O…M…G – Video explodes skeptical kids in bloodbath. Anthony Watts joins in the “astonishment” and “outrage” over this poorly conceived video. I have to point out that the blowin’ up kids bit is only the first of the four scenes. No compassion for white-collar workers, footballers or hard-working narrators?
10:10 exploding skeptical children video “disappears”. Anthony wants to know where the video has gone. Did Dr. Phil Jones e-mail everyone to delete it? Wait he’s found it again! Those wishing to refresh their outrage should click-through.
A message to 10:10 -”sorry”, just doesn’t cut it. Why, oh why would Anthony accept the video author’s apologies when he can continue to use it to malign all environmentalists?
WUWT’s story on 10:10 – 3rd most popular on WordPress globally – even in New Zealand. Anthony boasts about his web statistics. That was a given, wasn’t it?
Blow Me Up, Blow Me Down. Thomas Fuller continues to represent this video as proof that environmentalists think that “it’s okay to ostracize, bully and dismiss those who don’t agree that climate change”. Apparently their intent “is to legitimize the cruelty of children towards each other”. Go get ’em, Junior! Thomas knows he’s gone off the deep end though, because he spends a lot of time trying to preëmpt charges of Nazi allusions (while accusing environmentalists of doing it first).
Wott's Up With That? 
I proposed that instead of blowing them up we should instead be eating our children. Otherwise we are wasting them.
[Amen to that! I’ve heard that they’re delicious. I guess when Fuller was casting about for literary allusions he didn’t find “A Modest Proposal” to be helpful. – Ben]
Someone created subtitles on this 10:10 video
It’s always fun to look at the comments.
[Provides a bit more context, but I’m still not crazy about this video… – Ben]
I also thought this one was interesting
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/10/02/the-other-embarrassing-agw-story-this-week/
Anthony simultaneously wants to highlight the message of a terrorist because he finds it useful while expecting everyone else to be grateful for having the opportunity to say they don’t support terrorism.
I guess this it the kind of “balance” we’re all meant to be striving for, perhaps the next IPCC report should lead with a section on skeptical views and then scientists can explain their positions on puppy kicking.
Which part of “it was immediately withdrawn” does he not understand?
To be completely consistent, he really should demand that the Red Cross disassociate themselves from bin Laden as well. They both think that people should send aid to Pakistan!