists who hurt people's feelings about climate alarmism are more important to fight than people who just outright deny the existence of climate change.

This is a truly, critically important thing to understand about Cliff Mass, because it is the foundation for everything he does in his approach to climate science in the public sphere.

There may be "Plenty of blame to go around," but you relentlessly, pathologically focus blame on the alarmists rather than the deniers.

Don't be surprised when people call you out on your obviously misguided commentary. And I can do that really easily, without "calling names."

Charles, you are a Grade A mor*n. How could the stranger employ someone as stupid as you...someone who does not even believe in democracy.