Lewandowsky co-author Mike Marriott, serial climate goof, strikes again

Mike_MarriotUPDATE 3/30/14

There is a dispute over a quotation made at 

between Mike Marriott and the author of a blog post that included a quote about Marriot made by AIMN we repeated here.

Therefore, WUWT simply removes the story content here about that post at AIMN and Marriott, and redirects readers to the original AIMN post, where they can determine for themselves:

http://theaimn.com/2014/03/12/an-apology-to-dr-david-evans/

 

 

 

About these ads
This entry was posted in Climate ugliness. Bookmark the permalink.

21 Responses to Lewandowsky co-author Mike Marriott, serial climate goof, strikes again

  1. Dodgy Geezer says:

    I LOVE the explanation!

    I relied solely on information found on internet sites…

  2. Ric Werme says:

    I’m amused by the comments at Taylor’s post that reference SkS. Taylor may have figured out that the world is not what Sks makes it out to be, but his readers need to do a lot more reading and critical thinking.

  3. John M says:

    Have to love the comments in the echo chamber in the link.

    After the host of the blog makes the comment that he only deletes personal attacks, the termers “deniers” and “fools” flow like white wine at a posh Green conference, and are left to stand.

    And then there’s the folks that try to make a “point” by simply quoting what Evans has written.

    I guess they are so used to always being among “correct thinkers” that anything they disagree with is obviously foolish.

  4. Santa Baby says:

    Is this IPCC?

  5. John M says:

    oops, used the “d” to reference comments at Taylor’s blog and got thrown into moderation.

  6. DirkH says:

    “The Australian Independent Media Network
    An information alternative”

    Well, they’re right about one thing; it is really an alternative to information.

  7. shano says:

    Retractive Fury: Warmist Ideation

  8. pottereaton says:

    Now that is some major-league groveling. Gotta know your sources.

    Another liberal muck-raker bites the . . . muck:

    http://theaimn.com/author/miglo/

  9. John F. Hultquist says:

    Michael Taylor of AIMN seems to have gotten a lesson in the craft of being a cAGWer. He should be recognized for the apology – sound of one hand clapping.
    Perhaps Mr. Taylor could learn more if he were to read more and write less. I suggest WUWT as one source and “ joannenova . com . au ” as another. Jo seems to be well acquainted with David Evans!
    -insert smiley face-

  10. Greg says:

    http://watchingthedeniers.wordpress.com/about/
    “I recently established Climate Realities Research after many years of planning and consideration. CRR is focused on understanding environmental and policy issues in the context of public debate. Expect to here more about CRR over the coming months and years”

    Sounds exciting, can’t wait !

    REPLY:
    that was posted in 2010 – Anthony

  11. Richard D says:

    “I have a confession to make: I am not qualified to discuss the intricate, technical details of climate science. It’s beyond my capability. I can grasp the essentials, and even make sense of (some) the actual peer reviewed research that I read. However I am very conscious that I have large gaps in my knowledge, and that crucially I am not qualified to critique the work of science. In order to have a real understanding I’d need to pursue a Bachelor of Science and post-graduate degrees to be able to speak authoritatively on climate science.” Mike Hubble-Marriott

    http://watchingthedeniers.wordpress.com/2010/03/10/the-dunning-kruger-effect-deniers-may-take-down-what-they-dont-understand-but-at-heart-they-are-curious/

  12. Steve from Rockwood says:

    The apology is hilarious and well worth reading. It’s reminds me of John Cleese in “A Fish Called Wanda” where he’s forced to apologize for calling someone stupid.

    The comments after the apology are even funnier, such as “we all make mistakes” etc..

  13. Steve from Rockwood says:

    I [Michael Taylor] wrote: “Evans has gone further in stating that 9/11 was an inside job perpetrated by the Rothschild family, that US President Barack Obama is a secret Jew, that the Holocaust never happened and that Jewish bankers and the Rothschild family have assassinated at least two US Presidents.”. In fact:

    •In his articles, speeches, and interviews, Evans has never said anything about 9/11, inside jobs, Jews, or the Holocaust.

    •Evans has mentioned the Rothschilds in public only once, again in this article on page 27 (see above). In that article he also mentioned on page 8 the possibility that banksters had two US Presidents killed, Lincoln and Garfield (and contained no speculation on who killed Kennedy). That article makes no mentions of 9/11, inside jobs, Jews, religion, Obama, or the Holocaust.

    •Evans does not believe, and has never believed, that 9/11 was an inside job perpetrated by the Rothschild family, that US President Barack Obama is a secret Jew, that the Holocaust never happened or that Jewish bankers and the Rothschild family have assassinated at least two US Presidents.

    •It is possible I have misread or been misled by Mike Hubble-Marriott, and his practice of inferring motivations by using quotes made by other people entirely. See here, and this post on compulsive namecallers.

  14. Joel O'Bryan says:

    Lewandowski’s and Marriot’s escapades would make a good case study in epistemology.
    [epistemology - the study or a theory of the nature and grounds of knowledge especially with reference to its limits and validity.]

    From the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:
    Defined narrowly, epistemology is the study of knowledge and justified belief. As the study of knowledge, epistemology is concerned with the following questions: What are the necessary and sufficient conditions of knowledge? What are its sources? What is its structure, and what are its limits? As the study of justified belief, epistemology aims to answer questions such as: How we are to understand the concept of justification? What makes justified beliefs justified? Is justification internal or external to one’s own mind? Understood more broadly, epistemology is about issues having to do with the creation and dissemination of knowledge in particular areas of inquiry.
    ===============================

    The internet is profoundly changing how people come to acquire what they believe is knowledge and then lack of critical thinking leads to belief in “expert” status.

    On a personal note: I like to learn about climate change and ocean-climate interactions, but I know I will never be an expert. That doesn’t mean I have an informed opinion, which I will use to help guide me in my rants with friends and colleagues about the diminishment of science into a political ideology by the current crop of “experts” with AGW alarmist rhetoric.

  15. stewgreen says:

    That’s David Evan’s who is Jo Nova’s husband isn’t it ?

  16. Eric Worrall says:

    Mike Marriot’s zombie video from a few months ago, if anyone is interesting – puts a face to a name. http://vimeo.com/77954396

  17. DirkH says:

    Eric Worrall says:
    March 29, 2014 at 4:55 pm
    “Mike Marriot’s zombie video from a few months ago, if anyone is interesting – puts a face to a name. http://vimeo.com/77954396

    Proving his point: He really doesn’t understand it. (weather vs. climate; models vs. reality. Difficult concepts for a moron.)

  18. scaper... says:

    Michael Taylor’s background is a public servant (parasite) of no consequence who was put out to pasture due to bad health…he claims.

    He has on more than one occasion misstated the facts. He does no diligent research, writes with a blood tipped sickle and is been monitored with the possibility of legal action in the future. He runs another site (Café Whispers) that would be classified as an Abbott hate site.

    Mostly harmless and should be ignored.

  19. Bob says:

    I visited and commented on the Watching The Deniers site some time back, and my comments were erased. It is hard to have a conversation, especially an intelligent conversation, when someone asserts a private veto authority like that. My comment had to do with the veracity of computer models, and one of the devotees answered with a list of studies claiming the models were correct. Before I could comment on the studies, my original comments were erased.

    Looking at other areas on the site, I found some of the stuff to be politically ignorant. For example, a PR description by Frank Luntz was offered as proof that climate skeptics were conservative, and there was a conservative conspiracy at work to tear down climate science. Not once did anyone explain that that is how Luntz makes his money, writing PR proposals. It’s kind of like Fenton Communications, originator of Real Climate. Fenton was at least partially funded by George Soros, and I am sure that Dr Schmidt and Dr Mann have bound copies of a comprehensive, left-wing communications plan from Fenton.

  20. NikFromNYC says:

    Comical comeuppance.

  21. Bernie Hutchins says:

    Scorecard Please !

    Let’s see. Someone named Michael Marriott posted here on WUWT March 30, 2014 at 2:25 pm asking Anthony to post a correction based on the posted comment on some website “theaimn”. At WUWT Anthony quite appropriately re-posted the comment, as copied from theaimn, as Update3 on WUWT. Now, that comment from theaimn which became Update3 was apparently written to theaimn by someone names Michael Taylor, but all except the first sentence was a quote (from an email I guess) from Michael Marriott in complaint TO Michael Taylor. One too many Mikes – but we are not totally lost yet. But then the comment says “. . . . I’m sorry David, in your apology it very much appears you have attempted to shift the blame to myself. . . . “ Who is David? Isn’t this Mike to Mike? Name too hard to remember! Did “Mike” think he was writing David Evans? Why not Mike and Mike work out their own squabble first?

    [Note: The mods cannot verify anyone on the conversations you referenced was actually who he/she/it claimed to be. Mod]

Comments are closed.