Paging David Appell and Nick Stokes again: time to fess up and apologize

“Death threats” story now proven false by ANU Chancellor Ian Chubb

The bizarre now laughable “climate scientists get death threats” at Australian National University has finally imploded completely with the former chancellor Ian Chubb going on record in the Australian today saying:

“For the record, there were no alleged death threats except when journalists picked up the story.”

That puts an end to the issue of there ever being any death threat. There weren’t ever any at ANU, then or now.

Now the issue of how the Australian media took annoying and rude emails (we’ve never questioned that) and turned those into a lie of international proportions will take the stage.

A screencap of the story: 

Well that’s the end of that. Simon Turnill has more at Australian Climate Madness.

David Appell, who went on record to say I deny the existence of my own mother because I had the journalistic sense he didn’t and didn’t believe any of this was credible from the beginning is was recently whining that I’m a “bully” for pointing out the truth and calling him on his own childish behavior in this matter. His reputation as a science writer now lies in tatters, as he’s destroyed his credibility with his crusade of the non existent death threat issue.

Likewise, blogger/scientist Nick Stokes, who fancies himself as being cool and methodical, was completely taken in, and like Appell, seems unable to come to terms with his own quik-set epoxy position that seems to be a product of the tribalism he and Appell share.

They’ve earned a place in climate blog history right up there with “Vermin Supreme” for their inability to accept reality. I expect they’ll be making some sort or wardrobe change/fashion statement soon. In the Vermin Supreme style, I suggest wearing orange road cones:

The latest in Appell-wear, image via Flickr from Wendie Jordan

-or-

They can be men, apologize for their errant and childish behavior towards me and other skeptics on this matter, and move on. I’ll be happy to accept their sincere apologies posted here or on their own blogs and put the matter behind us. Ball’s in your court fellas.

I hope it is the latter rather than the former. Otherwise, I see Josh cartoons in their future.

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of

Quik-set epoxy! A marvellous analogy for the immovable mindset of some climate ‘scientists’ Made my day.

Curious George

Wasn’t there a guy with a kangaroo culling program? Weren’t climate scientists rightfully concerned that their funding might get culled? If that’s not a death threat, what is?

G. Karst

Delusional characters. GK

They can be men, apologize for their errant and childish behavior towards me and other skeptics on this matter, and move on…Otherwise, I see Josh cartoons in their future.
In the meantime, perhaps some savage satire–uhhhhhhh–gentle caricature from Josh will prod them onto the honorable path…

Truthseeker

I vote for a Josh cartoon!

jorgekafkazar

“The wicked flee when no man pursueth,,,”

davidmhoffer

Chubb said he trusted the man who came to him. Which raises the question, who was that man? And is he being disciplined for outright lying to Chubb?
Aw forget it. Already know the answer to the second question. There will be an investigation and he will be exonerated. Not necessarily in that order.

Neville

I hope they act like men as well, but I’ll believe it when I see it. Whenever stupid believers promote nonsense or are caught out telling porkies, they don’t seem to have any shame at all.
Just look at Ehrlich and his stupid predictions and now he still operates as though nothings happened and not a hint of shame at all.

Andrew30

They lie and they know that they lie.

Quark Soup in a basket followed by Oi!You! Moyhu pie.
Come on Nick and David, the sooner you admit mistakes and put things right, the less painful it is.

Gail Combs

Quik-set epoxy…. Thanks for the midnight chuckle Anthony. I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for an apology but I am looking forward to a Josh Lampoon.

pat

Who knows? If you are a crazy leftist living off government grants, with the goal of destroying the livelihood of millions, a bit of criticism might seem like a death threat.

johanna

Chubb has once again skated over the real issue. He seems to be saying that all academics need to be protected by security measures like swipe cards because just anyone could walk in to their taxpayer funded offices.
As a long standing denizen of the ANU, I am mystified by this. To the best of my knowledge, no academic has ever been killed, or even assaulted, in the ANU’s history, because of a dispute about academic issues. Not one. Not ever.
I discount drunken brawls during/after wine and cheese nights, which are far more of a threat to the ‘elf and safety’ of academics than genuine disagreements about big issues. And, oh yes, there have been quite a few. Sexual infidelity and internal politics (including parking and office space) figure prominently.
What we see (apart from the lawyeresque sliding away) is the normalisation of the idea that publicly funded institutions are only accessible to those who have been pre-approved via a swipe card. Thanks, taxpayers!
As for Chubb, he is now the Chief Scientist, whose remit is to justify the carbon dioxide tax. Nuff said.

temp

can we change this
“Now the issue of how the Australian media took annoying and rude emails (we’ve never questioned that) and turned those into a lie of international proportions will take the stage.”
to this
“Now the issue of how the Australian media took harsh but valid criticism found in emails (we’ve never questioned that) and turned those into a lie of international proportions will take the stage.”
hehe I think it has a more “journalistic” vibe to it.

Don Monfort

Chubby meant to set the record straight sooner, but just never got round to it. He should have kept his trap shut. Right, nicky?

Gail Combs says:
May 28, 2012 at 10:57 pm
Quik-set epoxy…. Thanks for the midnight chuckle Anthony. I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for an apology but I am looking forward to a Josh Lampoon.

In this instance, a Josh Harpoon is more apropriate….

Steve C

“Otherwise, I see Josh cartoons in their future.” …
Aha! A threat that makes mere death seem like the soft option … less embarrassing, anyhow!

wayne

Nothing new. Warmists like Appell are liars, cheaters… pseudo-science eaters.
But most intelligent citizens have already come to that conclusion. Just don’t hold your breathe for Appell to admit anything from under his cone.
At least Ian Chubb has some honesty to set the record straight.

temp

O PS love the correction they did on the piece.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-05-11/anu-releases-abusive-emails-sent-to-climate-scientists/4005132
first correction
“UPDATE (May 21): The release of these emails under Freedom of Information followed reports last year (see related stories above) that ANU scientists had received death threats. Climate change sceptics have claimed that the released emails contradict suggestions that any death threats were received, but a spokesperson for the ANU says the university is standing by its claims that death threats were received. Questions have also been raised about whether one of the released emails did, in fact, constitute a threat to use a gun, with a person involved in the kangaroo culling program claiming the comments were made by him, and were in no way intended as a threat.”
It bad but next correction really takes the cake
“Editor’s note (May 24): This story has been amended to clarify that the specific emails released under FOI were found by the Privacy Commissioner to contain abuse, but not overt threats.”
Really? “but not “overt” threats”…. how about no threats at all. These guys just refuse to move an inch.

robmcn

So the whole story was a lie, but the climate scientists wished they got death threats so their wild post modern consensus science would seem more believable. Incredible. Kindergarten science.

eyesonu

“I hope it is the latter rather than the former. Otherwise, I see Josh cartoons in their future.”
==========================
That could be construed as a veiled threat. Maybe even a death threat as one may not be able to live with being portrayed in Josh cartoon.

Patrick

None of this surprises me about the Australian media, in particular the ABC. And alarmists say people like Andrew Bolt are “shock jocks”. Well, that’s just…shocking! This will all be quickly “disappeared” in time for Gillards climate saving tax starting July 1st.
*whispers* Gillard/Swann, are you taking note of the tanking economy?

Laurie

‘What if climate change turns out to be a natural fluctuation? They’ll kill us all’
So, they decided emails were death threats?

eyesonu

Anthony, you’ve just got to love the BS that revolves around the ivory towers of the so-called ‘climate science’. There are more active stories to report on than there is in world affairs. And the best part is that most of the clowns have been sequestered in their ivory towers and sheltered from any form of scrutiny for so long that they are just wide open for ridicule. They are like a bunch of delinquent little teenagers that are going to have to grow up. When faced with that prospect some are going to scream “what’s up with that!”

“Humble in Victory, Gracious in Defeat” is what should apply here. I do not think demanding an apology is particularly humble, whatever the provocation.
Having said that…making an apology by the defeated would be gracious.

Larry in Texas

Like waiting for James Hansen to be fired, I won’t be holding my breath waiting for David Appell and Nick Stokes to apologize. For anything.

Ben U.

David Appell, if you’re reading this, I KNOW Anthony is making it hard for you, but – maybe precisely with that added reason – please do apologize. Short, but sweet, without qualifications and conditions, is best. I’ve been there, done that, and it’s worth it. I do remember your honest and non-Machiavellian reaction to Climategate II.

Shevva

And in there delusional little world they probably still truly believe they got death threats.
These people do not deal with the world in an adult way but as play school children, they just will not face reality.

AndyG55 (from down-under)

No death threats, but darn I want to see their whole ediface torn to the ground, and I want to see them suffer ignomy and despair at their total gullibility. I want to see their integrity and status ground into the dirt, the whole lot of them.
I want them to know and realise, deep in their soul, that they have been used ~!!!!!!!

Morph

He’s too busy with people posting using Anonymous on his website —
You know, the website which has an Anonymous option for posting comments.
http://davidappell.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/anonymous-comments-are-meaningless.html
Err, if you don’t want people to use it turn it off.
OK.

Hmmm
On 24th May 2012, (5 days ago) professor Ian Chubb unequivocally led the National Press Club of Australia to believe that the “Death Threats” were real and he had acted properly by relocating the scientists concerned. See video of Ian Chubb’s address and in particular question put to him by Christian Kerr of the Australian at 30mins 40seconds of the video.
Video of Ian Chubb’s Address
On the face of it, having regard to his reported evidence to the Senate Committee Ian Chubb fair and square and carefully mislead the National Press Club.

Brian H

Apologies from Appell and Stokes? Why not ask for one from Goldenberg, too, while you’re at it?
Airborne porkers, 700 yards to portside, 10 o’clock! ‘Ware the dive bombers!

Ed Moran.

I think I’ll run a book on how long it is before threats against the Team and its hangers-on start to appear. Of course they’ll be anonymous and not traceable back to the warmists who actually sent them. Glieck has shown the way, even though he’s so stupid he got caught.

greg holmes

Here in the UK the AGW campaign is actually paying to forcibly sterilise people in Asia as part of climate control, how long before this sort of crazy arrives at your door.

Nick Stokes

I respond without great hopes, because my responses at WUWT now just seem to disappear. However, if I’m paged, here’s hoping.
First, I’d note that having people barge in off the street to berate you in your office is serious business. So the relocation was indeed understandable.
The question of threats, death or not, has been investigated, as the Australian wished for, by Media Watch. It investigates how the death threats aspect of the ANU story did indeed grow in the telling. But the original Canberra Times story stood up well. As they say:
“As for death threats at ANU, where did that come from? Not from the Canberra Times. Perhaps from the ANU’s Vice-Chancellor.”
and go on to probe that a bit more. Meanwhile the report uncovers a lot of other stuff that has been going on.
For my part, I don’t believe I was taken in by anything, and I think you should quote what I said that I should apologize for. I entered the debate with the WUWT thread on the Privacy Commissioner’s finding. The post said that it declared the emails threat-free – I disputed that. It didn’t, and when the emails were released, I asked ANU for a copy and posted them. For the first time we could see what the Commissioner was alluding to. And indeed there was an email which in his terms described an incident that could be seen as possibly threatening.
Since then, Mr Coochey has come forward to explain in non-threatening terms how he came to be producing a shooting licence at an ANU gathering.

SC-SlyWolf

How can Prof. Chubb say:
“For the record, there were no alleged death threats …”
followed by:
“They were at least abusive but let me be clear… I didn’t read the emails.”

D Appell comes on Real Science and will light up the board with 20 comments in an hour, insulting everyone in sight across multiple posts, seemingly on a search and destroy mission. Nevertheless, it seems many skeptics are somehow enamored with him, otherwise he’d be ignored as they wouldn’t stand for his insults. Here are some of D Appell’s posts over the last couple of days:
“Of course, it is implied in all denier discussions of the MWP.” [still using the “denier” term, even when talking to skeptics {the gall, really}]
“You must be another idiot whiner unable to understand the concept of “metaphor.” Do you have a dictionary handy?” [to Stark D.]
“Did you ever have to write a research paper in, say, junior high school? I honestly can’t tell… As I said, standards here are quite low.” [papiertigre]
My feeling is that Appell is a warmist with an agenda. He doesn’t go to skeptic sites for his own fun and edification. I think he wants to throw a wrecking ball into skeptic morale. He prods endlessly to incite a reaction, and then goes back to his blog or Scientific American to say how bad us skeptics are. So we lose when we let him in. Look at the type of articles he writes at Sci American, as: Stumbling Over Data: Mistakes Fuel Climate-Warming Skeptics. This is a man who strives to ferret out our weaknesses, and then uses this against us elsewhere. I don’t know why he’s allowed on any skeptic sites, imho. But, I understand, that some might like the interaction.

Quick-set Epoxy and a guy wearing a traffic cone on his head really sum up this ridiculous pathetic bit of over-hyped propaganda. Shame falls of ANU again.

David L

You assume these guys want to get to THE truth of the matter (reality)….they only care about THEIR “truth”, their reality, their fantasy land. They won’t be bothered with facts that don’t support their fantasy.

wayne Job

Australia has a fairly large land area with a small population compared to America, it is inconceivable that we could beat you at anything. However there is one thing that we are beating you at hands down. We have more idiots per square mile than you have.

Ian E

Seen any good porcine aviators lately?

Ian E

‘wayne Job says:
May 29, 2012 at 3:02 am
Australia has a fairly large land area with a small population compared to America, it is inconceivable that we could beat you at anything. However there is one thing that we are beating you at hands down. We have more idiots per square mile than you have.’
I’m not so sure – California surely tips the balance in the USA’s favour!

Peter Crawford

Slightly off-topic but…..@Greg….The “AGW campaign” is not paying to forcibly sterilise people. As UK taxpayers WE are. And I do not think it is lacking in humility to demand an apology for that. S**tbags, they are. Ought to be ashamed of themselves

Gixxerboy

Nick Stokes’s equivocation, dissembling and misconstruction of events is exactly what I expected. Typically vile tribalism and closed-mindedness. He doesn’t even begin to recognise that he has done anything wrong. What a pathetic little man. Obviously the product of an age of stupidity, vanity and selfishness.

Shevva

Keep digging Nick, it’s worked so many times for other people in the past.
If you don’t believe Anthony try: http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/for_the_record_there_were_no_alleged_death_threats/
Money quote from the ANU head at the time “For the record, there were no alleged death threats except when journalists picked up the story.”

jono

I see a pattern emerging,
Chubb says he trusted (aka believed) the man who came to him, Glieck said he trusted the persons unkown who `sent` him the forged document, give me a third example and I`ve got a trend, now all I need is funding, a computer, and some software and I could track the gullibility of AGW scientists, the hindcast would be frighteneing.
regards

Dave N

Good luck with extracting an apology from Appell. He might attempt to divert the discussion to a video of someone holding up a noose in front of a non-Australian (let alone ANU) scientist; that person never uttering anything even close to a threat of violence, let alone death.
As for Nick, I’ve never seen any claims that he needs to apologise for on this subject. Having said that, I don’t read every single utterance from him, either.

Owen in Ga

wayneJob: We have to have more per square mile…we have California, Illinois and New York, not to mention Washington DC. I think there are more idiots in just those places than all of Australia put together. I haven’t done the division by surface area though so you may still have us.

Kev-in-Uk

Nick Stokes says:
May 29, 2012 at 2:33 am
my goodness – what a poor excuse for a climbdown!
..”And indeed there was an email which in his terms described an incident that could be seen as possibly threatening.”
AN email? COULD be seen as POSSIBLY threatening? WTF? even now, you are trying to defend the indefensible.
..”Since then, Mr Coochey has come forward to explain in non-threatening terms how he came to be producing a shooting licence at an ANU gathering.”
Oh, and you came straight out and agreed that the ‘story’ was clearly overblown and written in such an alarmist way as to not warrant further defence?
Nick, on the reasonable assumption that you do indeed have the capability of rational thought – please retrace your steps, and the likely ‘impression’ that the whole STORY left upon you to result in you being in this situation! Note, the word STORY in caps deliberately – as that what it was!

Kev-in-Uk

SC-SlyWolf says:
May 29, 2012 at 2:41 am
absofeckinglutely!! Perhaps Chubb is looking to be a comedian because those kind of comments are indeed a flippin joke!