(See the update below where SkS compares Climate Skeptics to the Viet Cong along with needing….”a conspiracy to save humanity”.)
LewWorld continues to crumble from within and Skeptical Science has been exposed as conspiracy theory central, according to Dr. Judith Curry, who sums up your failure quite well:
The latest ‘explanation’ for lack of belief in the IPCC consensus ‘truth’ is that these non believers are conspiracy theorists. See Stephan Lewandowsky’s editorial Evidence is overrated if you are a conspiracy theorist. Lewandowsky’s ‘evidence’ was a scammed internet survey. Bloggers such as Steve McIntyre, Anthony Watts, BishopHill, Lucia, JoNova are all over this, and have exposed the scam (note: there are multiple posts on each of these blogs). BS detection in action. While I have used the term ‘auditors’ for deep investigations of problems with climate data, BS detection seems much more apt for this particular issue.
Lew, get a clew. I hope this experience with the skeptical bloggers has revealed what they are really all about, as they have revealed YOUR conspiracy by finding a really big pile.
The ‘conspiracy’ among green climate bloggers has been further revealed by the leak of John Cook’s secret forum (link). SkepticalScience seems to becoming the ringleader for conspiratorial activities by the green climate bloggers. All this is high entertainment for those of us who follow the climate blog wars. But take a step back, and consider how bad this makes you look, and how poorly it reflects on the science and ’cause’ that you are trying to defend.
Read her post here.
Meanwhile, Steve McIntyre is collecting data on who actually took the survey, if you took the survey in 2010, then please note it in a comment here.
==============================================================
UPDATE: I had pretty much ignored the SkS forum dump when it was happening, thinking that perhaps they were being treated unfairly, but since Cook has gone a bridge too far now with this Lewandowsky mess, I no longer feel the need to hold back on what is going on behind the scenes over there.
Here is Glenn Tamblyn (Skeptical Science author/moderator) secretly conversing with his SkS pals on their off limits forum and saying “we need a conspiracy to save humanity”. The Viet Cong comparison is a nice touch too. There’s talk of convening a “war council” too.
And this isn’t about science or personal careers and reputations any more. This is a fight for survival. Our civilisations survival. .. We need our own anonymous (or not so anonymous) donors, our own think tanks…. Our Monckton’s … Our assassins.
Anyone got Bill Gates’ private number, Warren Buffett, Richard Branson? Our ‘side’ has got to get professional, ASAP. We don’t need to blog. We need to network. Every single blog, organisation, movement is like a platoon in an army. ..This has a lot of similarities to the Vietnam War….And the skeptics are the Viet Cong… Not fighting like ‘Gentlemen’ at all. And the mainstream guys like Gleick don’t know how to deal with this. Queensberry Rules rather than biting and gouging.
..So, either Mother Nature deigns to give the world a terrifying wake up call. Or people like us have to build the greatest guerilla force in human history. Now. Because time is up…Someone needs to convene a council of war of the major environmental movements, blogs, institutes etc. In a smoke filled room (OK, an incense filled room) we need a conspiracy to save humanity.
[As quoted by Geoff Chambers in this Bishop Hill thread. http://www.bishop-hill.net/blog/2012/3/26/opengate-josh-158.html?currentPage=2#comments ]
So, who are the nutters again?
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I converted one warmist to skepticism just by going through the graphs of global temperatures over the past few million years. This blog is to be highly commended on linking to the actual data.
After the occasional hysterical headline about arctic ice death spirals, I always show my partner the WUWT linked graphs of arctic and global sea ice cover and ask her to compare the graphs with the article. She always comes away shocked at the difference.
I always was of the impression that 99% of what is written about global climate change is actually regional weather. And the millions of words written about whether polar bear numbers are up or down neglects the fact that polar bears are not big fluffy proxy global thermometers.
***BREAKING***
urge all to monitor this situation, take screen shots etc.
Lewandowsky’s blog subsidiary of the SkepticalScience blog is now slashing more inconvenient comments, re-writing thread histories to excise unwelcome criticism:
===============================================================
Can something be both outrageous and hilarious? This is….
Now they will need to start snipping some of their loyal bots such as JBowers, whose response to a Foxgoose comment is now referring to a *future* comment (JBowers in #84 is now referring to #89 not yet made, according to the server’s revised numbering scheme):
<blockquote
Skiphil says:
September 15, 2012 at 11:29 am
Can something be both outrageous and hilarious? This is….
…a “Lew-Loo”!
Skiphil…perhaps they are playing 99 bottles of beer on the wall and starting at 100 😉
You have to agree that these AGWs are great entertainment if not very smart.
Those of you out there are not skeptics, if the evidence was so strong in favor of CAGW, why would the “believers” need to stoop to such nonsence?
Ask yourself, “When did this all start and who started it? Who started it and what did they have to gain?”
The “evidence” that what is going on with the weather (or climate) is Man’s fault is so weak. The “evidence” that Man can do anything to control the weather is even weaker.
But they need you to continue to believe them and vote to support their nonsense.
Again, ask yourself, “When did this all start and who started it? Who started it and what did they have to gain?”
Is this guy actually suggesting that Gleick was fighting within Queensbury rules?
Can I make a simple plea:
To sceptics: Stephan Lewandowsky is an angry person trying to hit out at us sceptics because he does not understand us. The more we attack him, the more he sees us as cold hearted vindictive people acting to stop him “saving the world” as he would see it.
Stephen has made mistakes. He has overstepped what is acceptable for research, that is not acceptable. But neither is some witch hunt against hum because his action was only possible because he failed to see the humanity in us. The more we attack him, the more we confirm his stereotype of cold hearted people driven by some inhuman “driving force” which is why he tries to rationalise our behaviour with this crazy idea of a conspiracy.
As for Stephen. Can you not see how much you have hurt us? I know you intended to do good, but you are attacking good people who do not deserve to be treated like you this way.
Please please! Just apologise and let’s have an end of it.
Gunga Din….It all started when our Colleges and Universities in Canada and the US started handing out degrees like so many prizes in Cracker Jack boxes. AS Kate at SDA asks…what is the opposite of diversity? University!
Im too fat to fit in a chu chi tunnel! I suppose I could by a bicycle and move rice and beer?
Both amusing and scary at the same time. These religious nuts are great. [snip -OTT] Yet they have demanded we be rounded up, jailed, put in “education camps”, put on trial for war crimes/crimes against humanity and a host of other things. They not only have demanded it they have tried to push laws to enact these ends….for what?
Simply because we don’t believe in the doomsday cult they belong too. They talk about “survival” but its the cultist who would gladly cut away the “dead wood” as we have been called in the past and bring about the new utopia. [snip -OTT]
Wire fraud is mainstream?
Mike Haseler says:…….
I don’t really think anyone gives a **** what SL thinks about them. The point of all this is to constantly expose the utter hypocracy of people like him an hold them accountable for their actions. Anthony etal do a great service in this regard.
Mike Haseler says (September 15, 2012 at 12:22 pm)
“To sceptics: Stephan Lewandowsky is an angry person…”
Isn’t it the sceptics who should be bloody angry at all these shenanigans? Mann, Gleick, Cook, Lew…
If they are going back to the 1960s with references to the Viet Cong, I’m reminded of JFKs response to Bertrand Russell during the missile crisis: “I think your attention might well be directed to the burglars rather than to those who caught the burglars.”
One suggestion to Mr. Tamblyn… Prozac!
Mike Haseler:
I reject your “simple plea” at September 15, 2012 at 12:22 pm and I call on all others to reject it, too.
It is time the public were made aware that the alarmists have deliberately destroyed careers of honest scientists who refused to toe the AGW line, have destroyed reputations of decent people who questioned their AGW-faith, have damaged the practice of science by damaging the peer review process and usurping the Executive Committees of Scientific Institutions, and etc..
Whenever something like the Lewandowsky affair occurs then we need to do all possible to expose it.
Richard
Mike Haseler
Chairman, Scottish Climate and Energy Forum
SCEF aims to support government, communities and the people of Scotland to make the best decisions on climate and energy for the benefit of us all.
Please add: I believe in Rodney King’s statement, “Can’t we all get along?”. Just because some people make up data, rig surveys, conspire with others to stamp out debate and receive government funding doesn’t mean they are bad people. They just care more at any cost. Wow!
Must agree with richardscourtney. This has become much more then just “The Lew”. If he had floated this turd and then backed away maybe he would be allowed to dive back in the sewers.
However thats not what happened. What happened was it passed peer, it was picked up by the press, it has and will be for years to attacked people unjustly with. Worse is that he is not only defending it he is actively going the extra mile to defend it when its clear to anyone the turd is a turd.
This is no longer just about the study.
Its about how its passed peer review, who reviewed it, how it passed,
Its about why the study was even done, who paid for it and a host of other things.
Its about how he has defended it, the other defenders and groups working to defend it.
Most of all its about the true goal of the study and how it would be used to attack anyone who doesn’t believe in the religion of global warming.
This study is so clearly a joke that it is the perfect rallying call to start pushing for change and holding people accountable. The reviews should be fired and disgraced, the study should be retracted and “The Lew” should be put out on the street… and thats the low end. Really he should be made to pay back much of his pay and grant money or face jail time.
” Really he should be made to pay back much of his pay and grant money or face jail time”
Ahh.. only in a sane world where democratic governments actually cared about the taxpayer, instead of only pushing their agenda upon taxpayers, whatever the cost.
This is becoming absolutely mindboggling. To use their own phrase, it really does begin to look like a “death spiral” … Reality check: it is all really happening, isn’t it? It’s getting almost impossible to believe, like a totally overdone Hunter S. Thompson scenario when you’re not ‘chemically enhanced’ enough yourself.
WTF, cui bono, richardscourtney, richardK, I did not say we didn’t have a right to be angry.
A few months ago a minister of religion from a Iona (an ancient seat of religion in Scotland) on the highest profile BBC program likened us ordinary sceptics in the UK to “paedophiles and sex traders”. I have a family and children, so you can imagine how absolutely appalling that kind of slander was. There is no doubt we have been treated absolutely appalling largely egged on by people like Stephen.
However, I used to be part of the Greens in the UK. I even was briefly selected to stand for the Scottish Parliament. I know these people are on the whole just as good as anyone here. I would not say that every green is perfect but on the whole their intention was good. Mistaken yes, but bad no.
That doesn’t make what Stephen did right. However, when our argument is that he has unjustly pursued a vendetta against us, it doesn’t help at all if we then carry out a vendetta against him.
“And the skeptics are the Viet Cong… Not fighting like ‘Gentlemen’ at all.”
Maybe we should invite Jane over to sit on our anti-aircraft guns. Oh wait! Since the indiscretions of her youth, she’s firmly on the side of the Gentlemen now. Greg should also approach Ted and Soros for a much needed infusion of cash. It breaks my heart to see these poor crusaders forced into a dark room with barely a tic tac between them.
Mike H I appreciate and respect your point of view on this matter. I really do. I have to say though that our definitions of ‘good people’ may come from different dictionaries.
Richard Courtney
I agree totally. They’re not worried about who they destroy. Up ’em!
Ken
Mike Haseler says:
September 15, 2012 at 2:36 pm
“I would not say that every green is perfect but on the whole their intention was good.”
Ever hear the saying “The road to hell is paved with good intentions.”. I could say that before socialism was defined as socialism through science this was the phase that was placed upon this ideology.
Whatever they believe about the supposed “good intentions” is meaningless. Hitler, stalin, mao, hundreds of others have had “good intentions”. What about all those eugenics professors…
“Good intentions” are the enemy of a free and just people….