“Emails from “attack ad” science group posted“. Anthony Watts is happy to report that a new batch of scientist’s private e-mails have been “obtained” by The Washington Times and are being quote-minded for juicy bits. Somehow the Competitive Enterprise Institute has “independently obtained” the e-mails too. Anthony says that the “e-mails reveal a group of scientists plotting a political strategy to minimize the effects of Climategate.” I say that the Climategate thing has coasted to a halt and the disappointed denialists are giving the tactic another try to get the hit of attention they crave.
So who are these Machiavellian “prominent climate scientists affiliated with the U.S. National Academies of Science”? Well, actually they seem to be biologists not climatologists, and they are simply members of NAS, not representatives of it. What is their “scheme”? Raise money to pay for a newspaper ad that would highlight the unaccountable falsehoods and character assassination that the denialists deal in. Now that’s nefarious!
Because everyone knows that scientists shouldn’t be allowed to have political opinions, or even worst, express them. That’s reserved for “think tanks” and cranks.
The ‘damning’ quotes Anthony presents are almost comically tepid. Here’s a typical one: “Op eds in the NY Times and other national newspapers would also be great.”
Wott's Up With That? 
Anthony Watts’ site is not “anti-science” and he’s worked tirelessly to expose a grand hoax. You should thank him for his efforts not build silly straw men!
It is the sky-is-falling, again and again, people of science, education and journalism who’ve breached their ethical and professional standards. They should be ashamed for setting climate science back decades…
Oh, please! Anthony is working tirelessly (if ineptly) to create a grand hoax.
Fortunately my education was classical. Two professional degrees, a professional practice for decades and the wonders of motherhood require me to see the world as it is [You are sadly not “meeting requirements” then, are you? – Ben].
Phil Jones and Michael Mann destroyed their own credibility when they chose to hide/manipulate data. [just because you want to believe something doesn’t make it true. Please back your assertion with some facts. – Ben] They’re not as rotten as Professor Ward Churchill but their willingness to misrepresent and then withold underlying data is wrong and they too should be fired. Certainly professionals in the private sector would have been fired.
I’m happy to see the AGW hoax exposed. Now I hope our primary school teachers will return to the task of teaching hard science and math in their centuries’ old tradition. For without their return to the basics our children will fall further and further behind – fact… [Ah yes, the good old days. Everything was better back then. – Ben]
WUWT is more definitely “anti-science” in the strictest definition of the word – it is against the science.
If you want an easy explanation of who is science and who is anti-science, look no further than how much WUWT deviates from purely scientific Q&A when they claim to be addressing science.
My favorite WUWT story along this line was recently (“The most slimy essay ever from the Guardian and Columbia University” Feb 22) Anthony claimed that “no scientific organizations were stepping forward to ask the tough questions” (his words) in climate science. I asked what were the tough questions? I suggested he post them prominently. Rather than do that, or promise to get back to that at a later date, he pointed me to a nonsense blog post that included drivel about Al Gore’s SF condo purchase. Anthony explicitly said he wasn’t going to put his own list together. So much for science.
[The problem with so many in the anti-AGW crowd is that their intellectual capacities have been slashed by Gore Derangement Syndrome. – Ben]