Friday Funny – John Cook's withdrawal symptoms

Whambulance[1]

Source: Encylcopedia Dramatica – click for the page

Call a whaaaambulance!

WUWT readers may recall that this blog and other popular skeptic blogs are in the running for the 2013 Bloggies in the Science category, as detailed here. Also, for the first time, the website “Skeptical Science” (operated by John Cook of Australia) was in the running, which is a measure of how much penetration they’ve made despite their very low traffic rankings.

I’ve been alerted to a hilarious change in the 2013 Bloggies contest status of SkS by a reader.

=========================================================

chris y says:

March 1, 2013 at 6:11 am

Leo Hickman has a blog posting in the Guardian today about the ‘climate sceptics’ (whatever that is) ‘capturing’ the science and technology category. It reads like sour grapes.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2013/mar/01/climate-sceptics-capture-bloggies-science?CMP=twt_fd

There is this tidbit at the end of the article-

“Reflecting such concern, I have learned that Skeptical Science, who have never lobbied to be nominated and are the only non-climate sceptic blog on the Science shortlist, has now asked to be withdrawn from the shortlist due to its concerns about the legitimacy of the voting process.”

=======================================================

LOL! Confirmed, see the center – “withdrawn by request” in this screencap today:

SKS-withdrawl

I suppose Mr. Cook also doesn’t support the democratic election process, where candidates put up signs, billboards, make radio and TV news appearances, make speeches, run newspaper and magazine advertisements, etc. all in the “vote for me” effort. It works for our USA political system, it works similarly in Australia, where Mr. Cook lives.

How odd that Mr. Cook thinks there’s a legitimacy issue here, when it simply models the Democratic political system of voting. The way the Bloggies system is setup, there’s one vote per email, and the user has to be real and answer the email for the vote to be legitimately recorded. Here are the rules:

  • Any pages with dated entries that existed at some point during the year 2012 are eligible.
  • Only one nomination ballot and one finalist ballot may be submitted per person.
  • E-mail addresses are required to vote. You must use your own address and confirm the verification e-mail.
  • If you verify a second ballot, your first one will be replaced.
  • In the nomination phase:
    • URLs are required.
    • Your ballot must contain at least three unique nominees.
    • Weblogs may be nominated for multiple categories.
    • Nominees must suit the category they are placed in.
  • Weblogs may win a category over multiple years a maximum of three times.

Source: http://2013.bloggi.es/#rules

If Mr. Cook can point out anywhere WUWT or any of the other contestants have violated the rules, now is the time to do so.

The Bloggies has over a decade of experience in dealing with vote stuffing, and they have a good system to prevent it. Even the bots Mr. Cook has designed (that make fake comments in response to other commenters) would likely not be able to make a dent in vote totals, Apparently, even the American Geophysical Union thinks Cooks’s bots making fake comments are an OK thing.

Climate-change deniers have nowhere to hide thanks to an ingenious piece of software that detects inaccurate statements on global warming that appear on the internet and delivers an automated response on Twitter citing peer- reviewed scientific evidence.

The so-called „Twitter-bot‟ is the brainchild of Australian webmaster John Cook and software developer Nigel Leck, and is part of an armoury of tools Cook has developed to rebut common myths and inaccuracies about climate change.

Source: AGU: http://blogs.agu.org/wildwildscience/2011/09/08/john-cook-at-skeptical-science-wins-eureka-prize/

Hickman in his article points out that

The system prevents scripts and voting multiple times. The e-mail verification is the first step, and any ballots that look like they might have been automated or collaborated are flagged for me to review manually. Most climate sceptic blog fans do follow the rules.

The Bloggies proprietor, Nikolai Nolan said in the Hickman interview:

I’m considering various resolutions. But it seems that science blogs would rather complain about the results than try to submit nominations themselves, so I’m not very motivated. No point in eliminating sceptic blogs from the category when there’s not much down the list to replace it with. I also need to keep in mind that fixing the Best Science or Technology category might cause climate sceptic blogs to migrate to another category.

Or, maybe, Mr. Cook thinks there is a conspiracy to win. After all, he and his psych sidekick Dr. Stephan Levandowsky are big on conspiracy theory studies as a tool to smear skeptics, quite certain that climate skeptics are mentally aberrant, even though they never gave the readers of this blog a chance to vote in their horridly self serving and skewed survey. Given that, I think a case could easily be made for psychological projection in Cook’s thinking. That flawed sampling of actual skeptic websites could be why Lewandowsky’s paper was recently pulled from publication by the scientific journal.

But I think that Mr. Cook realized that given his low numbers compared to WUWT and the other highly trafficked blogs, he just didn’t have a fighting chance, much like some candidates in a political election just don’t get penetration with the electorate. So, instead, he did the one thing he could do; he took his ball and went home, while complaining about “legitimacy” of the process without even trying himself.

I think his intent was to poison the results with his claims of “legitimacy”, even though it is just like any political election, and like any political election, there are checks in place to prevent vote stuffing. I predict that whoever wins the category, Cook and Lewandowsy will try to turn the award into some sort of political tool under the guise of science, just as they did with their bizarre “Moon Landing” paper that sampled Climate alarmist blogs, but not climate skeptic blogs, and the most visible skeptic blog, WUWT, was purposely excluded, because, in my opinion, they didn’t want that large sample, as it wouldn’t have given them answer they wanted.

But, this behavior is pretty much par for the course given the juvenile antics we’ve seen from the cartoonist turned conspiracy theory publisher and the whole crew at SkS, who have some pretty disturbing things to say.

Here is Glenn Tamblyn (Skeptical Science author/moderator) secretly conversing with his SkS pals on their off limits forum (which either got hacked or was left open by their own incompetence) and saying “we need a conspiracy to save humanity”. The Viet Cong comparison is a nice touch too. There’s talk of convening a “war council” too.

And this isn’t about science or personal careers and reputations any more. This is a fight for survival. Our civilisations survival. .. We need our own anonymous (or not so anonymous) donors, our own think tanks…. Our Monckton’s … Our assassins.

Anyone got Bill Gates’ private number, Warren Buffett, Richard Branson? Our ‘side’ has got to get professional, ASAP. We don’t need to blog. We need to network. Every single blog, organisation, movement is like a platoon in an army. ..This has a lot of similarities to the Vietnam War….And the skeptics are the Viet Cong… Not fighting like ‘Gentlemen’ at all. And the mainstream guys like Gleick don’t know how to deal with this. Queensberry Rules rather than biting and gouging.

..So, either Mother Nature deigns to give the world a terrifying wake up call. Or people like us have to build the greatest guerilla force in human history. Now. Because time is up…Someone needs to convene a council of war of the major environmental movements, blogs, institutes etc. In a smoke filled room (OK, an incense filled room) we need a conspiracy to save humanity.

[As quoted by Geoff Chambers in this Bishop Hill thread. http://www.bishop-hill.net/blog/2012/3/26/opengate-josh-158.html?currentPage=2#comments ]

Yes, I think we are dealing with Psychological projection on the part of Mr. Cook and SkS here, either that, or pure tribalism, where Mr. Cook couldn’t even stand to be in the same contest with climate skeptics.

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Bruckner8

Wow, what a coward. He knew he was going to get creamed.

Do this and Mr. Cook and all the GRANT chasers at our Universities, National research labs, NOAA, NASA, and the rest will be out of business as DC will have no money to give them.
http://articlevprojecttorestoreliberty.com/activity-page.html

Mark Bofill

The so-called „Twitter-bot‟ is the brainchild of Australian webmaster John Cook and software developer Nigel Leck, and is part of an armoury of tools Cook has developed to rebut common myths and inaccuracies about climate change.
Source: AGU: http://blogs.agu.org/wildwildscience/2011/09/08/john-cook-at-skeptical-science-wins-eureka-prize/

Bots, no kidding! I can’t wait to play with one! Do they try to pass themselves off as humans, are they any good at it? LMAO that’s too funny!
Recursive fury, Twitter-bots, the Skeptical Viet Cong… ~sigh~ What will that mad genius come up with next? :>

Matt in Houston

Wow. Sour grapes indeed. I almost laughed myself right off mychair when Mr. Tamblyn went into his little manifesto about the treachery of us skeptics. He should investigate the folkson his side of the equation- the political left are the ones that have made that behaviour the SOP for their political opponents. They are the charachter assasins. Another case of pointing the finger when reality is that, they are the scoundrels. One day they are going to realize how wrong they have been and I hope the bitter pill is not too big for them to swallow. Or perhaps, more likely, they will never realize, sheep to the slaughter and all…
I will be voting for WUWT, although I certainly recommend JoNova andTallBloke when someone asks me for a good reference site to learn about the charade of CAGW.

DesertYote

Don’t you know that in the leftie world-view, denying them the chance to cheat is the same as cheating.

Ignorance runs amok at Schleptical Science. Remarkable.

Obviously Cook can not cope with reality unless it’s made up by someone like Levandowsky!

Joe

Much as you raise some valid points, Anthony, I think you’re reading too much into their motives.
On the basis that simple is usually better, I’d be inclined to put it down to the simple cowardice of the bully. If they can’t control it, they run away from it.

oldfossil

If the Bad Guys have got a Hot Bot, can’t the Good Guys create a Skep Bot?

Mumbles McGuirk

I wonder if liberals’ constant complaints about how money is ‘corrupting’ the political process isn’t just a reflection of their distaste of having democracy sullied by all the proles having the same vote that they and their enlightened friends have. It just isn’t fair that someone who doesn’t agree with them should have the same rights. “Some animals are more equal than others.”

Perhaps Cook realizes that SkS is not a Science or Technology Weblog and he is using the “legitimacy” excuse to avoid having to admit that his blog is really a Fantasy/Conspiracy Weblog.

Mark Bofill

oldfossil says:
March 1, 2013 at 1:05 pm
If the Bad Guys have got a Hot Bot, can’t the Good Guys create a Skep Bot?
—————————
I know! Just imagine it! It’ll be like Core Wars again, over the net!
I’m sorry, I’m still geeking out about this. Bots to spread the alarmist message…

john robertson

If the rules are not, vote early, vote often and have the voting machine flip your opponents votes into support votes, then our friends do not want to play.
Hard to fake your support under normal rules.

Eliza

Most Australian academics such as Cook are really disappointing. Many are second rate workers imported from USA,Canada, Britain, Ireland, Western and Eastern Europe where they have not been very successful.This explains the Lewandoskwis, Flanneries, Cooks ect, In fact Australian Higher Education is very poor with very few of their Universities now having any decent rankings. They used to quite good before Keating took over in the 80’s

alcheson

They should still post the vote totals at the time of the SKS withdrawal just for reference.

Jimbo

Bwah, ha, haaaaaa! Chicken. Buck, buck, buwaaaack.

John

When you can’t successfully attack your opponents evidence, you attack the man…Well done John Cook. (sarcasm)

jonny old boy

Its what happens when Cartoonists dabble in fields of science they know absolutely nothing about.

KenB

More like Simon Sheik of “Getup” refused to get involved to boost Cook’s tally, lest it reveal Getup’s own bot driven inflation of membership BEFORE the coming election in Australia. These guys live in their own self deluded power crafting worlds, backed by the worlds worst psychologist, or wacky tobaccy take your pick.

mojo

“We had to destroy the award in order to save it.”

I’m sorry. In the last blog entry about this subject, I jokingly said that I voted twice. Even though I put “just kidding” at the end, John Cook must have read it and thought I wasn’t joking. And then he thought that since I voted twice others must have as well and so the whole process is not legitimate.

Oh course, I am still joking. I doubt John Cook even read my post and if he did, I doubt he thought my post was serious. More than likely he knew he would be destroyed in the voting process. So instead of letting the situation play out, he attempts to change the narrative to make himself the victim. Also, I think this is his juvenile way of protesting. A skeptic blog will win the science award, which it would have done regardless of SkS was in there or not. In John Cook’s mind, these are not science blogs. So he doesn’t want anyone to be able to say “a skeptic blog beat yours in the science category”. I think he is protesting the Bloggies inclusion of what he considers anti-science in the science category. These sites are not anti-science, of course.

Robert Austin

Hey, even when afforded the substantial advantage of competing against 4 skeptic sites where the skeptic vote is sure to be split four ways, Mr. Cook chickens out and goes home. And to think that even had SKS not won, it might of beaten out a skeptic site or two.
As for Cook’s pal Tamblynn saying:
“Not fighting like ‘Gentlemen’ at all. And the mainstream guys like Gleick don’t know how to deal with this. Queensberry Rules rather than biting and gouging.”
Since when do Gleick’s wire fraud and the Queensberry Rules equate?

Steve from Rockwood

Note sure why a web blog with very low traffic would be entered into such a contest anyway. But it does leave a clean sweep of skeptical global warming web-sites and that says a lot in 2013 about where this charade is going (and who the champions against it have been). Good luck WUWT.

pottereaton

Anthony writes: “How odd that Mr. Cook thinks there’s a legitimacy issue here, when it simply models the Democratic political system of voting.”
True, but not the whole story. In the US system we generally have two candidates from two parties competing with each other. In this case there is (was) one warmist blog vis a vis four skeptical blogs, all four of which would have (presumably) split the skeptic vote four ways. What Cook was likely afraid of was coming in last, even if he was the only warmist candidate on that ballot. That would have been true humiliation yet more evidence that the so-called “consensus” is not all it’s cracked up to be.

He probably withdrew because he knew he had been put in the wrong category and hadn’t a chance of winning. If he’d been in the correct category – religion – he’d have won easily.

FergalR

It’s very unfair for you to criticise the cartoonist Cook in this regard Anthony.
He’s entitled to feel aggrieved that nobody believes in his stupid crap.

Paul Linsay

I loved: “This has a lot of similarities to the Vietnam War….And the skeptics are the Viet Cong… Not fighting like ‘Gentlemen’ at all.”
I still remember the anti-war demonstrations of my college days,
“Ho, Ho, Ho Chi Min,
Viet-Cong are gonna win”
Guess who would have been leading the chants, Mr Cook and his friends with red bandanas on their heads and waving the Viet-Cong flag.

Jimbo

One of the reasons for the rise of the sceptic blogs is because Warmist sites like Guardian CIF cleanse sceptical comments and ban (remove accounts) from sceptics. It’s happened to me many times. A few years ago the climate CIF was lively and open, but today it is an echo chamber. Then they wonder why sceptic blogs dominate. Duh! or is it Doh!
It’s good to see Leo Hickman (Guardian piece writer) is paying attention. If you are reading this Leo your hidden agenda is doomed. The Guardian circulation is down the toilet. You will soon need to look for a worthwhile and honest job instead of spreading misinformation and propaganda. Monbiot will be close behind.

Ron

A very powerful rolling from top to bottom getting bigger as it goes like a snowball SMACKDOWN! Love it. Very much.

jorgekafkazar

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/cook
cook, v.tr.
3. To alter or falsify so as to make a more favorable impression; doctor: e.g., “…disreputable accountants who were paid to cook the firm’s books.”

FergalR

Really funny to see the SS crew wooing Warren Buffett. His BNSF trains are transporting the oil from the Bakken that otherwise would have gone through the Keystone XL pipeline that the useless idiots he funds helped block construction of.
Ask a greenie if they prefer an oil pipeline leak or an oil train derailment. If they say derailment they’re funded by Buffett.

“..So, either Mother Nature deigns to give the world a terrifying wake up call. Or people like us have to build the greatest guerilla force in human history. Now. Because time is up…Someone needs to convene a council of war of the major environmental movements, blogs, institutes etc. In a smoke filled room (OK, an incense filled room) we need a conspiracy to save humanity.”
Paranoia? Time is up alright, the temperature has stopped going up now, too.

Keith

This is not funny. Are the Glenn Tamblyn (Skeptical Science author/moderator) comments real? They meet the criteria for a terrorist organization.
http://www.nctc.gov/site/other/definitions.html
http://www.fbi.gov/albuquerque/about-us/what-we-investigate

He is often referred to as juvenile but I think Cook’s development was arrested at an earlier stage. His behaviour is much more in keeping with that of a precocious ten year old.
A sore loser even before the game started, his little chubby face all hot and huffy at the terrible injustice of it all!
What a treat.

clipe

To add injury to insult (or is it the other way around?)
Sun News BREAKING: US State Department has approved the Keystone XL pipeline plan as being environmentally sound.
http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/free-ethical-oi-23.html

Jimbo

It’s sooooooooo ironic that Warmists accuse us of being anti-science / anti-climate and yet the “Best Science or Technology Weblog” is dominated by………….Skeptics. That is quite an achievement. Now, Skeptical Science pulls out. I wonder why? We have divide and rule and yet they pull out. There is a consensus and skeptics are a small, maverick rump with no kudos, it would have been a walkover. He, he.

Michael Bacigalupo

Shrewd. Bloggers can now claim, when WUWT invariably wins, that “only denier blogs were even on the ballot”. Very shrewd.

I decided a month or so ago to only call the site ‘Cook’s blog’ because its official name is misleading, to say the least. No sense in helping Cook’s deception.
John

wayne Job

This Cook person needs to remember that when you point the fickle finger of fate at some body, three fingers are pointing back at you. He is the epitome of a herd follower showing fear and hatred of all things outside the herd. Basically a coward if not surrounded by the herd.
A sad indictment of much of our modern education system.

Rupert Bravery

Doubtful News is also carrying the story in a particularly pro Sceptical Science piece. Apparently the those sceptical of AGW are not truly scientific and Sceptical Science is the true sceptical blog.

DCA

1) I have to chuckle that SkS is worried about the fairness of voting. Weren’t they involved in the Lewandowsky survey that permitted people to vote using proxy IPs like those from “Hide My Ass”?
2) I tried to vote 15 minutes ago. Waiting for email with link. waiting. waiting….
How long did other people’s emails take?

How about we support changing the debate on the issue of C02 and AGW – to the real economy of the world – we must fix America first or none will recover and grow – America must do this project Read and learn how to Restore the engine of freedoms and capitalism . .
http://articlevprojecttorestoreliberty.com/

mikemUK

I was pretty disappointed to see Skepticalscience reach the nominations anyway, as in the first round I had (at someone else here’s witty suggestion) nominated it in the ‘Humorous Blog’ category.

Theo Goodwin

“Climate-change deniers have nowhere to hide thanks to an ingenious piece of software that detects inaccurate statements on global warming that appear on the internet and delivers an automated response on Twitter citing peer- reviewed scientific evidence.”
A “bot” that does rebuttals? No. A “bot” that delivers boiler plate. Just what a propagandist thinks of first and foremost. If it delivered rebuttals it would have higher consciousness including scientific understanding, would it not? Cook would have invented a human consciousness. Alarmists are dumb as rocks.

Goldie

As an environmental scientist, I get bombarded with pseudo science in the form of blatant global warming nonsense on a daily basis. I have turned to Wattsupwiththat. In order to see some real unembellished facts. Sure, you get some clearly biased stuff and some political commentary, but any moderately intelligent person can sort through that. On balance I’d prefer to be honestly skeptical than roll over on this one.

Theo Goodwin

Magnificent post, Anthony. A really fine, fine example of writing.

Theo Goodwin

mikemUK says:
March 1, 2013 at 3:01 pm
Good choice. I wanted to nominate it in the “Best Propaganda” category along with Huff Post and some others. Maybe next year.

The Bloggies final round turned out to be the most favourable possible for SkS – four sceptic sites splitting the sceptics’ votes, one mainstream site collecting all the mainstream votes.

OldWeirdHarold

“Our Monckton’s”
… Maybe some English lessons …

Rud Istvan

The cowardice of bullies.
I can offer another Cook example. My book used a single image from SkS. Finally got his express written permission after several months by pointing out that he had reproduced it from UK Met without attribution and with annotations, while I would attribute it to SkS. Gladly did so, since the reason the SkS image was preferred was simple. Emphasized things even UK Met did not.