UPDATE: Joe Romm, perhaps fearing he’d be drawn into a defamation lawsuit with Laden for not checking to see if Laden’s claims were true has made a rare update to ClimateProgress in my favor. See below.
UPDATE2: Reader poll on the question “should I sue the pants off Greg Laden?”
Harsh title – I know, but justified by Mr. Laden’s actions. I could ignore him, but people like him need to be called out when they do things like this.
Here’s a screencap of a “science blogs” post made by Mr. Laden, who is no stranger to shooting his mouth off in non factual ways that get him in trouble, as Roger Tattersall (aka Tallbloke) can testify to from another Laden episode last year where Laden was forced to remove untrue and libelous statements he made. Laden’s original post about Tattersall (with all the angry unedited rhetoric) is here.
You can read the rest of his post here.
Note how Laden frames the screen cap, and of course does not provide a link to the original story (lest his readers are able to get the full story instead of his spin on it). He then goes on to say:
Heh, he was so raging mad when he wrote that he couldn’t even spell denialist correctly, or even spell the name of this blog correctly even though he has a screen cap to guide him. He claims I “wasn’t equipped to recognize this science as bogus”. Well, I found it odd, but also interesting, and as Willis Eschenbach pointed out in comments:
I don’t agree with those saying it should not be posted. In my experience, there’s no faster way to separate wheat from chaff than to expose it to the unblinking eye of the populi on the web …
Unlike Mr. Laden (who gives the impression he’s an expert in everything), I’ve never claimed to be an expert in meteors or diatoms. So, I put it up for discussion. I also put several caveats in the story clearly showing my doubts, including the possibility that the Earthly diatoms hitched a ride on a tektite, but Mr. Laden won’t show you that, I will.
You see, it’s all part of a purposely orchestrated lie by Mr. Laden. If Mr. Laden hadn’t been so caught up in his hate, and made just an ever so slightly larger screen cap, this is what his readers would have seen from the story:
In case the print is too small, here’s the full paragraph (which Laden cut off):
This looks to be a huge story, the first evidence of extraterrestrial life, if it holds up. I would remind readers that “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence“. This needs to be confirmed by others in the science community before it can be taken seriously.
I don’t know how I could have made the caveat any clearer. Anyone not blinded by hate can see that in my very first paragraph, in red even.
Of course, Laden cuts off the most important part of the caveat and without an immediate link to the story, the weak minded or members of the his choir of haters have no single click way to check his claim, but that is what he is counting on.
And of course, Joe Romm also picks up the story from Laden, to spread the lie and hate. Romm might have been duped by Laden though and didn’t check, we’ll see.
Laden also says:
It is very fun to read the comments. I provided a comment that will not be printed because Watts never prints my comments, but I’ve screen captured it for you (it is below).
Mr. Laden, your comment appeared, approved well before you wrote this hateful piece, as shown below between two other comments:
A direct link to Laden’s published comment is here, read for yourselves.
As for the “never” part of Laden’s claim about his comments appearing, here they are:
His first two comments were snipped by moderators for not following the WUWT site policy, his others, (which didn’t contain hateful words) were published, including the comment on the meteor story he falsely claims never appeared.
Mr. Laden, you are a liar who published this story knowing full well what you were doing.
What you were doing was being a hater, not a scientist. Being a hater is part of Mr. Laden’s site policy, which incredibly, he spells out for all to see. Scroll down to “commenting policy”.
What Laden did here is a perfect example of why the general public is losing faith in climate science; this mix of condescension, censorship, incomplete presentation, misdirection, and overt hatred on display is exactly why reasonable people recoil and lose faith in the climate claims being made, which in some cases, can be just as dubious as diatoms on meteors.
The difference between myself and Mr. Laden is that WUWT isn’t afraid to have topics for discussion that might be proven wrong, and in the process, people learn something. I’m also not afraid to admit I’m not an expert on meteors or diatoms, and to ask my readers (who might be) what they think while at the same time making it clear that I had serious doubts about the claim.
If people like Laden ruled science, we’d never see any advances from serendipity or other odd moments where the scientist observes something unexpected and says to him/herself “hmmm, that’s odd”, because they’d be shouted down as “bogus” without even a discussion.
UPDATE: Joe Romm, responding to my email to him, has offered the closest thing he can to a walkback on the lie (of which he was also a victim) by Laden. He’s posted this on the Climate progress story by Laden smearing me. He sounds like Fox News “we report, you decide”.
JR UPDATE: Watts feels he was quoted out of context, that he put in appropriate caveats. His response is here. Greg Laden replies here. You decide.
In other news, in his latest childish rant, Mr. Laden wants his readers to think that I’m a child hater (even though I have two grade school aged children of my own).
It is against my blog policy to provide links to science denialist sites. It would be unethical for me to do that on a regular basis because it would enhance the google juice of pseudoscience. I’ve got children. I want them to grow up in a better world, not the world that Anthony Watts wants them to grow up in. So, no.
Another lie by Greg Laden. I never get how extremists like Laden think they somehow can be the only people that care about children’s future. I want a better future for my children to, just not the same one Mr. Laden envisions. As these commenters put it:
Jimmy Haigh says:
January 16, 2013 at 10:33 pm
“Laden clearly has issues…”
Issues? He’s got an entire subscription.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.





Laden clearly has issues…
Oh dear, Laden’s mouth-bone seems to be connected to his foot-bone rather than his brain-bone again.
Reblogged this on Climate Ponderings.
Foot bone? Sphincter bone is closer to the truth…
There are believers and non-believers, there are the religious and non-religious, and in each set there are the fanatics who have a screw loose. Any doubt where Mr. Laden falls in the continuum? The sad part of this are the followers of the fanatics for they can only be described as dumber than a box of rocks.
I noticed he couldn’t even get the name of the site right, despite it clearly appearing in his screenshot.
[snip]
Anthony, in a way, inadvertently, he’s right. You are good at nailing things, And thus you are deNAIList (the one who nails things).
Actually, there are some areas of science that are settled. Nobody will ever discover intelligent life on planet Laden.
I posted this at Think Progress…
Eric H. says:
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
January 17, 2013 at 1:55 am
Interesting what you can learn when you show the complete statement:
“This looks to be a huge story, the first evidence of extraterrestrial life, if it holds up. I would remind readers that “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence“. This needs to be confirmed by others in the science community before it can be taken seriously.”
How far will Mr. Laden go to smear Anthony? I believe you owe Watts and his readership an apology.
Eric
Well done, Anthony, for calling him out. He clearly feels rubbed the wrong way by you and perhaps by your successes at getting science across when the Greens seem to have such a hard time with that. Please do keep up the good work. 😉
For fun, I posted the following on the page:
Is there a reason you chopped off the full first paragraph where he goes rather over-the-top in saying this is a big fat maybe? Let me copy the full thing:
This looks to be a huge story, the first evidence of extraterrestrial life, if it holds up. I would remind readers that “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence“. This needs to be confirmed by others in the science community before it can be taken seriously.
Oh, and your comment is there, contrary to your comments:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/01/14/claim-meteorite-discovered-with-signs-of-life-in-it/#comment-1199560
It is, of course, “awaiting moderation”. I suspect “moderation” is equivalent to the bit bucket.
How anyone, except the most moronically stupid of people could see the original thread as anything but a, ” this is interesting, I wonder if its true” is beyond me.
This Laden guy sound like a fifth class ass !! A total nonce !!
Yes Greg, I hope you read this, you contemptuous git !!
Let me concur. Greg Laden is a liar. Maybe he can get Michael Mann’s lawyers to sue me.
Please try Greg.
It was both necessary and prudent to respond to Laden’s deliberate malice. Your site and the folks who contribute to it who also share your zeal for the truth about climate change, provide a realm of sanity to the constant barrage of global warming junk that steadily streams from mainstream media and our government. WUWT is the vaccine that has kept me from catching the AGW contagion. Thank you for being there for us.
So Mr Laden is a “liar” and a “hater”. I wasn’t able to devine his hatred for you, through his writing. He doesn’t think much of you, granted. But hate? Stick to what you know to be the facts, and stay clear of guessing what people are thinking. Not scientific. You might want to check your own WUWT site policy on these things.
REPLY: I have data. Read Laden’s site policy: http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/about/ (scroll down to “comments policy”)
Combine that with other written words and the application of his descriptions, and I feel the label is appropriate – Anthony
“Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I’m not sure about the universe.”
Albert Einstein
Do people have nothing better to do?
I have added my two pen’orth on Laden’s comments:
Greg Laden
January 16, 2013
Andy, I don’t say he was taken in. I said he did not recognize an utterly obviously bogus claim, and that he demonstrated a less than stellar understanding of some science he should have had a clue about.
This is not a claim tobeskeptical about. This is a claim to reject right away.
Andy
January 16, 2013
Oh so you agree he was skeptical which must entail him recognising or at least appreciating the rather grand claims made, a ‘bogus claim’ in your words…… the story now becomes, Watts correctly was skeptical about some stuff published. This makes him ‘anti science’.
You look foolish when stooping to such levels.
Dave Lowery
England
January 17, 2013
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
Andy I agree. Reading the whole of Watts’ original post shows he was clearly sceptical. Posting a slightly larger screen cap would have demonstrated this.
Is it just me, or is honesty important?
Wikipedia says that National Geographic now has editorial control over Science Blogs. Perhaps a strong complaint to NatGeo? (Although I’ve lost by my boyhood love for them after they became shrill warmists.)
Other strange bedfellows: quoting from Wikipedia on Science Blogs… “A writer at the New York Times Magazine reviewed the incident and commented, ‘ScienceBlogs has become Fox News for the religion-baiting, peak-oil crowd.'”
Laden’s post clearly includes the words “…if it holds up” which are underlined. Without reading another word it is clear that the writer (Anthony) had doubts. To then claim that there was an inability on the part of Anthony to recognize bogus science as bogus is disingenuous to say the least.
Re Laden’s comment, 2012.09.04 (see above screen cap)
Mr Laden, I feel proud – indeed honoured – to be one of the those three people who blindingly obviously write all the comments here, in fact.
Seriously: you were projecting, weren’t you. A little soul searching might be in order, sir.
A lying Laden? Must run in the family.
Sad loser desperately trying to get hits on his pointless blog.
These people know that WUWT is a source of hits and any reference from here is going to drive traffic.
Slap and forget.
Typo: “…example of why the general public is losing faith is climate science”. “is” -> “in”?
REPLY: Fixed, thanks
Greg (“did I mention I went to Harvard?”) Laden at least nails his flag to his masthead:
“Culture as Science-Science as Culture”. The culture is quite green and must have been forgotten, incubating at the back of a dark fridge (was it a Harvard fridge?) for some time.
I prefer my science out in the open where the winds of controversy can clarify it. (Stanford grad: “Die Luft der Freiheit Weht”….or at least it used to.
93% of Harvard grads do not understand the manner in which the earth goes around the sun: http://youtu.be/p0wk4qG2mIg
Did Greg mention that he went to Harvard?