Discussion thread: Reddit Bans Climate Change Skeptics

Discussion thread: Reddit Bans Climate Change Skeptics (2013-12-20). This is rich; Anthony Watts, who uses his website’s commenting policy to impede and frustrate critics of denialism, has suddenly noticed that Reddit banned “climate change skeptics” from its /r/science forum. A year ago.

Anthony excerpts an article from that bastion of honesty and impartiality, Fox News, to ‘splain it. Strange though that Anthony’s copy-and-paste fails to include this bit:

While there is a subreddit dedicated to climate skeptics, it has far less research than the larger science board.

I love the quote from famously dishonest denialist journalist James Delingpole that Anthony seems to want to highlight. it’s a beautiful example of free-floating, illogical, baseless political resentment:

“The greenies — and their many useful idiots in the liberal media — are terrified of open debate on climate-change because the real world evidence long ago parted company with their scientifically threadbare theory,” Delingpole told FoxNews.com, arguing that Allen’s tactic is part of a “classic liberal defense mechanism: If the facts don’t support you, then close down the argument.”

Seems pretty clear that Reddit moderator Nathan Allen understands readers of Watts Up With That? well:

They had no idea that the smart-sounding talking points from their preferred climate blog were, even to a casual climate science observer, plainly wrong.”

Have a look at the comments in Anthony’s post for the delusional nonsense Nathan recognizes as so poisonous to intelligent conversation.

“Watching the Deniers” makes hilarious goof while accusing WUWT of “doctoring” NSIDC images

“Watching the Deniers” makes hilarious goof while accusing WUWT of “doctoring” NSIDC images (2013-07-05). If Anthony ever happens to be right about something, which like a stopped clock is about once every 43,200 instances, you can be sure he’ll beat it to death (or is it more strut about like a rooster?). When Anthony’s Aussie ditto head Eric Worrall spotted an accusation at Watching the Deniers (WtD) that Anthony had doctored an Arctic Sea Ice Extent graph to conceal the fact that the decline in Arctic ice extent was more than 2 standard deviations away from Anthony went .

Silly Mike, Anthony only by pure chance used the option on the NSIDC charting web page that suppressed the display of statistical significance! That’s just misrepresentation, not dishonesty, the kind of thin line that Anthony spends his life dancing back and forth over.

Anthony Watts likes to use the version of this chart that excludes statistical context. Makes it easier to imply that every wiggle is “just natural”.

Anthony Watts likes to use the version of this chart that excludes statistical context. Makes it easier to imply that every wiggle is “just natural”. Click to see the difference.

After a short display of indignation Anthony runs quickly through the gamut of blogging postures.

  • Victim card: WtD is driven by “hatred”!
  • Anticipation of censorship: “I’ve left a comment explaining Mr. Marriott’s absurd misconception and asked for an apology. We’ll see if it passes moderation, and if he lives up to his “professional services” label.” Oh, it made it along with all the other denialist ditto head attacks. Mike ain’t you, Anthony.
  • Megalomania: The king of the interwebs commandeth and threatens – “Change it sir. I won’t ask again.”
  • Ad hominem digging.
  • Dog whistle: “In the meantime, you can leave comments here.
  • An update to the whining: Anthony contentedly reports that WtD has been forced to change their post, retracting the “photoshop” claim. Funny I can’t recall Anthony ever doing the same, I guess he’s always been right.

Thus ending Global Warming. Which was natural anyway if it was happening. Which it wasn’t.

Pielke Jr. appears to get booted from a journal for giving an unfavorable peer review to some shoddy science

Pielke Jr. appears to get booted from a journal for giving an unfavorable peer review to some shoddy science (2013-02-21). So much truculent stupidity at Watts Up With That recently! All just background noise here in the world of reality. This one’s entertaining though, especially as once again it illuminates Anthony Watts’ habit of blindly piling on any complaint of persecution of fellow denialists.

What happened? Dr. Roger Pielke Jr. wrote another of his “everyone’s mean to me” blog posts because he was dropped from the editorial board of Global Environmental Change. Why? Because they hate him and only ever pretended to like him. The reality however is hilariously different.

First though, Anthony’s contribution. He insta-pasted a snide accusation from Mark Steyn, a notoriously inflammatory right-wing flunky, who after the obligatory self-referential muttering about the evil Dr. Michael Mann declared that “…Professor Pielke, expelled by the palace guard of climate conformism, appears to have been felled by the very pathology he identified.”

Our un-inquisitive and hasty Anthony was forced to walk it back a bit though as you will notice when carefully examining his post’s slug; “pielke-jr-gets-booted-from-journal-for-giving-an-unfavorable-peer-review-to-some-shoddy-science”. It’s missing the ass-covering “appears to get” which was added to the post title later. The post now starts with a non-correction by Roger. It seems he still considers himself rudely dumped, but not for the reason he howled about. I can still hear the wahhhh-mbulance though.

So what really happened? The thin-skinned drama queen thought he was kicked to the curb as payback for his blog criticism (Science is the Shortcut) of a paper, Climate change prediction: Erring on the side of least drama?, published in Global Environmental Change. Sadly, it turns out that none of the journal’s other board members were even aware of Roger’s devastating blast, making it hard to sustain the accusation.

In fact, Roger had reached the end of his term and had clearly been coasting. Expected to review up to five papers a year, as many as 30 in his six years, he had been requested to review 18 papers. He’d only actually reviewed six and hadn’t submitted a review since August 2010. His replacement coincided with that of five others, who presumably all simultaneously pissed off the secret editorial board leaders…

2013-02-23 Update: “Rabett” calls it: victim bullying.

Beyond bizarre: University of Graz music professor calls for skeptic death sentences

Beyond bizarre: University of Graz music professor calls for skeptic death sentences (2012-12-23). Did you hear the one about the German music professor who thinks denialists should be executed? Anthony Watts heard it from Australian denialist Jo Nova (the “German” professor is actually Australian) and it’s hilarious!

Seems that Professor Richard Parncutt suggested in a rambling web essay that “the death penalty is an appropriate punishment for influential GW deniers” for “causing the deaths of hundreds of millions of future people” through their delaying tactics! Except he’s “not directly suggesting that the threat of execution be carried out.”

Of course this means that Anthony’s foes at Skeptical Science and DeSmogBlog are “motiviating [sp] this man’s hate”! Except of course that they haven’t. Professor Parncutt simply lists Skeptical Science and DeSmogBlog in passing as accurate resources for climate science information.

So it’s down to complaining about random members of the public now, is it Anthony?

Frontline responds to complaints about Oct 23 “Climate of Doubt”: Here, the Rebuttal to Frontline that PBS Ombudsman Won’t Put Online

“Frontline responds to complaints about Oct 23 “Climate of Doubt”: Here, the Rebuttal to Frontline that PBS Ombudsman Won’t Put Online” (2012-11-17). Anthony Watts want the world to know that Russell Cook (Dr.? Nope.) is pissed that the PBS Ombudsman won’t let him spiral off into vortex of yes but’s, replete with home-grown acronyms, over every dismissal of his complaints about PBS Frontline’s excoriating look at the politics of climate denialism, “Climate of Doubt”.

We were careful to base our reporting on the most credible and transparent sources we could find and verify. – sez the PBS Ombudsman

Monckton! Blogs! Fake think-tanks! Sez Russell Cook, in a tour de force demonstration of denialist Tourette syndrome.

I suppose I can understand Russell’s confusion. No doubt his experience at WUWT has taught him that internet forums are the natural home of delusional assertions and attention-seeking behavior.

Someone remind me: what’s the sound of one hand clapping?

Friday Funny – David Suzuki goes postal

“Friday Funny – David Suzuki goes postal” (2012-11-09). Anthony Watts re-blogs the Heartland Institute’s A Polite Discourse with Professional Climate Alarmist David Suzuki, where right-wing political hack Jim Lakely pretends that sending a Heartland Institute published rant on climate science (Roosters Of The Apocalypse: How The Junk Science Of Global Warming Nearly Bankrupted The Western World) was an attempt at “polite discourse.” (“Roosters” didn’t exactly make a splash back in February, this Bismarck Tribute review is the first real analysis that shows up in Google.)

Here’s Lakely’s attempt at polite discourse:

  1. He publishes and attacks a private correspondence.
  2. He calls Dr. Suzuki a “Professional Climate Alarmist”.
  3. He calls Dr. Suzuki childish.
  4. He puts “esteemed scientist” in sneer-quotes.
  5. He dismisses a renowned environmental scientist as expressing “faith-based climate views”.
  6. He ignores the entirety of environmental science to write “defaming people who disagree is the only trick aging alarmists like him have left.”

Here’s the note Dr. Suzuki wrote on his return-to-sender package:

“I am a scientist and I take great umbrage at being sent such a load of crap from a bullshit shill organization for the oil industry. You are the most anti-science group I can imagine.

David Suzuki.”

Seems pretty accurate to me, Anthony. In fact it applies equally to you, although I suspect your motivation is garden-variety incoherent libertarianism.

Neil Armstrong, First Man on the Moon: 1930-2012

Neil Armstrong, First Man on the Moon: 1930-2012 (2012-08-25). Do you really think that Anthony Watts would pass up the chance to sidle up beside a great man so he can poke his nose into the spotlight? Bet your ass not.

“America has just lost its most heroic son” declares Anthony, tissue dabbing the corner of his eye as he ‘reflects’ on the death of Neil Armstrong, first man to step on the surface of the Moon.

I wonder if Anthony will recognize the contrast: Neil Armstrong did something courageous and audacious. He was part of a concerted effort to face a challenge that had no guarantee of success, that required the best efforts of the entire nation and had to be reinvented every step along the way to finally achieve it. That was America in the 1960’s.

Denialists today say the environmental risks we clearly face aren’t so bad (maybe they’re even good!), are lies, or can’t be conveniently solved and fight for inaction. This is Tea Party America in the 2000’s.

America has gone from “can do ” to “can’t do”.

So Anthony when you declare, through crocodile tears, that “America’s manned space program is also dead” remember that thinking people know that it’s wounds come from the determined efforts of ‘small government’ political zealots like yourself. Reflect on that while you pretend to exalt NASA’s most famous representative.

Farewell to Neil Armstrong, a courageous and dedicated explorer from a time when America faced challenges rather than set them aside and bickered over them.

We choose to go to the moon. We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too. – President Kennedy, 1962.