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.
[snip -lets take the high road- Anthony]
If I put my pay packet on a horse and it loses I can say to my wife, “Sorry, Honey. I was wrong to do that.”
Or I can say, “I’m sorry that horse lost.”
One is an apology to the wronged party, the other is regret. Two entirely different commodities.
I’d put Laden’s statement into the “regret” column. He is yet to apologise.
(I forget which route I took. It was a long time ago and there was drink involved.)
Don’t be too quick to drop the chance to deliver an object lesson to the slur-meisters of the Believer world.