“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:
-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.
Related articles
- Paging David Appell – ‘death threats against climate scientists’ story even deader than yesterday (wattsupwiththat.com)
- Andrew Bolt: The perfect climate for hollow threats (junkscience.com)
- Lying climate scientists lie again – about death threats, this time (blogs.telegraph.co.uk)
- ‘Death threats’ against climate scientists story deader still (wattsupwiththat.com)
- Quote of the week – Death by Coochey coup (wattsupwiththat.com)
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Nick Stokes;
“false claims of death threats showed them to not be telling the truth”
OK, which scientists falsely claimed what?
>>>>>>>
Well we don’t know, do we Nick? Professor Chubb said he was told their were death threats. He’s quoted to that effect above. He claims he took the word of the person who told him, but doesn’t say who that person is. So, there are two possibilities:
1. Chubb lied about being told by someone else, or
2. Someone else lied to Chubb and he hasn’t said who.
So I don’t know which scientist made the false claim. Chubb, or the person Chubb says told him that Chubb hasn’t identified. But either way….someone lied. Instead of trying to obfuscate the matter, perhaps you should be just as angered about being mislead as the rest of us and put some time and effort into finding out the answer to your own question, just who is the liar? Pretending that there was no lie because at this point we don’t know exactly who the liar was is as weak a misdirection from the core issues as I’ve seen of late.
I believe it was Nick Stokes who posted shortly after Climategate that all he could get out of it was scientists were just going about their daily normal work as any scientists do; nothing at all unethical or untoward about them at all.
Nick Stokes,
Whatever respect I had with you was lost then. This issue just cements it.
Some time ago, Mr Watts didn’t your offices in chico get invaded by an uptight femal antagonist.? Do i not remember correctly that you were very upset by this event?
More threats to scientists:
Warning graphic language in emails!
http://www.readfearn.com/2011/06/emails-reveal-nature-of-attacks-on-climate-scientists/
I understand there were several incidents at the ANU in early 2010. On two separate occasions, individuals had walked into institute premises demanding to see particular staff members. Both individuals were acting “aggressively”, professor Steffen said. The institute’s offices were on the ground floor with open access with no security restrictions. The institute’s website had also been subjected to what professor Steffen described as a “cyber attack”.
http://www.crikey.com.au/2012/05/07/hate-campaign-against-climate-scientists-went-beyond-emails/?wpmp_switcher=mobile&wpmp_tp=1
MIT Climate Scientist’s Wife Threatened In A “Frenzy of Hate”
http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2012/01/mit-climate-scientists-wife-threatened-frenzy-hate
“I have hundreds” of threatening emails, Stephen Schneider, a climatologist at Stanford University in California, told Tierramérica.
http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=50607
Dr Wigley what can you tell me about these death threats?
TOM WIGLEY: Well there’ve been a number of abusive and threatening emails that have been sent to a number of the protagonists here, and I’m not going to mention the names of the individuals but it does include me, and those things are very worrying.
I’ve been asked not to say anything about the details of these threats but I can at least say that the FBI in the USA and the police in England are taking these things seriously and are investigating the sources of the threatening emails as well as they can.
And you know, while the investigation is going on it’s really not possible for me to say any more and I’ve been asked not to say any more.
http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2009/s2766202.htm
REPLY: The ANU is a public place, open to everyone, with generally free access. For example, here in Chico, Chico State University is open access, and if I wished to, I could walk right into CSUC and visit any professor’s office at any time. My private office is not a public place, but my own private property, which I hold title to. Big difference. – Anthony
Isn’t it odd how there’s all this furor over threats to warmists, while Green terrorists are actually attacking people?
Nick your integrity dies every time you defend something utterly untrue, The Hockey Stick and the Death threats were fabrications. Lies to influence the gullible. Keep it up, it hurts and ridicules climatology and keeps reminding people who the charlatans are.
i like how chubb blames the journos. is he taking his cue from myles?
they’d make lovely goats for the cagw ridiculum.
stokes is like stepping on a snail. one doesn’t feel too badly about his destruction, but grimaces about the slime on one’s shoes.
unfortunately, this entertainment comes at a price just as the fraud has a cost.
why do they continue to lie when they know we know they are lying?
because we keep paying for the show.
it’s the only growth industry left in america.
too strong for josh to cartoon: the steer who amputates his own limbs to provide free burgers.
america, the edible.
No Surprises here the Socialist Doom and Gloom, CAGW crowd will do and say anything to promote their lying agenda, lie’s stacked on lie’s. This is a classic example.
1. Chubb lied about being told by someone else, or
2. Someone else lied to Chubb and he hasn’t said who.
3. The MSM media pushes the lie over and over again.
4. This is a small pathetic but example of how the AGW industry/movement has operated since day one!
A good headline for this story would be “What Do You Expect form Alarmists?” — or just “Alarmists!” This subtly implies that they’re generally disposed to be jumpy and accusatory on evidence that is slim or nonexistent.
jjthoms says:
May 29, 2012 at 9:34 am
Some time ago, Mr Watts didn’t your offices in chico get invaded by an uptight femal antagonist.?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
So, you’re trying to equate something that actually happened with a lie about something that didn’t actually happen? Oh my.
PS: “Alarmists at Work” could/should be the title of a Josh cartoon.
“Threats” of a sort, are everywhere and in every field. I witnessed or was told about a few between employees at a large radio station, one being an exchange between the tower rigger and an electrical engineer. I don’t condone *any* type threat, but what some of the AGW crowd was trying to do was to use those real or perceived incidents as a way of tarring the skeptics. In a way, I think they *wanted* the threats in one form or another.
There was a poster Nick Stokes at Lucia’s who was maintaining that Greenpeace and ATI were treated by UVA same standard way.
Is this the same Nick?
http://rankexploits.com/musings/2012/court-ruling-on-mannati-case/
Everyone watched and understood the Media Watch report, raise your hand. If it’s more than 10 I’ll buy a weather gadget from Anthony Watts.
kim2ooo says:
May 29, 2012 at 8:06 am
“It is now clear that the move to more secure buildings at ANU had nothing to do with death threats. The move took place in february 2010, 16 months before it was linked in the Canberra Times to death threats”
http://abcnewswatch.blogspot.com.au/
Nice find, Kimmie!
Chubb’s story is starting to look even shakier…
tonyb says:
May 29, 2012 at 5:55 am
damn, damn, damn and DAMN! And I thought I’d disguised my threats very well, but you smarty pants saw right through…….!
Nick Stokes says:
May 29, 2012 at 7:39 am
Bill Tuttle
“And the “other stuff” going on reported by the Canberra Times and your link to it is…?”
Did you miss it? It’s the Media Watch report. It has links to the original Canberra Times report, which it discusses.
Okay, I read it a bit farther and discovered this: “But the story quoted only one scientist talking about death threats…he was advised by police to install a ‘panic button’ security alarm in his university office after receiving death threats.”
Police wouldn’t have advised him to install a “panic button” if he’d received a credible threat — unless they’d also told him to have the receiver attached to an armed guard sitting just outside his office door.
BTW, if you’re interested in trying to earn a fast 500,000 Pakistani rupees, that’s the current going price for my head over here. But i wouldn’t advise the attempt…
— The Canberra Times, 4th June, 2011
%$#@ur momisugly! Dropped the Canberra Times cite too far.
Disclaimer: the 500,000 Pak rupees info did *not* appear in the Canberra Times…
Peter Whale says:
May 29, 2012 at 9:50 am
Nick your integrity dies every time you defend something utterly untrue, The Hockey Stick and the Death threats were fabrications. Lies to influence the gullible. Keep it up, it hurts and ridicules climatology and keeps reminding people who the charlatans are.”
He doesn’t care about his integrity here at WUWT. As long as his mates slap him on the back and cheer him on then he finds his integrity is justified. A different story when his mates turn on him.
“My colleagues in BoM and CSIRO have told me of the vilest threats made against person and family in email and postal mail, and sometimes in person at presentations.”
50 years ago people whould throw rotten eggs and tomatoes at those they didn’t like. What a bunch of baby girls. Form the Climate Scientist Rugby team and scrum down with some real men.
climatereflections says: May 29, 2012 at 8:51 am
“Nick, are you suggesting that your posts are being deleted/censored?”
It’s not just my fantasy. On troll bin moderation, my posts are not acknowledged with a note that they are awaiting moderation. I suspect the mechanism of “troll bin moderation” is that they go straight into the spam bin, from which someone will retrieve them if the spirit moves.
John Whitman says: May 29, 2012 at 9:15 am
“the ANU scientists (who falsely claimed death threats) “
But there you go again. Quote them. Or set out your evidence before calling them liars.
In fact the thrust of the Media Watch report was that the original Canberra Times report seems to have been based on what scientists said. It said almost nothing about death threats, but did describe an alarming situation, and stood up well. Reference to death threats grew as the story was relayed through the media, and was mentioned by the V-C (Ian Young, not Chubb) during an on-air interview. It may be that the V-C mis-spoke, or that he knew something that we don’t. It doesn’t follow that scientists lied.
[REPLY: Nick, your posts are NOT being deleted or censored. Extra moderation simply means that your postings are getting the extra attention they deserve. -REP]
davidmhoffer says: May 29, 2012 at 9:20 am
“Professor Chubb said he was told their were death threats. He’s quoted to that effect above.”
No, in fact Prof Chubb is careful not to say that. People get the V-C’s mixed up. Chubb was V-C at the time of the staff move, which was queried in the Senate Committee. His statement, of which much is made in the head post, is simply saying that death threats were not alleged at the time of that decision, in Feb 2010.
Ian Young was the V-C in the academic year 2011, and it was he who mentioned [the nonexistent] death threats in an on-air interview.
REPLY: added [the nonexistent] There, fixed that for you. You have to get used to saying that now – Anthony
Nick Stokes is dealing with profound, chronic Cognitive Dissonance. Leave him alone.
Rob Crawford says:
May 29, 2012 at 9:39 am
Yep.
http://the-scientist.com/2012/05/29/attacks-on-nuclear-and-nano-science/
Of course, I’m sure our intreprid “journalist” (Appell) has heavily reported on this.
jjthoms says:
May 29, 2012 at 9:34 am
Nice links 🙂
Being a fairly good researcher,,,well looked at those links.
The first two are from Mr Graham Readfearn …WHO uses The Guardians report here
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/jun/06/australia-climate-scientists-death-threats
You are aware these are the emails that have been debunked in this very post?
Many of the others listed by Mr Graham Readfearn seem to be referring not to scientists, but to Cate Blachard…
IMO stretches the limits of Mr Graham Readfearns crudity as he titles his piece “Emails reveal nature of attacks on climate scientists”.
One goes to Mother Jones….In it Mr Kerry Emanuel states they came because of this video clip he did: “New Hampshire’s GOP Climate Hawks”
“It makes me feel to some extent disgusted with politics and to some extent ashamed to be an American.”
“Republican candidates “have either been misled in which case it’s not great to be part of the political system where candidates for the president of the United States could be so misled on such an important issue, or they were dishonest, in which case equally bad in my view: How could we live in a country where candidates are being dishonest about an issue of such importance?”
“”What was a little bit new about it was dragging family members into it and feeling that my family might be under threat, so naturally I didn’t feel very good about that at all,”
IF SOMEONE THREATENED MY FAMILY I WOULD NOT RESPOND LIKE THIS:
“Emanuel decided not to alert police.”
Another stretch of the limits of credulity.
THEN we have: .
“I have hundreds” of threatening emails, Stephen Schneider, a climatologist at Stanford University in California, told Tierramérica.
http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=50607
Is this the same person?
Stephen Schneider: “”To capture the public imagination, we have to offer up some scary scenarios, make simplified dramatic statements and little mention of any doubts one might have. Each of us has to decide the right balance between being effective, and being honest.””
Mr Stephen Schneider: seems to see threats different than me.
Bill Tuttle says:
Thank You! 🙂
PS My above post links
http://www.readfearn.com/2011/06/emails-reveal-nature-of-attacks-on-climate-scientists/
http://www.crikey.com.au/2012/05/07/hate-campaign-against-climate-scientists-went-beyond-emails/?wpmp_switcher=mobile&wpmp_tp=1
http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2012/01/mit-climate-scientists-wife-threatened-frenzy-hate
http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=50607
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/jun/06/australia-climate-scientists-death-threats