Tom Nelson points out that Laden seems to have caved to impending legal action. His essay now is a world apart from the angry and accusatory rhetoric of a few days ago. I think maybe Laden and the owners of ScienceBlogs.com had a “come to Jesus meeting” (as my favorite broadcasting boss calls them) to basically say, “repent or ye shall be sued to holy hell”.
Actions speaking loudly here:
Warmist Greg Laden: Did I say that tallbloke is a criminal? I meant he’s not a criminal
Computers Seized in Cyber-Thief Investigation (updated again) : Greg Laden’s Blog
I’ve decided to update this blog entry (20 Dec 2011) because it occurs to me that certain things could be misinterpreted…I want to make it clear that I do not think that the blogger “TallBloke” a.k.a. Roger Tattersall has broken British law…The fact that we (Tattersall and I) are on very different sides of this issue should mean spirited debate. It should mean an open conversation about the issues. It should not mean undue accusations or harassment. In pursuit of that ideal, I am offering Mr. Tattersall to publish a blog post on this site (Greg Laden’s Blog) expressing his opinion on the matter, and he has agreed to to so, through his solicitor, instead of pursuing legal action that was previously suggested. I look forward to receiving the text for this post and, again in the spirit of open and public debate about these important issues, I will post it prominently and place it on the select feed for Scienceblog.com to give it maximum exposure.
Laden’s original post (with all the angry unedited rhetoric) is here.
For those late to the party, the timeline summary is here.
Oh, and a personal thank you to all WUWT readers who contributed to Tallbloke’s legal defense fund, which swelled mightily shortly after announced here. Proof positive that money talks, …….. walks. – Anthony
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Several of you have described Mr. Laden as a weasel. I would submit that it is tallbloke who is a “Wild Weasel.” For those of you who are unfamiliar with the term I submit the following:
In brief, the task of a Wild Weasel aircraft is to bait enemy anti-aircraft defenses into targeting it with their radars, whereupon the radar waves are traced back to their source allowing the Weasel or its teammates to precisely target it for destruction. A simple analogy is playing the game of “flashlight tag” in the dark; a flashlight is usually the only reliable means of identifying someone in order to “tag” (destroy) them, but the light immediately renders the bearer able to be identified and attacked as well. The result is a hectic game of cat-and-mouse in which the radar “flashlights” are rapidly cycled on and off in an attempt to identify and kill the target before the target is able to home in on the emitted radar “light” and destroy the site.
Welcome, tallbloke, to the ranks of the “Wild Weasels.”
Good show to Greg Laden on this. Not only did he modify his original post, he ended up adding the explanatory text on top that I and others urged him to do. When you change a blog post you should always alert the reader a) that it’s been changed, and b) what has been changed.
Given the erroneous nature of the initial post, closing comments on it was appropriate IMO as well.
John Warner says:
December 20, 2011 at 5:12 pm
Excellent idea, but we should be sure TB’s legal headaches are done and over with first, but, just a suggestion, but maybe a peek into Dr. Ball’s defense?
John Warner said @ur momisugly December 20, 2011 at 5:12 pm: “What do other readers of this blog think?”
I think we should fund Willis’s “People for the Ethical Treatment of Herrings” and drink beer, but I suspect I’m in the minority 🙂
Let’s take the high road here, shall we? -REP
================
Anthony and REPs, Tallbloke, and the many other climate realists, you have not just taken ‘the high road’, you have paved it and improved it !!! There are too many of you to list without making this comment a book!
I could rattle on about ‘the high road’ but you are making inroads into politics, science, truth, ethics, etc. There are too many names to even begin to list but a cople that immediately come to mind all seem to be climate realists (often referred to as skeptics). You all may become the salvation to humanity, truth, science, political ethics and reforms (truth by the ruling elite), global economy, etc. You guys are paving the new roads that were considered honorable in the past.
You have my greatest respect and admiration and that comes from the heart.
I wonder how Tim Ball is doing with his defense against Mann and Weaver?
Merovign says:
December 20, 2011 at 5:24 pm
The danger is in taking the high road alone.
The problem with the “apology” is that it is *transparently* disingenuous, Laden defended the charges in detail, first issued a half-correction leaving the charge in place, and now claims it was a misunderstanding – this is not credible. The charge was clear, unambiguous, and repeated.
It’s up to Tallbloke if he wants to accept the deal, but I do not believe for one second that the people who have been calling me mentally ill, a shill, or calling for my imprisonment for *years* for the crime of questioning them (even as we catch them in more and more lies and cover-ups, re: Climategates I and II), are suddenly going to participate in an open and honest debate.
Would that there had been an open and honest debate, but that’s just not what has happened or is happening.
————————————————————————————————————————-
Second!!! Well put Merovign.
Personally, I think that if Mr. Laden and Mr. Mann publicly admit that they were wrong, and they are very sorry for crossing the line and that it will not happen again I would let them off the hook, but… No weasel words, but must be a true admission of guilt and apology.
Of course it IS up to Tallbloke, and I feel he is probably a nicer man then I am…
Tallbloke… Keep us up to date if you can and, keep your powder and your sparcstation… dry.
PS. My spellchecker did not recognize sparcstation, and you do not want to know what my Microsoft product suggested as the correct spelling. 😉
Boy, for a moment I thought this was the beginning of the end of the CAGW grant-making movement.
I mean Big Oil fund flows would have been capped and the billions of tax payer to eviro’s monies would have dried up. Can you imagine, oil market would have collaped and energy utility bills cut. It could have been nasty. Whew!
Party time!
/sarc off
Carrick says:
December 20, 2011 at 5:37 pm
“Good show to Greg Laden on this. Not only did he modify his original post, he ended up adding the explanatory text on top that I and others urged him to do. When you change a blog post you should always alert the reader a) that it’s been changed, and b) what has been changed.
“Given the erroneous nature of the initial post, closing comments on it was appropriate IMO as well.”
My dear Carrick, there was absolutely nothing ERRONEOUS about Laden’s original post, which was libelous and defamatory. What are you on about here?
As one of the contributors to Roger Tallbloke’s legal funds, I want to strongly endorse the idea put forward by Richard Drake and John Warner to create a trust fund for the defense of climate realist bloggers or worthy individuals should the occasion arise. I’ve also donated to Tim Ball in the past, but he probably needs more help. As long as the litigious and thin-skinned Mann is in the picture, not to mention the rather puzzling and definitely worrying actions of the Norfolk constabulary, there remains the prospect of further need for a legal slush fund.
Should this idea not fly, my first donation was sent also with the ancillary intent of assisting a worthy blogger replace the computers needed to continue with his blogging, and I would gladly see the full amount donated put to this use. Merry Christmas, Tallbloke and Anthony and all you good folks at WUWT!
My earlier comment was from the mild side of my heart.
The other side of my heart would require that Laden read every post from Anthony, Steve M, Willis, Bob Tinsdale, (pick thirteen others) and write an essay on each as to what they had presented (not an argument against) and post it on ScienceBlogs.com weekly and not allow moderation for as long as Tallbloke should deem appropriate. Kind of like teaching little kids in school to be responsible for their actions.
He would likely become a ‘climate realist’ (skeptic).
I have to agree with the skeptics. The non-apology apology doesn’t wash. Moreover, I would think twice about accepting the offer to “publish a blog post on this site”. I think it is a ploy to draw Roger into saying something contentious to the denizens of their site, so that they can replace Mr. Laden’s despicable comments in their readers’ minds with self-damning (to their choir) comments from him.
Actually, I wouldn’t think once. I simply would refuse the proffered hand – there’s likely something nasty concealed in the palm. But, if you go through with it, Roger, I would stick to the facts of the case and demonstrate unequivocally that Mr. Laden was in the wrong, without giving out any red meat to his pack.
Quite sad in a way. Some years ago I knew Greg Laden in another context, and thought him an intelligent, highly knowledgeable, and very pleasant man, not especially given to either bigotry or stupidity. I don’t know what’s changed him. Perhaps he always had this darkness within, and it just never showed while I knew him. In any case, I’ll remember the man I thought he was, and regret the man he’s apparently become.
Bart is right. It was a non-apology. A pseudo-apology, for no other reason than to try and get out of what has bin Laden’s escalating legal problems. And what about Mann? Does he get a free pass on the back of Laden’s climbdown?
AFAIK, Mann is still unrepentant for labeling TB a “criminal”. Mann’s ego wouldn’t let him even apologize to the extent Laden didn’t. Time to hold Mann’s feet to the fire. He will have to cave. Otherwise, he’s facing weeks of discovery in endless depositions.
I agree; not an apology, rather a revisionist denial of any offense in the first place. I don’t think Laden is capable of admitting error or fault, even by faint indirect implication.
____
TB, about decorating the tree with your lady: how are you attaching her? Enquiring minds … 😉 😯
________
John Warner’s suggestions are excellent.
But I’d personally prefer to see the libel suit go ahead. I don’t see this denial of fault as either an apology or a withdrawal or redress.
I hope Tallbloke sues him anyway.
Greg in his own words: “mean spirited”.
Yes, it was copied and pasted, and yes, context, context, context as the ‘Team’ keep telling us.
thepompousgit says:
December 20, 2011 at 5:41 pm
John Warner said @ur momisugly December 20, 2011 at 5:12 pm: “What do other readers of this blog think?”
I think we should fund Willis’s “People for the Ethical Treatment of Herrings” and drink beer, but I suspect I’m in the minority 🙂
========================================================
I’m with you on the beer part…….
If an a purported apology contains; a reason; or the word but; or an explanation, then it is not an apology, it is an excuse for (perhaps) regretable actions that were caused by, or the fault of, the other party.
So where is the apology? All I see is denial wrapped in an excuse.
The only thing Laden is sorry for is that he got caught libeling someone who fought back. And Mann skates away as usual.
All I want to know, is with a last name like Laden, if Mr. Laden ever finds himself on the “no fly” list when he travels… he definitely seems to have learned that terror is a two way street.
The only way Laden is going to learn a lesson here is if the settlement to be negotiated includes, amongst other things, a donation of a considerable financial sum to an sceptic-AGW ‘charity’ of Tallbloke’s choice.
Nothing like a hole in the pocket to extract some heartfelt humility.
Before Tallbloke’s difficulties, I had not heard of Greg Laden. I am glad of that. Because of Tallbloke’s difficulties, I learned from this blog what Greg Laden was doing on his blog to harm Tallbloke. I am glad that Tallbloke has protected himself against Greg Laden. But I have chosen not to learn any more about Greg Laden. I am really glad of that. Sanity is its own reward.
I am not sure why Carrick, who is normally quite sensible, is congratulating Greg Laden. On the contrary, Mr. Laden’s non apology is disingenuous and dishonest. He blames this all on a simple misunderstanding between British and American cousins (“certain things could be misinterpreted, in no small part because of the common language that separates us across various national borders, and differences in the way debate and concepts of free speech operate in different lands.”)
This strains credibility to the utmost. Let’s look at the title of the original Laden post: “Computers of Criminal Cyber-Thieves Seized”. I don’t see any ambiguity there. Or what about: “Thieves who broke into Unviersity (sic) of East Anglia computers in 2009 … have had some of their computer equipment seized by UK authorities.” This one also seems pretty clear: “So, apparently it is OK for Tattersall and his band of thieves…”. As is this: “investigate his misdeeds.”
Laden’s allegations were reckless and false but also patently unambiguous. He should be ashamed and should apologize directly.
Well, given Laden’s previous, Tallbloke should specify that his response is to be published letter-for-letter, comma-for-comma, as should any comments he makes in reply (if comments are opened).