My thanks to Mike Roddy for helping with BEST review

Eh, even when I try to get away from it on weekends it follows me via email.

But, I decided I’d take a moment to post this comment from Joe Romm’s Climate Progress somebody sent me that popped up on my phone. I got a huge belly laugh out of it. I startled Kenji when I laughed so hard:

Meet Mike Roddy, whose picture has previously appeared here.

[Update: Image from Mike’s movie PR: http://northwardho.blogspot.com/2008/09/polar-cities-go-hollywood-2112-hopes-to.html ]

Mike has always been a class act at Climate Progress, as you can see below:

It stems from this piece Roddy wrote about me, see the “corrections” at the end, which he apparently agrees with:

http://www.webcitation.org/5x0pgZdgl

Heh. Quite something that Mike Roddy, but I’m not sure what.

But, see here’s the thing, kicking and bestiality aside, in science, replication is King, and if other scientists can’t replicate a paper’s work, well then it often doesn’t get to pass peer review when peer review works correctly and isn’t “pal” review.

That might be a minor detail with BEST, since they to put PR before peer review in a media blitzkrieg. Even so, there are many things I do agree with in their other papers. The one on quality of station siting, not so much.

But, as Steve McIntyre demonstrates, the BEST work with my station siting quality isn’t replicable. The devil is in the details. He says boldly:

I have looked at some details of the [BEST] Station Quality paper using a spreadsheet of station classification sent to me by Anthony in August 2011 and cannot replicate their results at all.

Gosh, I feel pretty good after all that kicking. Kinda reminds me of this:

BEST is at the starting line in the cartoon above. Will they survive?

About these ads

92 thoughts on “My thanks to Mike Roddy for helping with BEST review

  1. That is Mike Roddy??? I couldn’t even picture a grown man from his posts. Certainly not a man in a suit.

    This is the most brain busting thing I’ve seen all week.

  2. Even the most illiterate of listeners knows this is not about gradual warming, it’s about unprecedented, catastrophic fossil fuel induced annihilation. The believers love to play bait and switch, which I find extremely annoying, and must be the point, but remember they have nothing now. They’re losing the scientific argument as each day the flawed techniques and gross incompetence is exposed in greater detail and they’ve lost the political message, which if you’ve been following over the years is their only real objective. They have nothing left but their sneers, wretched language, name calling and petulance. They placed their entire existence in the hands of a relative few demagogic leaders and now they all stand naked for the world to see them for who they really are…and of course this terrifies them.

  3. I think “science by press release” has got to die together with “science by consensus”, “science by acclamation” and “science by censorship of opposing views” before science is ruined.

    This perverse belief in the super-powers of peer review is worse than any government propaganda, and is promoted by perverters of the scientific method like Phil Jones. The supposedly anonymous peer review process are becoming part of the side-show barking of promoters of scientific nonsense.

  4. McIntyre writes at his website:

    “Combining both stratifications, “MMTS rural good” had a post-1979 trend of 0.11 deg C/decade while “CRS urban bad” had a corresponding trend of 0.42 deg C/decade.”

    It looks to me that McIntyre takes a very dim view of BEST’s work on siting issues. I think you should have a post on it.

  5. Why not post his address and phone number while you’re at it? I’m sure your followers know what to do.

    [REPLY: GK – WUWT does not post that kind of personal information and does not encourage the harassment of people holding different views. We condemn it. -REP]

    REPLY: see comment below, that picture was a publicty photo for his movie. But seeing how that was the only thing you complained about, your true color was revealed. Thanks – Anthony

  6. ‘[REPLY: GK – WUWT does not post that kind of personal information and does not encourage the harassment of people holding different views. We condemn it. -REP]’

    And noticably unlike Mike Roddy himself….

  7. Seems that absurdist reference comes from an anecdote featuring Lyndon B. Johnson:

    LBJ once wanted and aide to accuse an opponent of having sex with farm animals. And the aide said we don’t have any evidence that he had sex with farm animals. And LBJ said,”I just want to see the SOB deny it.”

    I presume the only reasonable answer to such an accusation is to state: “Whilst watching videos of people having sex with farm animals, Mike Roddy should stop fantasizing about fellow netizens”.

    ps By the look of it, Mike Roddy better beware also of the people that laugh at his jokes

  8. @Günther Kirschbaum The image was publicly available on the web as part of a news article on another website

    http://northwardho.blogspot.com/2008/09/polar-cities-go-hollywood-2112-hopes-to.html

    Where not only his photo appears, but his name, occupation, and town. Seems he’s hawking a movie script.

    Mike Roddy even commented on it here.

    Roddy he thinks that “older white men” are the problem with climate science, which is why it was relevant to show his picture.
    =========================================

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/04/04/the-great-imaginary-ice-barrier/#comment-360746

    mike roddy says:
    April 5, 2010 at 7:56 am (Edit)

    David Appell, thanks for posting here. The skills needed are really those of a junior high science teacher, since the regulars on this blog do not even know the basics, but you have shown much needed patience and perserverance.

    Most won’t listen, since they are mostly older white men, who get their information from Fox, and whose views are set in concrete, but a few will. That makes it worthwhile.

    He replied: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/04/04/the-great-imaginary-ice-barrier/#comment-360752

    mike roddy says:
    April 5, 2010 at 8:03 am (Edit)

    sustantia8, thanks for the film clip.

    Most of the contrarians will be dead or forgotten by the time the everyday evidence of global warming becomes so obvious that it will make their notions sound like comedy pieces. Oops, maybe they already are (google my [snip]). Or, they could be so old that shaving their heads could cause injury. I suggest public dunce caps instead, required to be worn for 30 days.

    Anthony, I hope you’ll have a sense of humor about your upcoming appearance in the sequel. I’ll tone down the comeuppances next time.

    ==============================================

    So his farm animals thing was the “toned down” version I suppose.

  9. Roddy’s seemingly out-of-context references to sexual activity perhaps make more sense now that we know that his blog is the diary of a North Ward Ho.

  10. Well, this guy expects around $220 million to produce and market his movie.

    I’d say he has both a firm grasp on reality and a fine ability to “model” the future.

  11. BEST is at the starting line in the cartoon above. Will they survive?

    IF their claim to appear in the future in the next IPCC report is not simply unwarranted pride on their part (always possible I suppose), then yes, they will survive. All those exes and swords and the like will not hit since none of the wielders will even attempt to use them.

    The WebCite article was…amusing. It may also be actionable in court, and I really think it is time for skeptics to actually do that, otherwise, the warmist sill be emboldened and escalate. The purpose of the law is deterrence, and these people need deterring. Lets look at some of it:

    Misdeeds: Overnight, went from local TV weatherman to a climate “expert,” constantly attacking scientific reports for groupthink, grant-seeking greed, and phony data. Sent his minions to photograph those US temperature stations which he claimed were too close to heat sinks, skewing temperature readings.

    Overnight, which night was that, exactly, what date?
    How can you be a climate “expert” if you have never had day to day interaction on a scientific and predictive way with actual real world weather? If all you do is sit in your comfortable bureaucratic office and issue memos or hang around your computer ordering around your undergraduate slaves and never get out and actually observe the weather (climate) in the real world, how can you claim to know anything about it? You need to get out more.
    “Groupthink”, what is groupthink, do the climategate emails look like groupthink? If they do, we no longer need accusations, we can see it for ourselves.
    Grant-seeking greed, did they receive grants, do they receive more grants if they support AGW, do they receive less or no grants if they do not? In fact, have they not been caught trying, and often succeeding, in actually getting people fired for apposing AGW? Is that not my tax dollars going into those grants, and if I see evidence of grant-seeking greed, do I not have a right to look into it? If they are thus taking my money by what looks like deception, should I be able to charge them with felony “grand theft by means of deception”?
    “Phony data”, was it phony, can it be shown to be phony? If it can, and that was done with my money, see the felony charges above.
    “Minions”, hes got minions?? Nice to have minions, do they bring hin coffee, shine his shoes?
    “Claims”, I’ve seen the photographs, that’s more than “claims”, that actually is “too close to heat sinks”, according to the NOAA’s own guidelines. Claims are one thing, seeing is believing. Since I can see it, and this guy only says “claims”, I must assume that this guy is lying.

    NOAA decided to take him up on his claim and analyzed the station data from all 1218 sites, and found no evidence of bias or distortion. Anthony instantly dropped the project with no mention of his error and simply began shouting, “Climategate!” — the oil company e-burglary and nontroversy, which ultimately offered no evidence of scientific wrongdoing.

    “Found no evidence of bias or distortion”, well, of course they did not, they are bureaucrats, bureaucrats never find such things, all mistakes of any kind are always as well hidden and buried as well as bureaucrats can make them. That is because their political superiors are always looking for a reason to cut their budgets to support their own pet projects, as are their bureaucratic rivals, and mistakes are the best way to embarass them and accomplish this. This results in bureaucrats hiding such mistakes, which mean that there is no accountability, which means that the mistakes accumulate, and the unaccountable “minions” commit more and more of them since they will not pay for them (often through sheer laziness, such as never actually visiting the sites in question). And then we see the NOAA quietly (for reasons noted above) dropping the reported bad stations or modifying them (rarer, that takes work, see laziness above), which shows that while they will not admit it to the outside world, they know that there is a problem there.
    “Anthony instantly dropped the project”, date please (actually, forget the “please” part). “With no mention of his error”, seems I’ve seen plenty of mention, nothing about error though, mention made after the mythical date the project was ‘dropped”. And how can there be ‘error” when I have seen the bad siting in photographs myself? I mean, seeing is believing, right? These people really need to get out more!
    “Climategate!” — the oil company e-burglary and nontroversy”, which oil company, exactly (suggestion, call your lawyer before answering that), show evidence of e-burglary, nontroversy that garnered that much attention? Do these people even know the meaning of the word? Was their education that poor? Perhaps they are just stupid (to be charitable).
    “Offered no evidence of scientific wrongdoing”, odd, it did offer evidence of conspiracy to break, and actually breaking, the law, specifically, the Freedom of Information Act, for which the perps should now still be in prison. The only reason they are not is because of another factor of bureaucracies, called “one hand washes the other” and “you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours”. They may hate and fear each other, but they hate outsiders more, and will band together to protect themselves.

    This article also fails to mention that Anthony Watts routinely rapes farm animals. We sincerely regret the errors.
    The corrections issued above states that Anthony Watts “routinely rapes farm animals.” It has been brought to our attention by Mr. Watts that he actually makes sweet, consensual love to farm animals.

    This is called ‘libel”, and is actionable in court. Since many of the above can also be called libel, I wonder, why has legal action not been taken? Simply sending them an email will not stop them, or even slow them down. Unless someone is punished and punished hard, this will continue and escalate. In addition, taking legal action will bring lies to the public attention, a positive benefit.
    Defamation—also called calumny, vilification, traducement, slander (for transitory statements), and libel (for written, broadcast, or otherwise published words)—is the communication of a statement that makes a claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual , business , product , group , government , or nation a negative image. It is usually a requirement that this claim be false and that the publication is communicated to someone other than the person defamed (the claimant ).

    Hmm, meets all of the criteria stated above, which can be proven with actual photographs (such as from the surfacestation project) and of course the WebCite page above.

    Perhaps it’s time to create a “skeptics defense fund”, find a skeptic lawyer (you know you want to, it would be fun), and prepare to go at it. Just in case that is not deterrence enough, well, take the action to court, and enjoy the cash when you win. I mean, if big oil won’t cough up the cash, let the AGW types do it.

  12. Robyn – thanks for that, that’s hilarious.

    Anthony – Illigitimi non corrundum. Don’t let the bast@rd.s grind you down. Thanks for an exemplary site on scientific and (mostly) polite discussion. (heh, have fun with that @ sign, phishers)

  13. Mike Roddy takes to the streets and writes about his encounter in which he syas, “Roddy gets hassled by liberal pussies, for his accurate signage”. When Mike is not in a suit and tie he can be found celebrating Haloween as Svengoolie(TM) as can be seen in the pictures in the link. lol

    http://buffalobeast.com/?p=4630

    Anthony I suggest you use the Svengoolie(TM) picture of Mike Roddy for future posts.

  14. Take Mike Roddy for a helicopter ride and drop him off in the middle of Yellowstone Park, let him hear the howls of the wolf packs, and maybe step in a grizzly’s scat.
    Then ask him, which species needs protection.

  15. richard – doh, the first thing I saw posted after hitting “post” was your comment. Kudos on being first with a great quip.

  16. I’ll make a point to avoid attending any and all movies produced by this Roddy character. To call him dispicable would be charitable.

  17. Heard Richard Muller, himself, on the BBC shamelessly plugging his shoddy product. So they found a new way to slice baloney and now they call it prime rib. Just as expected – he was imperious and arrogant. The current mantra seems to be that if you don’t abjectly “Believe, Conform, Obey” you must be a “conspiracy theorist”. No, it doesn’t take a warmist conspiracy, just a herd mentality. This at a time when institutions and authorities throughout the world are crumbling before a liberating spirit of questioning and critical thinking among the populace.

  18. Occasionally I see a comment that’s snipped that says [snip – you can’t use the “D-word” here]. Because it’s always snipped I don’t actually know for certain what the “D word” is but if it is what I believe it to be, Mike Roddy is definitely the “D-word”.

  19. In my country, what serves as congress, who is mostly made up of even green socialists, at the time, voted against making bestiality illegal.

    To this date, there’s still a rational argument lacking for why even the green eco-loon socialists think bestiality is ok.

  20. >> “Even so, there are many things I do agree with in their other papers. The one on quality of station siting, not so much.”

    From this article:

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/03/06/briggs-on-berkeleys-best-plus-my-thoughts-from-my-visit-there/

    >> “And, I’m prepared to accept whatever result they produce, even if it proves my premise wrong.”

    I guess the issues with the BEST methodology (30 versus 60 years) and the paper pre-release have soured the results?

    [Note: otter, you are right at the threadjacking line. ~dbs, mod.]

  21. Why not put an action cam on poor little Kenji connected to internet, via google ad, or some such, supported (by stoopid people) live feed? et voila, very rich dog supporting an ever richer owner. Just think about it, with todays’ technology you could even hook up Kenji to a temperature/CO2 recorder getting the real deal at ground level even. :p

  22. Robyn from Aus says:
    October 22, 2011 at 3:43 pm
    Hi Anthony,
    I don’t know if you have seen this
    ———————————————
    From truth comes comedy.
    Hadn’t seen it ……………Loved it.

  23. Joe Romm does not miss a beat covering ” the well known smearers of climate scientists, Judith Curry and Richard Muller.”

    Besides it is old news: “Climate Progress actually broke this story back in March — ……….based on an email Climatologist Ken Caldeira sent me after seeing their preliminary results …”

    Anthony, Roddy says he will miss you:

    “Mike Roddy says:
    October 20, 2011 at 9:33 pm
    Muller and I have mutual friends at Berkeley-he is an opportunist, and was once Nobelist Louis Alvarez’ lap dog. He has become a little weird, but is still a smart scientist.
    I think Muller was gaming Koch and Watts the whole time. He knew about the NOAA study, of course, and all of the suspense about postponing the BEST results until “all the data are in” was just a way to milk the Kochs out of more money, which amounted to a lot compared to a professor’s salary.
    In this case, the charge that climate scientists were “after grant money” was correct, but the results verified what has become obvious. Only a complete idiot would claim otherwise.
    As for Watts, the whole notion that scientists were conspiring to use faulty temperature stations to exaggerate climate change was never anything more than a joke. Even Curry and Muller figured that one out.
    Watts is not going to be headlining any Heartland conferences for a while. I’ll miss the humor opportunities, but good riddance.”

    Roddy is in the business of selling steel (produced using coke, maybe even Koch coke?) framed structures, claiming they have a smaller carbon footprint because they reduce logging. http://rpsonline.com.sg/proceedings/9789810862183/html/978-981-08-6218-3_SUS-Th033.html

  24. [snip – over the top, while I don’t have much respect for Mr. Roddy, I’m not going to allow people to make such innuendo, even if funny – Anthony]

  25. Roddy is the poster child for all that is wrong with the True Believers of CAGW. He used to whine incessantly about how the media was to blame for his religion never obtaining a foothold in polite society. Heh. He never thinks to look in the mirror. Blind bigotry and hatred is never a way to sell something, Mikey.

  26. Thanks for not posting my info, and for showing a sense of humor here, Anthony. Global warming is so serious an issue that we all need to have fun once in a while.

    My offer to have a beer next time I’m in your neighborhood remains open. You remain a fascinating character to me, and I want more.

    BTW, Muller and I were at Berkeley around the same time, and had friends in common (my roommate was a Physics PhD student). And I accused Muller of grant seeking on CP, since the answer he came up with was pretty obvious to most of us, and I think he was milking the Kochs.

    And yeah, that means I’m an old white man, even worse than the photo, which is about 6 years old.
    I’ll sell my screenplay cheap, too. Maybe the Kochs are interested.

    No hard feelings-

    Mike

  27. Mike D in AB says:
    October 22, 2011 at 4:18 pm

    richard – doh, the first thing I saw posted after hitting “post” was your comment. Kudos on being first with a great quip.

    Note that richard got it right: carborundum, not corrundum.
    ________
    Mike R.;
    A fine demonstration of disingenuous cluelessness. Classic.

  28. Mike Roddy says:
    October 22, 2011 at 6:28 pm

    Thanks for not posting my info, and for showing a sense of humor here, Anthony. Global warming is so serious an issue that we all need to have fun once in a while.

    No hard feelings-

    I don’t have any. I don’t have time to not ignore you.

  29. And scanning the beast website they seem to have a unusual attraction to deviant sexual behavior. Who are these weirdo’s?

    And they expect to be taken seriously? Really???

  30. Mike Roddy once posted a comment at Climate Audit linking to a porn video – a granny porn video. Such misconduct is extremely rare among commenters. Other than Josh Halpern/Eli Rabett’s inappropriate comments about a teenage girl a few years ago, I can’t think of any similar non-spam incidents.

  31. So Roddy is a troll or flake and he’s just having fun so no hard feelings, buy you beer ?

    I suspect he just realized he is in a legally precarious position. He should have consulted an attorney before commenting further because that confirms his not quite connected to social norms.

  32. otter17 says:
    October 22, 2011 at 5:40 pm

    “I guess the issues with the BEST methodology (30 versus 60 years) and the paper pre-release have soured the results?”

    You are almost right. It means there are no results. Anthony expected them to use his 30 years of data since 1979 because there is siting information for that 30 years. Anthony was excited that they were going to use their new techniques on his station siting data. In switching to a 60 year period, they pulled a Bait and Switch on Anthony. Their results are worthless because they used a period that contains 30 years without siting information.

    The paper pre-release, the media grandstanding by Muller, the Bait and Switch on Anthony have so soured the moral standing of the entire BEST team that each and every one of them has earned the label Loose Cannon on Deck. Muller has trashed his own dream of corporate interest in his geo-engineering firm. Corporate types have written off Muller entirely.

  33. Mike Roddy says:
    October 22, 2011 at 6:28 pm

    Thanks for not posting my info, and for showing a sense of humor here, Anthony. Global warming is so serious an issue that we all need to have fun once in a while.

    No hard feelings-
    *****************
    Ric Werme says:
    October 22, 2011 at 7:22 pm

    I don’t have any. I don’t have time to not ignore you.
    =======================

    Touché Ric, this Roddy bloke is somewhat of a pussy … needs therapy for his obsession with abnormal sexuality.

  34. Mike Roddy says:
    October 22, 2011 at 6:28 pm
    “Thanks for not posting my info, and for showing a sense of humor here,”

    I for one do not find you funny at all Roddy. Infantile is a better description for your disgusting accusations. Ask yourself what Anthony’s wife and family must go through when people like you come out with filth like that!

    I suspect Cecil Coupe is right with his comment…..
    October 22, 2011 at 9:03 pm

    “So Roddy is a troll or flake and he’s just having fun so no hard feelings, buy you beer ?
    I suspect he just realized he is in a legally precarious position.”

  35. Anthony:

    In your next email exchange with Mr. Roddy, would you please find time to explain to him that, unlike the Wimpy Warmers, we do not prefer sexual congress with nice, tame farm animals. We fearless Skeptics prefer the wild ones!

  36. I’m sorry that you are having this unpleasant, actually thoroughly nasty, certainly juvenile nonsense to put up with Anthony. It is much better if commenters here don’t descend to such foulness in response.

    Keep up the good work Anthony; there are so many of us who are heartened by your work.

    Regards,

    Annie.

  37. Annie says:
    October 23, 2011 at 2:08 am

    “I’m sorry that you are having this unpleasant, actually thoroughly nasty, certainly juvenile nonsense to put up with Anthony. It is much better if commenters here don’t descend to such foulness in response.

    Keep up the good work Anthony; there are so many of us who are heartened by your work.”

    Spot on Annie, thank you, I couldn’t have said it better.

  38. Legatus says:
    October 22, 2011 at 4:05 pm

    This is called ‘libel”

    You may call it “libel” but it really isn’t. Roddy’s comment suggesting Anthony admits to having sex with animals is childish, idiotic, unimaginative, base, and entirely typical of this immature man, but there is clearly no design for the comment to be taken factually or seriously, and thus it could not be considered libellous. Reading the comment which came from an apparently grown, educated man, it’s almost enough to make you feel embarrassed for Roddy.

    I was going to end with the words “not really though” – but I can’t shake it. I actually do feel embarrassed for him.

  39. Anthony keep up the good work. The whole AGW bandwagon is a ship of fools, their use of physics is dubious, they have invented their own terms, they push anomalies as temperatures and a plethora of sins against solid science we have discussed over and over again.

    In my opinion it is really not possible that with the large proportion of badly sited stations you found, and the nonexistent data base for the rest of the world , which is more than ten times the area of the US, they can claim they have taken into account the urban effect. And the comparison should be between well sited and badly sited stations. A station can be rural and badly sited.

    That is the reason they use “anomalies”. The minute I saw “anomalies” in their plot, I stopped reading. Anomalies are a trick to make plots they like, when they average them over large areas, they have little meaning except like a wet finger to the wind: this way it blows. The largest anomalies are at night and in the polar regions where a higher temperature should be really welcome if it exists. The connection with heat and energy is practically destroyed in the world average, because it is the absolute temperature that enters the radiation budgets with T^4 , not the anomaly distortions.

    Fortunately another la Nina is coming and by the time people’s teeth stop chattering, the self promoting fireworks of these people will sputter out and maybe people who know physics will have a chance at climate studies.

  40. It could be Roddy feels he possesses the authority to comment upon other people’s sexual proclivities. He obviously never grew out of playground bullying and witless namecalling. In my local vernacular he would be described as a total tugger (w**ker). And then studiously ignored since he would have nothing sensible to bring to the discussion table.

  41. Roddy’s written material is so clearly actionable, its enough to make you gag. Set up a pursuit fund, Anthony. I think there’s probably plenty of money out there to support you in making an example of him. It way past time to start spanking the potty-mouthed children.

  42. I have no complaints about the personal comments, or any opinions about my written work. If you’re going to dish it out, as I do, you’ve got to take it, right? I’m curious about McIntyre claiming that I linked to a porno site on ClimateAudit. I’ll admit my memory is not what it was, but I don’t recall that one. Please send me a link, Steve.

    I only wish that more of you would focus on Muller’s WSJ editorial. What’s next for you guys, “It’s the sun!”, or “Volcanic activity”?

  43. “I only wish that more of you would focus on Muller’s WSJ editorial. What’s next for you guys, “It’s the sun!”, or “Volcanic activity”?”

    Don’t know…. What’s next for you guys after “global warming – climate change – global climate disruption” ?

  44. Paul Coppin says:
    October 23, 2011 at 6:45 am

    It way past time to start spanking the potty-mouthed children.

    It is often those who can afford to start a fight who are actively trying to start one. IOW, those with decent lawyers are more likely to try to goad Anthony into a legal battle. Best to avoid it if you can.

  45. Mike Roddy says:

    I’m curious about McIntyre claiming that I linked to a porno site on ClimateAudit. I’ll admit my memory is not what it was, but I don’t recall that one.

    So, are you denying that you ever posted such a link anywhere? Or, are you admitting that you might do such a thing, but just don’t remember that particular occasion?

    Given your sleazy propensity for ascribing aberrant sexual behavior to other people, my guess would be that in fact what Steve claims might very well be true. ;)

  46. Muller was a CACC shoveler before he was a ‘skeptic’ before he was a born-again CACC shoveler-

    ““In fact, back in the early ’80s, I resigned from the Sierra Club over the issue of global warming. At that time, they were opposing nuclear power. What I wrote them in my letter of resignation was that, if you oppose nuclear power, the U.S. will become much more heavily dependent on fossil fuels, and that this is a pollutant to the atmosphere that is very likely to lead to global warming.”
    Climate ‘skeptic’ Richard Muller, Grist, October 2008

    I am confused over Mike Roddy’s vuvuzelan embrace of Muller’s results, for the following reasons-

    1. The papers are not peer reviewed.
    2. The lead author and PR shill is reportedly a climate skeptic/denier, to which Roddy has previously stated at DotEarth that- “Deniers, especially those who populate this comments section, live in an alternate reality, and giving them any credence at all should be viewed as dangerous.” Papers that are guaranteed to pass peer review are certainly much more *dangerous* than mere comments on blogs.
    3. Any research that has been funded by the Koch brothers or big oil or big coal or big gas or big nuclear is extremely suspect, and should be ignored.
    4. The results directly challenge the canonical MBH hockey-stick.
    5. The lead author is not a climate scientist, and therefore lacks the training required to tease the climate catastrophe from the hash of data.

  47. Mike Roddy says:
    October 23, 2011 at 8:04 am

    I have no complaints about the personal comments, or any opinions about my written work. If you’re going to dish it out, as I do, you’ve got to take it, right? I’m curious about McIntyre claiming that I linked to a porno site on ClimateAudit. I’ll admit my memory is not what it was, but I don’t recall that one. Please send me a link, Steve.

    What’s next for you guys, “It’s the sun!”, or “Volcanic activity”?

    I can only speak for myself Mike but I intend to return to the elementary schools and help teach science. We have done severe damage to a couple generations of children in teaching them that a religious devotion “global warming” is a proper way to embrace and understand science. Nothing could be further from the truth in my opinion and we may have lost some brilliant young scientific minds to the rubbish you and other global warming religious believers push as “science”. That is my opinion and I it’s my intention to help defeat the onslaught of global warming religion in the schools.

  48. Dave, UK says:
    October 23, 2011 at 3:52 am
    there is clearly no design for the comment to be taken factually or seriously, and thus it could not be considered libellous.

    Yet Mann has sued over the use of “State Penn” versus “Penn State”.

  49. Mike Roddy says:
    October 23, 2011 at 8:04 am
    “I only wish that more of you would focus on Muller’s WSJ editorial. What’s next for you guys, “It’s the sun!”, or “Volcanic activity”?”

    This can’t be the real Roddy; he didn’t call us names.

  50. Is it possible that within the BEST team there is much consternation about what they are finding? That saying “it is warmer now than before” is the only thing that they could agree on? That releasing their data is recognized as a problem for the warmists with whom they are friends and philosophical buddies? That the “certainty” and the “settled science” is not, to them, and though they intellectually understand the case for a firm position, they are in a quandary when it comes to demonstrating it?

    Remember when Gary Hart said he wasn’t having an affair, and challenged the reporters to follow him, and they did, and he was having an affair and thus ended his presidential aspirations? A challenge, fairly met, can have undesirable outcomes. Or perhaps the analogy is closer to that of Farmer Jones” Used Car Sales: I can see a Josh cartoon where the BEST team are used car salesmen, saying “Of course this car is drivable – if you don’t trust me, drive it!”, while the car behind them is held up on concrete blocks.

    And on a more technical note, the BEST temp graph doesn’t look like the GISTemp graph, except grossly. So BEST is saying there are serious problems with GISTemp/Hansen, even if their view is more pro-warmist than Hansen. Is best saying GISTemp sorta sucks, but only sorta? Backhanded compliments are not what the BEST guys were expected to provide.

  51. Mike Roddy says:
    October 23, 2011 at 8:04 am

    What’s next for you guys, “It’s the sun!”, or “Volcanic activity”?

    Come now, Mike. You wish that those are the extents of our arguments. And you call us deniers. How lame. Some scientist you are. Go back to your self-fulfilling prophesy models.

  52. I said:
    October 23, 2011 at 3:52 am
    “…there is clearly no design for the comment to be taken factually or seriously, and thus it could not be considered libellous.”

    ferd berple says:
    October 23, 2011 at 10:19 am
    Yet Mann has sued over the use of “State Penn” versus “Penn State”.

    Yeah, so Mann is a clown. What’s your point? That Anthony should respond in the same way as that fool?

  53. Jeremy says:
    October 23, 2011 at 9:02 am

    Paul Coppin says:
    October 23, 2011 at 6:45 am

    It way past time to start spanking the potty-mouthed children.

    It is often those who can afford to start a fight who are actively trying to start one. IOW, those with decent lawyers are more likely to try to goad Anthony into a legal battle. Best to avoid it if you can.

    And sometimes all turning the other cheek does is make you dizzy.. Sometimes the best defence is is a cracking good offence.

  54. Poor Mike Roddy just does not seem to understand the many messages sent with pre-peer-reviewed BEST papers. He doesn’t see that Muller made no effort to attribute the warming to any force, natural or man made. He doesn’t see that BEST shows a decrease in storminess…with a temperature rise of 2°C since 1800. And come to think of it, an awful lot of warming occurred without any help from Republican SUVs. Can someone remind me of just when the natural warming that started in 1800 stopped and CAGW took over? Be careful what you embrace, Mikey, it may not help your case…

  55. Let’s assume that mean Global Temperature has meaning. (Which I doubt!)
    So, we have an increase in GT of about 0.7°C over a century.
    That’s a drift of about 0.2%!
    I wish my central heating was that good!
    Can someone remind me why people are hyperventilating over this?

    DaveE.

  56. Mike Roddy says:
    October 22, 2011 at 6:28 pm
    ==========
    Mods,
    Is this really Mike Roddy, making these comments ?

    REPLY: Yes, Anthony

  57. Hey guys, don’t be so hard on Roddy – he might change for the better when he grows up.

    PS I’m old and white, including my hair.

  58. Mike Roddy says:
    October 23, 2011 at 8:04 am
    “I only wish that more of you would focus on Muller’s WSJ editorial.”
    ===========
    “A scientific man ought to have no wishes, no affections, – a mere heart of stone.”
    Charles Darwin

    “He who wishes to be rich in a day will be hanged in a year.”
    Leonardo da Vinci

    Careful what you wish for, you may get it.

  59. Mike Roddy says:
    October 22, 2011 at 6:28 pm
    “Global warming is so serious an issue that we all need to have fun once in a while.”
    ========
    Warning to the Mods,
    I plan to “go off” on stupid statements like this tonight, tell me when to stop.

  60. “By your actions shall ye be judged.”

    Anthony comes out very impressively indeed.
    Mike Roddy, a little less so…

  61. Mike Roddy says:
    October 23, 2011 at 8:04 am
    “I only wish that more of you would focus on Muller’s WSJ editorial.”
    =======================

    Hey Mikey … According to the learned folk on WUWT (real scientists among them), Muller’s work failed to clear the first hurdle. So out with your ‘scope and focus on Uranus.

    Sorry AW, couldn’t help having some fun ;)

  62. Beesaman says:
    October 22, 2011 at 2:10 pm

    Well I guess that scientists do peer reviews, while primadonnas do press reviews….

    Larry says:

    I think scientists d experiments, art critics do (they think) peer reviews, prima donnas do press releases.

  63. I’m a bit confused, Dr. Muller has produced a graph showing a steady rise in temperature, in fact a 2C rise in temperature since around 1815. Is that the same as the HadCrut temperature graph? I don’t believe so. Further he goes on to say that now nobody could be sceptical about global warming. There maybe people who are sceptical about global warming, but I’ve yet to meet, or even hear from, one. I know there are plenty of people who are sceptical about whether it is all, mostly, or partially caused by CO2 emissions, and his graph gives succour to this group, because right there for all to see it’s been warming since 1815, and by 2C. So what caused the warming pre-1950 Mr. Roddy? Dr. Muller doesn’t claim to know, in fact they say in there papers that the human contribution to global warming may have been overestimated, so why is Mr. Roddy crowing about the paper, it doesn’t support his position at all.

  64. Mike Roddy says:
    October 20, 2011 at 9:33 pm
    Muller and I have mutual friends at Berkeley-he is an opportunist, and was once Nobelist Louis Alvarez’ lap dog. He has become a little weird, but is still a smart scientist.
    I think Muller was gaming Koch and Watts the whole time. He knew about the NOAA study, of course, and all of the suspense about postponing the BEST results until “all the data are in” was just a way to milk the Kochs out of more money, which amounted to a lot compared to a professor’s salary……
    ______________________________________________
    Given the fact the BEST data has been used for a media blitz, I think the up coming United Nations Climate Change Conference from 28 November to 9 December 2011 is a much better reason. A month is about the right timing to make the information the most useful as propaganda, especially if the peer review and publication is delayed

    All the pot shots we are seeing taken against Anthony here and elsewhere in an attempt to brand him (and skeptics) as liars is part of the campaign too.

    It explains the whole idiocy over “Anthony and skeptics denied it was warming and now they are lying and saying they didn’t…”

  65. I just googled to find out more about Dr. Michael Roddy and the first thing I hit was
    “Dr. Michael Roddy and his wife Wendy Sue were arrested on Sunday. The couple was taken into custody at the Embassy Suites in Huntsville and charged…..” http://www.waff.com/story/12191964/arrested-psychiatrists-practice-remains-open?redirected=true

    OOPS, I think that is the wrong Roddy but the second hit ( the correct Roddy) was not much better. http://buffalobeast.com/?p=1237

  66. Gail;
    Yep, and his autobio there explains all:

    Michael Roddy graduated with honors from Berkeley, and has written numerous magazine articles and Congressional testimonies on environmental and construction issues. He currently owns and operates a small hotel energy management company, with offices in Seattle, Napa, and Yucca Valley, California.

Comments are closed.