Skeptical Science takes 'creepy' to a whole new level

People send me stuff.

Yesterday Skeptical Science owner John Cook announced to the world that he thought Willis’s open letter to the new editor of Science was “creepy” and “sexist”.

Cook_creepy

As is typical with the Skeptical Science kidz, it’s just projection. How much? You have no idea. But it turns out that when you scratch the surface of the SkS Forum, where the principals and moderators talk amongst themselves (seemingly unaware of others watching) you discover what creepy really is. For a supposed site about “climate science” it sure does look a lot like “high school climate science”.

Get a load of the pictures from the SkS forum website sent to me today. A friend of WUWT writes:

(Note: I’m leaving the author of this email private, lest he become another Photoshop victim. Note that all the links are in the open, there’s no hack or mole action going on here. BTW, each word highlighted below is a separate link to an image. – Anthony)

I found something I thought you might be interested in while looking to see what is publicly viewable on the new SkS forum’s website (www.sksforum.org).  Little is, but there happens to be a viewable images directory that has a subdirectory, [http://www.sksforum.org/images/user_uploaded].  This directory has some… interesting images.

One [http://www.sksforum.org/images/user_uploaded/WeAreSkeptics.jpg] has several the heads of several skeptics photoshopped onto people from a movie about the 300 Spartans (300, perhaps?).  I assume it was an attempt at humorously painting skeptics as few in number and dogmatic.

But the most interesting ones defy explanation at the moment.  There are a number of images where the head of Dana Nuccitelli or John Cook appear to have been photoshopped onto images of [http://www.sksforum.org/images/user_uploaded/herrscooterboy.jpg]

[http://www.sksforum.org/images/user_uploaded/herrtankboy2.jpg]

It’s possible these images were taken from somewhere else and uploaded, but that seems unlikely as a couple of them show signs of further photoshopping done to improve them.  To see what I mean, compare this image to this one.

Combined with the fact there are a number of similarly photoshopped images done to flatter Nuccitelli, it seems almost certain SkS members have photoshopped images of SkS members as Nazi soldiers.  I can’t think of a single sensible reason they would do that.

I don’t think they dream of being Nazis, and I can’t imagine it was particularly fun to make those images.  It’s possible they made these with the idea of a false flag operation in mind, but that seems ridiculous.  It’s not more absurd than Peter Gleick’s behavior was, but it’s hard to believe anyone would consider doing that (especially on a forum which has been exposed once before).

[NOTE: Brandon Shollenberger decided that he didn’t care that his name was attached to the above, hence this update. – Anthony]

You have to wonder what motivates them to take the time do things like this, especially when they claim that global warming is accelerating, and there is precious little time left before we all roast.

SkS Kidz will be kids I suppose.

I haven’t looked this good since high school:

WeAreSkeptics

L-R: Watts, Monckton, Delingpole.

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

UPDATE: 10:35 PDT About three hours later It seems that somebody at SkS has been embarrassed that they’ve been caught out, and they have comically simply moved the “user_uploaded” folder to one with a seemingly random (Ric Werme says: “Hey, a11g0n3 is leet-speak for allgone. Oh Lord, there be idiots over there.”) name:  [http://www.sksforum.org//images/a11g0n3/]

Sks_allgone

Of course that breaks all the links in the story above.

Only problem is, it’s still open to the public there. All images are still visible: [http://www.sksforum.org//images/a11g0n3/]

Surely they know that the Internet has a permanent memory and all these images still exist elsewhere in folders that people have scraped from the original by now?

Amateur hour cover up tactics. – Anthony

UPDATE2: 11:07AM PDT It seems that they’ve taken down the “leet speak” folder as well, no matter, they still all exist in many places, and I’ll add a gallery shortly.  -Anthony

UPDATE3: 11:19AM PDT here is a few of the images referenced above in the story and in comments. I also have a screen cap of the original folder listing at SkS which I’ll upload tonight when I get home.

skstroopers_marked timemachineboy3 timemachineboy1 ScooterBoy_Prawn osullivanpenguin WeAreSkeptics tol timemachineboy4 Monkeys herrtankboy2 herrtankboy herrscooterboy2

herrscooterboy 1_herrcook11_Tol1 12_Tol2 graphcomaprisonsks_attacks

UPDATE4: 5:31PM PDT, As promised earlier in UPDATE3 here is a PDF capture of the file listing from the original SkS forum snapped at 829AM PDT today.

Index of _images_user_uploaded (PDF)

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

 

0 0 vote
Article Rating
310 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Pamela Gray
August 6, 2013 8:12 am

Photo shop me! Use the gal who starred in the 200 Zillion BC flick with the fur bikini. Perfect flat earther portrayal I think. A bit far from reality but then so are the CO2 models.

M Courtney
August 6, 2013 8:14 am

Not been to SkS but I thought the tone of Willis’s letter was a bit off. Ridiculing it as sexist seemed viable. Anything to distract from the substance, I suppose.
Not been to Thermopylae either but it looks a bit queer. I’m guessing the idea is that the 97% so overwhelm the few Spartans that we sceptics will be overrun.
Of course, if they knew their history then they might worry about taking to the sea as their refuge from the pause in warming problem.
Nazi images proliferate on the internet. It’s a strange place. There are so many that it’s reasonable to assume that someone has probably built a bot to photshop them autmoatically. That’s probably what happened to SkS.

RACookPE1978
Editor
August 6, 2013 8:14 am

Pam:
From your earlier missive of “lithe and curved” I flat-out deny you – or that other fur-bikini-clad young lady – is anythong near a flat-earther!!!!!

Mark Hladik
August 6, 2013 8:16 am

That was Raquel Welch …

Mike Bromley the Kurd
August 6, 2013 8:18 am

Am I imagining things, or are the warmists eggings-on becoming exponentially infantile? From the AGU ‘statement’ to Mann’s almost psycho paranoia, they all seem to be falling off the rails of sanity at an increasing rate.

Sean Peake
August 6, 2013 8:20 am

Nice six-pack, Anthony!

Mark Bofill
August 6, 2013 8:20 am

Huh. Some things are just too weird for me to mock.

August 6, 2013 8:23 am

Somehow, Douche’s just doesn’t seem to cover the infantile mentality.

steveta_uk
August 6, 2013 8:24 am
intrepid_wanders
August 6, 2013 8:24 am

LOL!
A little more photo-shopping and now each of you can have a twitter avatar with
“My abs can crack walnuts, You argument is invalid”

Annie
August 6, 2013 8:25 am

Infantile, unfunny, pathetic…further words fail me.

Dennis Dunton
August 6, 2013 8:25 am

“That was Raquel Welch …” SIGH….Yes, yes it was.

Doug UK
August 6, 2013 8:25 am

@ Mike Bromley the Kurd
Well – it was predicted that as the wheels came off the “AGW = catastrophe Alarmism” then those with a more religious belief would start to lose the plot.
History tells us this is the likely scenario.
I would say that they are “falling off the rails at an “Alarming” rate”.
And this is more predictable than the climate.

Jimbo
August 6, 2013 8:26 am

Anthony, that looks like you photoshopped onto ‘300’ film image which has been criticized for having Nazi overtones, made in the style of Hitler’s filmaker Leni Riefenstahl’s ‘Triumph of the Will’.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/IC23Ak03.html
Now that aside, let’s look at what drives Skeptical Science or SS for short. 😉

John Cook – Skeptical Science – 3 August 2010
“….my faith and my situation are my own. But hopefully for those curious, you understand more clearly the driving force behind Skeptical Science.”

August 6, 2013 8:27 am

For a crowd that espouses peace, love, and a nice planet for everyone, what would explain the image titled “osullivanpenguin”? These guys really have that much free time to waste on creating such violent imagery?

RHS
August 6, 2013 8:28 am

Not just creepy, it reminds of Peter Graves in Airplane! Joey, have you ever been in a Turkish prison? Joey, do you like movies about Gladiators? Joey, do you like to Photoshop yourself into movies you don’t belong?

RichieP
August 6, 2013 8:29 am

Excellent pic of you gentlemen. Shows how little these people know and understand (and not only about science). They’ve forgotten that the Spartans (and the others with them) were standing up for freedom against the autocracy and domination of the Persian king of kings.
μολὼν λαβέ

Ben Wilson
August 6, 2013 8:30 am

Those aren’t real pictures of you guys?
Could have fooled me!!! I really thought that was the way you looked. . . .and dressed. . . . . 😉 !!!

Denier
August 6, 2013 8:32 am

I’m pretty Skeptical there is any Science on the SkepticalScience site….

KevinM
August 6, 2013 8:34 am

Sorry, I also found Willis’s article to be creepy and sexist.
I agreed with the content, but if you read the comments here on WUWT by supportive regulars, you will find references to the less appropriate bits.

Doug Huffman
August 6, 2013 8:34 am

RichieP says: August 6, 2013 at 8:29 am “They’ve forgotten that the Spartans (and the others with them) were standing up for freedom against the autocracy and domination of the Persian king of kings. μολὼν λαβέ” Well said. MOLON LABE Lord of Flies We live in interesting times.

August 6, 2013 8:35 am

I was struck by skstroopers_marked.jpg, and by the amount of effort they put into the comparison of climate change with the attack on Hiroshima, 68 years ago today.

Mike Bromley the Kurd
August 6, 2013 8:36 am

Oh dear, models dressed in bikinis. As if dressing up the code wasn’t enough. Rack-elle Squelch.

August 6, 2013 8:37 am

Yes, I think it was “1 Million BC” with Raquel Welch.(wow!) I was about 12yo when I saw it. As I recall she didn’t have any lines. No one did. Only grunts. Impressionable as I was,that flick changed me. I really wanted to be caveman
Not so much anymore.

Barry Cullen
August 6, 2013 8:37 am

Maybe these people really like the idea of national socialism. ??

August 6, 2013 8:40 am

I was struck by skstroopers_marked.jpg; and by the amount of effort they put into comparing climate change to the attack on Hiroshima, 68 years ago today.

Kevin Kilty
August 6, 2013 8:41 am

You guys are seriously buff and speaqrchuckers to boot! I’m in awe.

Another Gareth
August 6, 2013 8:42 am

With regard to the Nazi images and “I can’t think of a single sensible reason they would do that.”
Being charitable it could be evidence of self-depricating humour over the abbreviation sometimes used for their site – SS.

Kevin Kilty
August 6, 2013 8:43 am

Examine this and then tell me that anyone cannot figure out where schemes to burn food, and transport woodchip pellets around the planet are hatched.

Matthew R Marler
August 6, 2013 8:44 am

On the whole, that’s better than Willis’ letter. It’s funny.

IanE
August 6, 2013 8:48 am

Abs Fab Anthony

Foxgoose
August 6, 2013 8:55 am

Comedy gold Anthony!
(BTW you owe me a new keyboard)

LucVC
August 6, 2013 8:56 am

I think they do you a favour here Anthony. Print it out. Show it to your wife and say that this is your new body. Then make sure to put the light out before you crawl into bed. 😉

Riki
August 6, 2013 9:02 am

Aw, c’mon Anthony, can’t we have some more interesting science articles. The fact that the SkS crowd are basically a bunch of pre-pubescent boys playing around with their computers is nothing new, and, frankly, it’s really boring.
Regarding Willis’ letter, it was a tad lengthy. Also, he probably should not have made any comments, including the flattering ones, about her gender. Unfortunately, we live in an era where gentility has been reframed into sexism by the PC masses. And there is no point in us getting into that argument, which only distracts from the one we really want to engage in.
BTW, I love you guys. I think you’re great.

arthur4563
August 6, 2013 9:06 am

Not to be picky, but “Nazi soldiers” is not correct, since the German soldiers depicted are not apparently members of the Waffen SS, to judge from their insignia. The Nazi Party was pretty exclusive, actually. These guys should be identified as either German soldier of WWII, members of the Heer (Army) or Wehrmacht (armed forces). I once heard that master plagiarist and idiot
Stephen Ambrose refer to the German Army as “the Nazi Army.” Generally the ordinary German soldiers despised the Waffen SS soldiers, and that included non-Waffen German generals.

Justa Joe
August 6, 2013 9:08 am

I think that the modified NAZI images were done to portray themselves as bad dudes that don’t take any guff from their enemies (so-called “deniers” ironically). They imagine themselves destroying their enemies in a war of annihilation with little or no mercy shown. Impotent lefties have many violent fantasies of redemptive violence.

more soylent green!
August 6, 2013 9:08 am

SKS Thinking Explained == McNutt a woman, skeptics have no valid basis for complaint, so the stated complaints must be just a facade for underlying _____.*
What else could it be.
* In this case, “Sexism.” Just identify the target of the criticism using various descriptive attributes that identify race, gender, religion, ethnic background, social background, etc.**
** If the target is a white male of European ancestry (see Mann, Michael), go to Plan B — Claim defamation of character or threat of bodily harm instead.

beng
August 6, 2013 9:10 am

***
I don’t think they dream of being Nazis, and I can’t imagine it was particularly fun to make those images. It’s possible they made these with the idea of a false flag operation in mind, but that seems ridiculous.
***
Seems the only reasonable explanation. Plant the pics somewhere & accuse skeptics of it. Certainly in their realm of Glick-style operations.

dp
August 6, 2013 9:11 am

It is definitely a creepy week when I’m in agreement with both Mosher and Cook. Probably climate change is making me angry. /snark

Paul Matthews
August 6, 2013 9:15 am
DirkH
August 6, 2013 9:17 am

They see themselves under attack.
[http://www.sksforum.org/images/user_uploaded/sks_attacks.jpg]
[http://www.sksforum.org/images/user_uploaded/sks_attacks_impact.gif]
Just like Nazi Germany.
They want to save the world.
Just like Nazi Germany.
Nazi Germany wanted to save the world from the jews.
SkS wants to save the world from climate deniers.
That would be my explanation for the weird and very bad Nazi photoshops.
Maybe a warmist troll could confirm or deny this explanation?

August 6, 2013 9:31 am

[snip – over the top – Anthony]

DirkH
August 6, 2013 9:37 am

Global warming is still happening when you tilt the instrumental record a bit to the left.
[http://www.sksforum.org/images/user_uploaded/graphcomaprison.jpg]
WHY do they do this???? They don’t seem to believe it themselves.

MP
August 6, 2013 9:40 am

Ironically, the “sexist” part was actually referring to the possibility of men around her not giving her the whole truth. I thought it was unnecessary, but certainly not sexist.

Pamela Gray
August 6, 2013 9:40 am

“A bit far from reality…”
Okay! Okay! So maybe it is really far from reality.

August 6, 2013 9:43 am

Bizarre.
Had to be a false flag idea.
Even if they were that sick, they’d not be public about it….would they?

Stacey
August 6, 2013 9:45 am

Anthony I think you should have a caption contest 🙂
“Alarmists don’t like it stuck up em” Bubble out of James Delingpole’s mouth (Apologies to Dad’s Army)

Robert W Turner
August 6, 2013 9:46 am

Who cares about SS really? A climate page with a picture on the front page of a few penguins checking out a plant growing out of ice is a clear indication of the fantasy world they live in.

DirkH
August 6, 2013 9:46 am

Caleb says:
August 6, 2013 at 9:43 am
“Bizarre.
Had to be a false flag idea.
Even if they were that sick, they’d not be public about it….would they?”
Cook is such a bad webmaster that he forgot to protect that folder.

Steve C
August 6, 2013 9:50 am

I think Kenji should complain to SkS that they didn’t Photoshop him into it too. They’re already barking mad. They’ll understand him.

DirkH
August 6, 2013 9:50 am

DirkH says:
August 6, 2013 at 9:46 am
“Cook is such a bad webmaster that he forgot to protect that folder.”
To be specific: to protect it from viewing via a web browser. You will not be able to upload anything without knowing ftp user account and password, though. So without hacking, no “false flag” is possible.

Duster
August 6, 2013 9:51 am

Pamela Gray says:
August 6, 2013 at 8:12 am
Photo shop me! Use the gal who starred in the 200 Zillion BC flick with the fur bikini. Perfect flat earther portrayal I think. A bit far from reality but then so are the CO2 models.

That was one of the One Million BC movies. There was one in the ’40s, with Carol Landis and another, with Raquel Welch, in the ’60s. They constitute the most recent evidence of dinosaurs in geological history, other than in Professor Challenger’s papers.

August 6, 2013 9:58 am

Wasn’t it Prince Harry that thought dressing in a Nazi Uniform was funny as well?

OldWeirdHarold
August 6, 2013 10:02 am

“Cook is such a bad webmaster that he forgot to protect that folder.”
He wouldn’t be the first warmist to leave ‘censored’ data out in plain sight.
Have you ever noticed how cyber-unsophisticated so many of these ‘scientists’ are?

August 6, 2013 10:03 am

Pamela Gray says:
August 6, 2013 at 8:12 am
Photo shop me! Use the gal who starred in the 200 Zillion BC flick with the fur bikini. Perfect flat earther portrayal I think. A bit far from reality but then so are the CO2 models.
===========================================
You mean you don’t really look like Raquel??? I’d always imagined ……… Yum!!!!
As to those paranoid delusional creepys…. well, yes. This is consistent with their actions and words.

milodonharlani
August 6, 2013 10:05 am

arthur4563 says:
August 6, 2013 at 9:06 am
As the world learned when Reagan visited the Bitburg cemetery, after 1943 the Waffen SS drafted conscripts, so its troops’ situation thereafter resembled that of Wehrmacht soldiers.
Maybe Skeptical Science think of themselves as climate change storm troopers (SA) rather than the SS perpetrators of the Holocaust. It is, as has been noted, weirdly twisted that they would envision themselves in WWII German military uniforms of any kind, given their “denier” slur.

SasjaL
August 6, 2013 10:13 am

Sorry to say, but Cook’s avatar looks quite creepy …

DirkH
August 6, 2013 10:14 am

OldWeirdHarold says:
August 6, 2013 at 10:02 am
“Have you ever noticed how cyber-unsophisticated so many of these ‘scientists’ are?”
Sure. I have also seen a lot of FORTRAN source code written by professors. They usually insist one removes the comments so as to not disturb the reading flow.

DirkH
August 6, 2013 10:21 am

milodonharlani says:
August 6, 2013 at 10:05 am
“Maybe Skeptical Science think of themselves as climate change storm troopers (SA) rather than the SS perpetrators of the Holocaust.”
The SA was the security for Hitler’s election campaign. Simple thugs, not soldiers. The only thing they stormed were halls where communists held a speech – before Hitler’s election; there were no communist congregations after that.
The “brownshirts”. Later exterminated, the survivors put into the Wehrmacht.
The pictured guys look like Wehrmacht soldiers, which were mostly conscripts.

steveta_uk
August 6, 2013 10:23 am

The pictures just all disappeared!
Someone at SkS must read WUWT.

steveta_uk
August 6, 2013 10:24 am

… and all reappeared in “/images/a11g0n3”
REPLY: right, the link is: http://www.sksforum.org//images/a11g0n3/
-Anthony

Alvin
August 6, 2013 10:26 am

I am starting to understand why the pro-AGW crowd stating calling skeptics “deniers”. It’s not that we ( I like to include myself) are denying that climate changes, but we are in the way of what they want. We are denying them the wealth and riches they believe they deserve. They are the plundering armies, and the real skeptics are the 300 who are in their way. The plundering hordes are so angry that even with all the Marxists, environmentalists, revisionists, and the like on their side they are not able to win the fight. That is why they resort to the false flags, the lies, and the character assassinations. That is why it is important to keep fighting the good fight.
Thank you Anthony. You should print up that image in high quality and post it on your office wall. You are in their heads, rent-free.

August 6, 2013 10:27 am

The links are now broken unfortunately (or is that fortunate?) – has anyone grabbed the images?

katabasis1
August 6, 2013 10:32 am

“… and all reappeared in “/images/a11g0n3″
– So they have! Good god how incompetent can you get? Move the images to another directory in the same publicly accessible root directory and still expect them not to be found? I didn’t even bother to check that possibility because I made the idiot assumption that no one would be that stupid, especially after being caught.

SasjaL
August 6, 2013 10:33 am

DirkH on August 6, 2013 at 10:14 am
LOL!

August 6, 2013 10:35 am

They really are the gang who couldn’t shoot straight over there at SkS, aren’t they?

DJ
August 6, 2013 10:36 am

It would appear from the group photo that you guys really intimidate… !
…. Their subconscious is getting the better of them.

Gary Hladik
August 6, 2013 10:37 am

…it seems almost certain SkS members have photoshopped images of SkS members as Nazi soldiers. I can’t think of a single sensible reason they would do that.”
The term “bat crap crazy” comes to mind…

Clyde
August 6, 2013 10:37 am

I get the 404 error on all links.

August 6, 2013 10:38 am

SkS seem to have realised they’ve got a major problem – the links no longer work.

katabasis1
August 6, 2013 10:38 am

The ‘Hiro counter’ is amusing….

Editor
August 6, 2013 10:38 am

Pity, user_uploaded has been drained. The “other” directory is still there, so
http://www.sksforum.org/images/a11g0n3/WeAreSkeptics.jpg and http://www.sksforum.org/images/a11g0n3/Monkeys.jpg live on for now. Hey John, should we give you a list of photos you probably want to take down?
Hey, a11g0n3 is leet-speak for allgone. Oh Lord, there be idiots over there.

August 6, 2013 10:38 am

Remember when The Guardian that was unexpectedly positive toward skepticism and this site. For those of us that get in comment tussles with those parroting warmist talking points, there was a commenter that kept referring to skepticalscience dot com, and a skeptic had an outstanding response (I liked the terminology he used, which I’ll make bold), a comment in which ‘Rob’ later had a kind of gibbering ineffectual counter response:

“Rob – can’t you see that trying to hijack a constructive dialogue with a link to your climate activist site is just the sort of behaviour that caused this ugly polarised debate in the first place. Try and take in what Warren [Guardian author] is saying and realise that activist dogma is the absolute antithesis of the scientific method.

JBirks
August 6, 2013 10:43 am

It’s telling that the Skepkidz chose to focus on the most extraneous elements of Willis’ article (calling a woman good looking isn’t sexist IMO) and completely ignore the factual guts. Here is the money quote:
…once you convince people that your causes are more important to you than your science, that’s it for your authority regarding the science. You either get to have activism, or you get scientific authority.
This applies to science as well as journalism. Neither institution has come close to fulfilling its obligation to the public.

Clyde
August 6, 2013 10:45 am

The one Anthony posted above works.

Rational Db8
August 6, 2013 10:47 am

So who is it that they’re depicting as the wicked witch of the west? http://www.sksforum.org//images/a11g0n3/Monkeys.jpg

DirkH
August 6, 2013 10:54 am

Ric Werme says:
August 6, 2013 at 10:38 am
“Hey, a11g0n3 is leet-speak for allgone. Oh Lord, there be idiots over there.”
He wanted to call it “recycle bin” first but then he tried to be original.
My-oh-my.

RoyFOMR
August 6, 2013 10:55 am

None of this surprises me. The increasingly ill-named SkepticalScience site draws a motley crew of neurotic extremists to it as surely as a flame attracts flying creatures of the night.
One of those night-creatures is Dana Nuccitelli who now pens an environment blog for the mighty Guardian newspaper in which he habitually spews out vitriol at those who dare question the ‘coming of the loud’
His blogs attract a lot of interest, not all of it welcome, and despite heavy censorship of posts he can’t (yet?) control the ‘Recommend’ button.
‘Contrarian’ posts regularly attract many, more votes than those who share his views.
He is learning, however, and his most recent post is attracting a much greater number of recommends, and earlier, from those of his ilk than previously.
Perhaps he’s sent out a rallying call to his supporters to do battle with those pesky ‘contrarian Recommenders!
In this post he is aided and abetted by one of his buddies, Andrew Dessler, whose work is featured regularly at the SkS site. Together they turn their baleful gaze upon Dr Tamsin Edwards NAS (Not a Sceptic) who had the temerity to bring a bit of respect and reason (and in a Guardian blog to boot)to the climate debate.
This extract from Dessler’s diatribe may confer a flavour of the post.
(Dr Edwards writes:)
“”much climate skepticism is driven by a belief that environmental activism has influenced how scientists gather and interpret evidence.” She certainly may believe this, but it’s wrong.”
For those of those with a strong stomach here’s the link:
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2013/aug/06/climate-change-scientists-moral-obligation
Anyone who likes clicking that ‘irritating’ Recommend button, to show support for those whose views you agree with, is welcome to join me over there.
If you believe in ‘One Mouse, One Vote’ then exercise that right (Script Kiddies are NOT welcome)

DirkH
August 6, 2013 10:56 am

Eric Simpson says:
August 6, 2013 at 10:38 am
“response (I liked the terminology he used, which I’ll make bold), a comment in which ‘Rob’ later had a kind of gibbering ineffectual counter response:”
Rob sounds like Rob Honeycutt, a pal of Nuccitelli, maker of purses in California. Diana and he once appeared in tandem on notrickszone to break our resistance with clever warmist rethoric.

David L. Hagen
August 6, 2013 11:00 am

Anthony
Sparticans – Only 500:1 odds – not bad.
Gimli: “Certainty of death, *small* chance of success… What are we waiting for?”
Better yet, when right is on your side,
See the Unbeatable Batallion in Chuck Girard, Soldiers of the Lion
Go route them!

Ed Fix
August 6, 2013 11:03 am

And “poof” they’re gone again.

dp
August 6, 2013 11:06 am

Looks like they finally figured out how to move the images out of webspace on the server.

Theo Goodwin
August 6, 2013 11:09 am

If Willis’ letter was “creepy and sexist,” it is only because the PC Police have declared it so. No ordinary American accepts the views of the politically correct. Those views are pushed upon on us by the Leftists among our ruling class who wish fervently that ordinary Americans could be replaced with other more malleable folk. Doubt what I say? Then answer one question. Why does every college in the US, no matter how small or insignificant, have a Diversity Dean funded by the taxpayer dime?

August 6, 2013 11:12 am

I got most of the images before the two folders were cleansed.
For me most interesting were two groups of images, bars*.jpg and figure*.jpg. Both sets of charts go up to 2011. The first set shows that around 30% of authors took ‘no position’ on AGW. The second set shows that when abstracts are analysed only 30% of authors ‘endorse’ AGW. These seem to contradict the 97% claim.

RC Saumarez
August 6, 2013 11:12 am

Who cares what these poisonous little reptiles think? Just deny them the oxygen of publicity.

Keith
August 6, 2013 11:16 am

Anthony:
I would not put up a gallery.
Keep tracking their attempts to hide the images. It is more revealing.

Brandon Shollenberger
August 6, 2013 11:16 am

milodonharlani:

Maybe Skeptical Science think of themselves as climate change storm troopers (SA) rather than the SS perpetrators of the Holocaust. It is, as has been noted, weirdly twisted that they would envision themselves in WWII German military uniforms of any kind, given their “denier” slur.

Interestingly, there was a picture at this link:
http://www.sksforum.org/images/user_uploaded/skstroopers_marked.jpg
But unfortunately, the link is broken now. Hopefully somebody scraped all the images and will upload them. In the meantime, the name of this picture will have to suffice.
REPLY: it is added now to the images at the end of the post, refresh to see – Anthony

Mark Bofill
August 6, 2013 11:17 am

RoyFOMR says:
August 6, 2013 at 10:55 am
—————-
Just my opinion, and as always I acknowledge I could be dead wrong:
I’m not wasting my time engaging on blogs by Nuticelli and Abrahams. Those guys will openly state the skeptic opinion should be ignored and minimized as far as possible. Assuming the Guardian is interested in a lively discussion with lots of comments, they’re going to have to post more blog articles by people who invite discussion if they want my participation.
Let Dana and Abrahams have their echo chamber, I say.

August 6, 2013 11:23 am

skstroopers_marked and herrcook and scooterboy1 2 & 3 are just puzzling beyond belief. however, why ever they were created, why oh why would they have those handing around

RockyRoad
August 6, 2013 11:30 am

The dudes at SKS probably pictured themselves as Climate Nazis–similar to “grammar Nazis”–trying to get rid of those pesky Climate Deniers.
Too bad their silliness has managed to expose themselves as being anything but skeptical.

August 6, 2013 11:33 am

Creepy is more a state of mind and one of those strange words more appreciated by those to whom it applies. Boring being another such

davidmhoffer
August 6, 2013 11:41 am

Ron Manley;
The second set shows that when abstracts are analysed only 30% of authors ‘endorse’ AGW. These seem to contradict the 97% claim.
>>>>
Those would be VERY interesting to see!

RoyFOMR
August 6, 2013 11:53 am

Mark Bofill August 6, 2013 at 11:17 am
I always enjoy and learn from your CIF (Comment Is Free in the Guardian) replies and appreciate that you’re a braver man than me for going into the Donkey’s Den and penning your thoughts.
The more that people suspend their distaste, go to those blogs and see your always respectful and sensible comments and compare them with the subsequent spittle-flecked responses of some, the better.
It was the ill-temper and intolerance in such places that first piqued my interest. I owe my journey from being a mild believer into a confirmed climate sceptic. I owe these people a huge debt of gratitude.
Clicking the ‘Recommend’ button may be a meaningless gesture but it has a purpose or at least it has for me.
Firstly, it allows me to show my appreciation for those whose opinion strike a positive chord and, secondly, it annoys the Dickens out of some of the wild-eyed denizens who squat, and blog, there!

DirkH
August 6, 2013 11:53 am

thisisgettingtiresome says:
August 6, 2013 at 11:33 am
“Creepy is more a state of mind and one of those strange words more appreciated by those to whom it applies. Boring being another such”
You’re right. Wrong word. Totalitarian is much better.

August 6, 2013 11:59 am

Has it come to this?

Jimbo
August 6, 2013 11:59 am

Self projection? First we had Nuccitelli taking oil money and now these Nazi ‘denier’ images. What next, tobacco? Oh wait, I covered that before with Al Gore when he chopped, shredded and sold tobacco. What about coal? Are CRU took cash from power generation companies. What about dung?

James Strom
August 6, 2013 12:05 pm

Willis sexist, creepy? I had to check. There are a lot of guys who can’t help themselves, and have to make irrelevant remarks about a good-looking woman. Initially I carelessly thought that that’s what Willis had done. But it’s not the case–writing to Marcia McNutt Willis mentioned her looks as a possible factor making it difficult for her to get honest feedback about her ideas or actions. And since his letter is ostensibly aimed at giving her advice on improving the magazine Science, his comments are quite relevant.
That said, I wouldn’t have gone there. No matter how relevant the remarks, in our adversarial culture not only would Willis’s opponents not get his point, the would deliberately refuse to see his point because of the wonderful opportunity to call him names. It’s not always prudent to say everything that’s true.

Mark Bofill
August 6, 2013 12:09 pm

RoyFOMR –
Thanks. 🙂 Yeah, I’ll engage if the blog article is reasonable or by someone reasonable like Tasmin Edwards or Warren Pearce.

The more that people suspend their distaste, go to those blogs and see your always respectful and sensible comments and compare them with the subsequent spittle-flecked responses of some, the better.

Well, that was my theory anyways. I knew nobody there was going to be persuaded about much of anything, but I hoped that maybe demonstrating decent conduct and good faith in discussion might count for something with some readers.
I do approve comments over there, but I still suspect engaging people who actively campaign to have discussion with skeptics halted is a mistake.
Regards

Manniac
August 6, 2013 12:10 pm

But surely all good Climate Scientists leave their ‘dirty laundry’ in a folder called “Censored back to 1400AD”…

August 6, 2013 12:11 pm

davidmhoffer
You can see the files at:
http://www.sliderules.info/temp/default.html

TomR,Worc,MA
August 6, 2013 12:15 pm

I think that all of this is just intended to pump up their #s over at Sks. They would love to get in a pissing match with us. I honestly believe that is why so many “alarmist” bloggers post here with their names as a link to their blogs. I don’t ever click the link to their sites.
Tom

August 6, 2013 12:18 pm

Clara looks well tho’. [The impossible girl to Dr. Who fans.]

Richard Day
August 6, 2013 12:20 pm

Step aside Billy Blanks, Beach Body and Bob Greene. There’s a new program in town: The Warrior Body.

BlogUserFun
August 6, 2013 12:23 pm

I’m thinking that since these are “user_uploaded” files that one or more skeptics have loaded what appear to be “politically incorrect” (relative to the SKS site) pics there for a little fun. If this is the case, then Cook & Co. probably should review these files more often for content.

REPLY:
No Skeptic I know of would make these. I sure wouldn’t. besides, you have to be a member of the SkS club to be able to participate in that closed forum, and they don’t allow skeptics there. This is why it was theorized to be the beginning of a “false flag” operation. – Anthony

mkelly
August 6, 2013 12:23 pm

Since the 300 are credited with saving western civilization I would suppose being photoshopped into that group would in fact be a high honor. I bet they are more like the guy King Leonidas told go guard the goat passage. Come back carrying your shield or on it.

M Courtney
August 6, 2013 12:28 pm

RoyFOMR says at August 6, 2013 at 10:55 am…
Dana’s viewpoint wasn’t as unjustified as usual. Perhaps that was Dessler’s influence. He was talking about politics and the influence of scientists on the debate. That isn’t factual (it is opinion) and I was happy to engage with him.
Go and look, unless I’ve been censored already.
Yet, the first reply to me was (I quote) “Shut up you. You don’t even know what climate change is.
It was deleted after a while as too embarrassing. Most of my recommends probably came out of sympathy.
And the worse thing is he’s right.
Unlike him I don’t have absolute faith that I know what the next climate change will be.

davidmhoffer
August 6, 2013 12:29 pm

Anthony, all, have a look. These do NOT support the notion of a 97% consensus in any way shape or form.
Ron Manley says:
August 6, 2013 at 12:11 pm
davidmhoffer
You can see the files at:
http://www.sliderules.info/temp/default.html

M Courtney
August 6, 2013 12:36 pm

Jimbo says August 6, 2013 at 8:26 am

Anthony, that looks like you photoshopped onto ’300′ film image which has been criticized for having Nazi overtones, made in the style of Hitler’s filmaker Leni Riefenstahl’s ‘Triumph of the Will’.

If they want to play that dirty political game let them.
Up the ante, nerd-style.
The last scene of Star Wars Episode IV (A New Hope) is a scene for scene remake of ‘Triumph of the Wlll’… with better music courtesy of John Williams.
Even the size of the squares that the crowds form, as the trio advance, is the same.
Let them claim that Watts and Monckton are Luke Skywalker and Han Solo… it will be too ludicrous for words; just laughter.
Mockery is the right approach to alarmists.

hunter
August 6, 2013 12:42 pm

Putting the skeptics in the place of the Spartans as an effort to put down the skeptics is a nice demonstration of historical illiteracy [on] the part of the SkS goon squad.
As others here have pointed out, the battle depicted in “300”, Thermopylae, is generally recognized as one of the turning points in the emergence of the West as a positive force civilization.
More and more often the AGW promoters and true believers come across as ignorant boors.
As to the alleged sexism of Willis……pc whining is the main refuge of ‘progressive’ losers.

Ox AO
August 6, 2013 12:50 pm

I get it.
The persians were pissed at the Greeks for warming the earth because it was over one degree warmer then today and the evidence is obvious in those pics you guys couldn’t put full suits of armor on you would burn up.

clipe
August 6, 2013 12:50 pm

Pamela Gray says:
August 6, 2013 at 8:12 am
Photo shop me! Use the gal who starred in the 200 Zillion BC flick with the fur bikini….
comment image
Done! 😉

M Courtney
August 6, 2013 12:52 pm

Mark Bofill says at August 6, 2013 at 11:17 am

Just my opinion, and as always I acknowledge I could be dead wrong:
I’m not wasting my time engaging on blogs by Nuticelli and Abrahams. Those guys will openly state the skeptic opinion should be ignored and minimized as far as possible. Assuming the Guardian is interested in a lively discussion with lots of comments, they’re going to have to post more blog articles by people who invite discussion if they want my participation.
Let Dana and Abrahams have their echo chamber, I say.

Three reasons I respectfully disagree:
1) Most viewers of the page are lurkers who want to see the debate. If there is none then they will move on and their prejudices will be patted down. But any counter-argument will be novel to many viewers. And knowledge, innovative ideas, thinking even, is good.
2) The Guardian needs advertising revenue to continue, Echo chambers die. For the health of Western democracy a left-wing broadsheet is required. Playing on their turf (or our turf if you are a lefty like me) is of value to democracy.
3) Censorship of responses will be noted by the editors. The 97% blog has a different moderation policy to the rest of the Guardian website. If it seems to work then it will spread. And spread beyond the Guardian. There is a veru good reason to challenge the moderation policy by making it look unreasonable. And that reason is: It is unreasonable.
The Guardian Environment website is important enough to be worth fighting for.
Let us not be craven.

MangoChutney
August 6, 2013 1:04 pm

if i’m not mistaken Dana sees himself as The Doctor from the 1970’s (jon pertwee) – his sidekick in the photo is kay manning http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/timemachineboy4.jpg
maybe it’s because Dana isn’t a real PhD that he needs to pretend he’s an immortal time travelling savour of the human race
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Pertwee

Mark Bofill
August 6, 2013 1:06 pm

M Courtney says:
August 6, 2013 at 12:52 pm
————————
Re (1) : I agree, but:
Re (2) : I agree, and this is why I won’t engage with Nuticelli or Abrahams. If the editors have any brains, they’ll see that blog posters who invite discussion with skeptics are the ones who get the good discussions.
Re (3) : Reinforces my point Re (2), I will not help Nuticelli or Abrahams blog successfully by serving as the token opposition.
There’s fighting, and then there’s fighting. I try to choose terrain that favors me.
🙂
Best regards.

RoyFOMR
August 6, 2013 1:07 pm

M Courtney says:
August 6, 2013 at 12:52 pm
I looked at, and enjoyed, your posts on the Dana thread (Yup, they’re still there for the present)
Your three reasons for persevering with the Guardian Blogs are very well put and make sense to me.
If you could only persuade Mark to join in (alongside TLITB and others) on Dana’s blog then that can only enrich the debate and may help open eyes.

Lauren R
August 6, 2013 1:07 pm

Sadly, I find myself agreeing with John Cook. If there is any “projection” going on, it was from Eschenbach with his odd paragraph about McNutt’s attractiveness and his postulating that “particularly men” hadn’t rebutted McNutt and told her the “unvarnished truth” in years. Weird. Most of the rest of Eschenbach’s essay was filled with good information but he wandered at times into unseemly personal lecturing of McNutt that struck me as a reflection of his personal issues, perhaps. Unfortunate, coming from someone who has posted highly informative essays here. We’re all (hopefully) allowed the odd rant here and there. An apology to McNutt is in order, I think.

milodonharlani
August 6, 2013 1:13 pm

Brandon Shollenberger says:
August 6, 2013 at 11:16 am
“Herr Cook” as a Reichsfuehrer is beyond bizarre. What are these guys thinking?
Thanks to Anthony for preserving these disturbing, disturbed images for posterity before they were made to disappear.

Foxgoose
August 6, 2013 1:24 pm

The fact that a flattering image has been chosen for the Herr Cook pic, and all the uniform insignia have been lovingly replaced by the Skeptical Science blog logos – make me think this is neither a sceptic product nor a false-flag attempt.
Incredibly – I think this is how some of these guys see themselves or their leaders.
No doubt, if this is just my “recursive fury” kicking in – John or Dana will be along in a minute to explain what a fool I am.
If not, I think this is definitely a case for that pre-eminent paragon of climate psychology – Professor Lew!

Ox AO
August 6, 2013 1:27 pm

M Courtney
Don’t get your three points. All those reasons are good reasons to keep all opinions open for discussion. The point was they do not. So, why do they ban alternate opinions that doesn’t fit the narrative?

DirkH
August 6, 2013 1:28 pm

“REPLY: No Skeptic I know of would make these. I sure wouldn’t. besides, you have to be a member of the SkS club to be able to participate in that closed forum, and they don’t allow skeptics there. This is why it was theorized to be the beginning of a “false flag” operation. – Anthony”
Ah! That makes sense! Material to be planted on skeptic blogs, hoping that we’ll hand them around or something; giggling at stupid Herr Cook.
I wonder whether we have destroyed their real invasion fleet or only a decoy. These are no military-grade photoshops; and the bumbling reaction of the webmaster was a bit too incompetent.
They must have a second server containing the real arsenal.

MangoChutney
August 6, 2013 1:34 pm

to get guardiam comments reinstated i wrote to the mods, tweeted the guardian, guardian science, guardian eco, dana and emailed just about everybody at the guardian
shouldn’t be that way, but they won’t stop me commenting

clipe
August 6, 2013 1:37 pm

There’s an awful lot of girly-men here who don’t seem to understand what Willis actually said.
Men treat women differently than they do other men. It doesn’t always boil down to looks but often to “mother syndrome”.
We all know a fellow who is a “ladies man’. A man who always gravitates to the company of a woman. Does this comment make me look fat? Rachel wants to know.

Tim Clark
August 6, 2013 1:40 pm

{ KevinM says:
August 6, 2013 at 8:34 am
Sorry, I also found Willis’s article to be creepy and sexist.
I agreed with the content, but if you read the comments here on WUWT by supportive regulars, you will find references to the less appropriate bits. }
But he’s getting the wider publicity he prophesied. Cut the man a break.

Gary Pearse
August 6, 2013 1:42 pm

Hmm…not one CAGW proponent troll who joined in to ridicule SkS. By golly you can do what ever craziness you want if you are on the CAGW supporters list. I’m waiting for Real Climate to photo shop themselves into Huns or Mongol warriors. This might be a new disease that wasn’t possible to get before the invention of the internet.

Chris
August 6, 2013 1:47 pm

Riki says “Aw, c’mon Anthony, can’t we have some more interesting science articles. The fact that the SkS crowd are basically a bunch of pre-pubescent boys playing around with their computers is nothing new, and, frankly, it’s really boring.
Regarding Willis’ letter, it was a tad lengthy. Also, he probably should not have made any comments, including the flattering ones, about her gender. Unfortunately, we live in an era where gentility has been reframed into sexism by the PC masses. And there is no point in us getting into that argument, which only distracts from the one we really want to engage in.
BTW, I love you guys. I think you’re great.”
I agree. Even tongue-in-cheek diversions detract from the validity of this site and the dialogue it is attempting to elevate. Leave the humor to the comments or other blogs. This site is providing an enormous public service, and as such is an attractive target to those espousing policy over science. Don’t give them any ammunition. And, like Riki, I love this site. Thank you for it.

Foxgoose
August 6, 2013 1:50 pm

I don’t get the “Willlis was sexist” bit at all.
He addressed her with courtesy, care and respect – but as a man talking to an attractive & very successful woman. Is that “sexist” in progressive circles?
Maybe I’m just too old to get it, but IMHO progressives had better be careful they don’t become extinct due to lack of heterosexual activity.

charles nelson
August 6, 2013 1:55 pm

It is long been known that when Warmists are cornered on any issue of substance, or are put in a position where they simply cannot win the argument that they immediately latch on to anything they can use as the basis for an attack…I’ve been ridiculed for my punctuation on occasion!
Having said that, Willis was definitely ‘off on one’ during his piece on Mc Nutt, you could tell he was enjoying it just a little too much. He should watch out for that.
But having said THAT, the word ‘creepy’ was surely invented for John Cook.

DirkH
August 6, 2013 1:56 pm

Foxgoose says:
August 6, 2013 at 1:50 pm
“Maybe I’m just too old to get it, but IMHO progressives had better be careful they don’t become extinct due to lack of heterosexual activity.”
They reproduce asexually; through brainwashing other people’s kids using other people’s money (planned since The Republic by Plato).

jimmi_the_dalek
August 6, 2013 1:57 pm

Well those images from SkS are just stupid, and their computer incompetence is amusing. On the other hand the words “creepy” and “sexist” were used by several people here regarding Willis’ open letter, so there’s a bit pot calling the kettle black going on here.

Tommy Roche
August 6, 2013 2:03 pm

Herr Drillbit will not be amused that these photo’s got out. A dodgy consensus, working for a major player in the fossil fuel industry and now this ? I often come across Nuccitelli online banging on about “communicating the message”, but somehow I don’t think the message he is sending is actually the one he intended.

clipe
August 6, 2013 2:05 pm

clipe says:
August 6, 2013 at 1:37 pm
“mother syndrome”.
That’s not the correct phrase I was looking for.

MangoChutney
August 6, 2013 2:07 pm

imho Willis should not have commented on her looks – he wouldn’t have said the same thing about a man would he?

Alan Watt, Climate Denialst Level 7
August 6, 2013 2:16 pm

clipe says:
August 6, 2013 at 12:50 pm

Pamela Gray says:
August 6, 2013 at 8:12 am

Photo shop me! Use the gal who starred in the 200 Zillion BC flick with the fur bikini….

comment image
Done! 😉

Far from being off-topic The 10E6 BC documentary provides evidence that the earth was considerably warmer back then — people only needed minimal clothing to be comfortable in any season. Good thing too, considering how drafty caves can be.
And if you want a fur bikini, you can still get one — all while being environmentally conscious. Actually, it looks like you have to get the bikini a separates, starting with these .

August 6, 2013 2:18 pm

Someone at SkS took the time to remove the original Nazi symbols from the original 1936 SS Nuremburg rally, and replace them with Skeptical Scence logo..
Original(or very similar):
http://www.lookandlearn.com/history-images/XD169226/Massed-ranks-of-the-SS-at-the-Nuremberg-Rally-1936
They did such a good job of it, ie greyscaled, etc, it almost looked original!
Then actually naming an adulterated 1936 Nuremburg rally SKStrooper_marked is just utterly juvenile.
Scrawling an arrow to Hitler, and labelling John Cook is almost trivial in comparison (effort wise)
Whatever the reason, these images were there, however they got there, the fact that the kept them is truly odd.
Dana’s Scooterboy, and tankboy pictures, makes you wonder exactly why the Guardian have given him a 97% consensus column.Dana photo shopped as Dr Who is comically tragic
I wonder which original photo, they modified to make John Cook’s HerrCook photo
by the way, It’s James Delingpole’s birthday today, and his brother said on twitter the photo of him (and you, Monckton) as Spartans, made his day..

patrioticduo
August 6, 2013 2:19 pm

I can’t wait to hear what their explanation is for all these creative art shenanigans. Will we see the return of the limited hang-out yet again? Whatever they say, I bet it will include blaming “deniers” in some form.

milodonharlani
August 6, 2013 2:20 pm

Foxgoose says:
August 6, 2013 at 1:24 pm
Strange though the SS crews’ behavior may be, I have to agree with your explanation.
But even if they do see themselves as on a military campaign, why chose a temporarily victorious but ultimately defeated army associated with systematic mass murder of civilians in death camps? Why not dress themselves up in Allied uniforms? Even the much-calumniated US strategic Air Forces & British Bomber Command are less excoriated than the armed forces of the Nazi regime.

Beesaman
August 6, 2013 2:23 pm

Well if you will look in the ‘bunker’!

Foxgoose
August 6, 2013 2:24 pm

” DirkH says: ………
They reproduce asexually; through brainwashing other people’s kids using other people’s money (planned since The Republic by Plato).”
Now you owe me a new keyboard too.

August 6, 2013 2:25 pm

Lauren R says:
“An apology to McNutt is in order, I think.”
Really? I think not.
An apology is due from the new Editor to the subscribers of Science for pushing an unscientific agenda. For propagandizing science. For repeating a narrative that has no verifiable, testable scientific evidence to support it.
Don’t hold your breath, though. McNutt was chosen only after close scrutiny. There is no way she is going to do honest science. If the selection committee had the slightest doubt regarding that, they would have chosen someone more reliable.

August 6, 2013 2:32 pm

“Pamela Gray says: August 6, 2013 at 8:12 am
Photo shop me! Use the gal who starred in the 200 Zillion BC flick with the fur bikini. Perfect flat earther portrayal I think. A bit far from reality but then so are the CO2 models.”

Wasn’t that originally ‘elvish’ and ‘tiny’ or something similar? Why the abrupt longing for the ancient ‘cave woman’ fashion look? You could worry us.

M Courtney
August 6, 2013 2:33 pm

Mark Bofill says at August 6, 2013 at 1:06 pm…
Points 2 and 3: Fair enough. You speak as an officer. Your strategy is arguably correct.
But I am a mere infantryman in the blog wars. My role is to walk into the minefield wherever the battle is.
Will that encourage the laying of more minefields? I hope not. Please do mock and scorn those who try to lay those traps. Attack that idea. Don’t fear such patheticism, guide it.
But, at my level, I will fight for this land (the lefty-wing broadsheet discussion space.
You should do what you think you should.
I will respect that.

August 6, 2013 2:42 pm

Why would they photoshop Lord Monckton onto my body??

M Courtney
August 6, 2013 2:44 pm

Ox AO says at August 6, 2013 at 1:27 pm

Don’t get your three points. All those reasons are good reasons to keep all opinions open for discussion. The point was they do not. So, why do they ban alternate opinions that doesn’t fit the narrative?

Yes, I see what you mean.
At best I am hitting my head against a brick wall.
At worst I am being manipulated as a pet ‘feral sceptic’.
But…
The Guardian is not a publication of a political party. It is not the Morning Star.
The Guardian is the lefty-wing broadsheet of the Anglosphere.
It is worth fighting for its right to survive for the benefit of democracy and the vibrancy of philosophy.
And the owners know that. They don’t own it as a cash-cow. Believe me. Research the Guardian’s finances for yourself if you want to challenge that.
The censorship on the 97% blog is a threat to democracy. And it is virulent. It must be crushed now, before it become the internet norm.
Even though confronting it on ‘away ground’ makes you look like a pillock when you inevitably lose.
It’s worth it, in my opinion.

Lew Skannen
August 6, 2013 2:47 pm

Nice abs, Anthony!

DirkH
August 6, 2013 2:58 pm

M Courtney says:
August 6, 2013 at 2:44 pm
“But…
The Guardian is not a publication of a political party. It is not the Morning Star.
The Guardian is the lefty-wing broadsheet of the Anglosphere.”
I agree. The Fabian Society is not a party. They are the bosses of two parties. (The Labour Party and the Tories)

clipe
August 6, 2013 3:07 pm

MangoChutney says:
August 6, 2013 at 2:07 pm
imho Willis should not have commented on her looks – he wouldn’t have said the same thing about a man would he?

Please pay attention to the lesson.

Alan Clark, Paid shill for Big Oil
August 6, 2013 3:10 pm

No doubt the pictures of the NAZI’s are just preparation for the political left’s next big Enviro-Innovation, burning people as fuel.

katabasis1
August 6, 2013 3:11 pm

For anyone who has not already, I highly recommend browsing the selection of images put up by Ron Manley regarding the “97% consensus” at:
http://www.sliderules.info/temp/default.html
They really do demonstrate Cook et al were trying to polish a very large turd indeed.

Jeff Condon
August 6, 2013 3:12 pm

Priceless!!

Mark Bofill
August 6, 2013 3:17 pm

Minor formatting oversight. 😮
M Courtney says:
August 6, 2013 at 2:44 pm

…Even though confronting it on ‘away ground’ makes you look like a pillock when you inevitably lose.
It’s worth it, in my opinion.

Don’t misunderstand me. I’ve got no problem with getting torn up because I’m arguing on ‘away ground’. I’ve got a problem with the results, when arguing a winning position gets censored into looking like you had no rebuttal to some trivial point. When I speak, there’s a purpose I’m trying to accomplish by communicating, and an opposite purpose is served if part of what I’m saying is censored out. I don’t see the point in talking on forums where the rules of engagement essentially guarantee I can’t accomplish any of my objectives by talking, but instead help people accomplish objectives I disapprove of.
I feel for you since you obviously care about the Guardian. But for me, the bottom line is that I don’t run the Guardian. If they make poor decisions about environmental / climate change blog authority, them’s the breaks I guess.
Anyways, good luck regardless and best regards.
[Should the earlier (improperly formatted) item be deleted then? Mod]

Dave
August 6, 2013 3:19 pm

So if you’re one of the brave heroic 300, they must be the corrupt priests in the temple!

OldWeirdHarold
August 6, 2013 3:19 pm

FWIW, you’re being accused of “Anthony Watt’s professional-grade creepy hacking of SkS” at Curry’s:
http://judithcurry.com/2013/08/06/irresponsible-advocacy-by-scientists/#comment-360788
So apparently finding ditched pictures on the internet is “professional-grade creepy hacking”. Congrats on being promoted to professional grade hacker.
REPLY: LOL! – Anthony

Rational Db8
August 6, 2013 3:20 pm

I went ahead and posted a few comments to the Guardian article along with M Courtney.
Does anyone have a link to a good article about how the AGW “Team” or other “climate scientists” have repeatedly increased the interval of no warming or declining temps “necessary” to be “significant?” I’d like to post something that way also (and have it for future reference), but wound up just using recollection… I’m sure I’ve seen something that way even here on WUWT, but I’m not finding it so far – thanks in advance for links or help on this one.

katabasis1
August 6, 2013 3:26 pm

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then it pretty much stays at laughing when you photoshop yourselves into Nazi uniforms, to be honest.
(Read with reference to this image:comment image)

BFL
August 6, 2013 3:34 pm

patrioticduo says:
August 6, 2013 at 2:19 pm
I can’t wait to hear what their explanation is for all these creative art shenanigans. Will we see the return of the limited hang-out yet again? Whatever they say, I bet it will include blaming “deniers” in some form.
————————————————————————————————————
It would be reasonable that it could be a skeptic having some fun with the SKS files since they are for “user_upload”. However, that also might ruin most of the fun here, so let’s not think about that. It would also indicate that they don’t review these files for content often enough.

richardscourtney
August 6, 2013 3:41 pm

Rational Db8:
At August 6, 2013 at 3:20 pm you ask

Does anyone have a link to a good article about how the AGW “Team” or other “climate scientists” have repeatedly increased the interval of no warming or declining temps “necessary” to be “significant?”

Go to the ‘Search’ facility on the WUWT Home Page.
Enter: temperature adjustments
Select the article(s) you want from the resulting list of links.
I hope that helps.
Richard

Streetcred
August 6, 2013 3:50 pm

SasjaL says: August 6, 2013 at 10:13 am
“Sorry to say, but Cook’s avatar looks quite creepy …”

He’s even more of a creep in real life !

milodonharlani
August 6, 2013 3:52 pm

Rational Db8 says:
August 6, 2013 at 3:20 pm
Maybe not an exhaustive list of changing periods of warming “pause” periods for significance, but a start:
http://www.quadrant.org.au/blogs/doomed-planet/2013/03/the-science-is-settled-no-warming
To which list included in the above link must be added this capper:
“The UN’s climate change chief, Rajendra Pachauri, has acknowledged a 17-year pause in global temperature rises, confirmed recently by Britain’s Met Office, but said it would need to last ‘30 to 40 years at least’ to break the long-term global warming trend.” – The Australian, Feb 22 2013
Since the globe has been warming since about 1700, most of the time without benefit of rising CO2, & is now cooling despite still higher GHG concentrations, maybe he’s right about the “long-term”, but certainly not compared to the warming of c. 1977-96, which resembled that of the 1920s to 40s.

RC Saumarez
August 6, 2013 4:02 pm

Regarding SKS and the Grauniad (I’m sorry that’s the Guardian for non-UK readers):
Just before the Copenhagen summit, the Eco column produced an article saying that “there might have been a short pause in temperature but in the next 5 years it was going to rise faster than ever unless …. ”
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2009/jul/27/world-warming-faster-study?INTCMP=SRCH&commentpage=1
and a 9 metre sea level rise ….
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2009/dec/16/ipcc-sea-level-rise-temperatures?INTCMP=SRCH
The interesting thing is that the gang of true believing commenters are still here today, commenting with all the outrage and moral certitude that they can muster on the 97% thread.
Is there such a thing as learning from experience or does this simply show that the lunatic fringe remains the lunatic finge? Should we care?
The only problem is that the Guardian is main source for the BBC.

clipe
August 6, 2013 4:09 pm

“I’m sorry that’s the Guardian for non-UK readers”
grauniad.co.uk works.

Rational Db8
August 6, 2013 4:23 pm

@ richardscourtney says: August 6, 2013 at 3:41 pm
Thanks for the reply Richard. I’m not really looking for data problems/temperature adjustments, but the claims by AGW promoting scientists that X number of years must go by without warming before AGW itself is discredited… I think the first claim of that nature was either 10 or 12 years pause or decline necessary, then they upped it to 15, then to 17, and now higher… So I was hoping to find an article documenting those wildly different claims and when they occurred, showing how the AGW “climate scientists” keep moving the goalposts as soon as the actual temperature measurements come close to passing their earlier time period of significance type claims.
@ milodonharlani says: August 6, 2013 at 3:52 pm
Thank you! That one comes pretty close. I think there was an even earlier, shorter time frame originally claimed, but your article is right along the lines I’m looking for. I’ll go post it to the Guardian.
If anyone else runs across more this way, please still post your link & thanks in advance!

KevinM
August 6, 2013 4:29 pm

I keep coming back to the idea some of these pictures were meant to end up somewhere where they would have mislead speculatiors as to their authorship.

DirkH
August 6, 2013 4:39 pm

BFL says:
August 6, 2013 at 3:34 pm
“It would be reasonable that it could be a skeptic having some fun with the SKS files since they are for “user_upload”. ”
Everyone here knows Sks for years now. Many of us have communicated with Diana, Rob or Herr Cook. Don’t you think we would know if there were a possibility to upload files?

DirkH
August 6, 2013 4:42 pm

And BFL; you probably don’t know; but as a webmaster you upload your files wither with an ftp or with a web frontend. Both of them are always protected with username and password. You want to avoid that a guy you don’t know, say your friendly government, plants some kiddiepr0n on your web server to have an excuse to shut you down and throw you in a cage like they just did with that TOR guy. You will share the password only with people you trust.
So now you know.

Maarten
August 6, 2013 4:44 pm

how deep can Cook sink!

DirkH
August 6, 2013 4:45 pm

Rational Db8 says:
August 6, 2013 at 3:20 pm
“Does anyone have a link to a good article about how the AGW “Team” or other “climate scientists” have repeatedly increased the interval of no warming or declining temps “necessary” to be “significant?” ”
Hansen era
Hansen cools down the 19th century MAY 2012 blink comparator
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2012/05/19/more-data-corruption-from-giss/#comment-90722
Post hansen era
GISS unter Gavin post Hansen, the fraud continues
http://suyts.wordpress.com/2013/07/23/really-giss-dishonesty-continues-in-post-hansen-era/

Barry Woods
August 6, 2013 5:10 pm

Even if the Sks photos turn out to be some bizarre self planted lewandowsky inspired ‘research’ to stir the pot. 2 things. Delingpole,Watts and Monckton get a fantastically funny framed photo of themselves as the spartans. Xmas cards, calendars and the Josh version shoukd be funny.And if a bit of psychology research, ( as was mentioned as a possibilty – false flag- in the main wuwt article above) everyone only wanted to believe it, because the SkS guys come across as that juvenile in the first place!!! Definitely juvenile not sinister, in my mind
Or some hacker planted them to make them look like juvenile kids. A hacker would had to have permission to make directories and move files. Or msybe an insider. Who knows or cares, lets wsit and see what happens next
Has anybody asked John Cook what is going on yet?
or they are what one or 2 of the SKS crowd do for fun..Popcorn tommorrow
Who knows. I have no idea what is going on, but domebody took some effort withthe photos. Ie the cap badges.
Imagine if it were some ill conceived psychology research, who on earth would allow their own image to be manipulated to show themsekves as John and Dana are depicted. So by that logic it can’t be research. Either a hacker, or someone there is crazy enough to make those photos of John and Dana?
But I have no idea what is going on, , just guesses (look up Johann Hari, for bizarre behaviour on the internet, that you could not make up, as an example)
Whatever the explanation is it is surely going to be interesting.
Just when things were getting boring.

Txomin
August 6, 2013 5:14 pm

Bad reply, Watts.
First of all, the McNutt thingy was a bit of a fckup. Not sexist but weird on some levels. Second, it is foolish to answer Cook’s delusion with a back slap. Many of us are here precisely because we don’t fall for misdirection. You had to do nothing more than post Cook’s tweet if you wanted to expose his intellectual deficits. Instead, you committed folly.

Robert of Ottawa
August 6, 2013 5:16 pm

Note how the warmistas conflate one cause with another. Somehow, to argue about climate science with a female scientist makes you SEXIST! Proof that the warmistas are driven by a political agenda, rather than science.

August 6, 2013 5:35 pm

The most interesting question to me is why the Skeptical[-less] Science site’s leader (Cook) and the insider clique projected themselves and their critics (the skeptics) the way they did in the images contained originally in their site’s subdirectory ‘user_uploaded’?
Consider this scenario as an explanation. They were just having what they considered phantasy fun in making and using the images. In history there have been groups whose phantasy images were subsequently implemented in horrific ways. It is in my view that it is too early to conclude the leader (John Cook) and his insider clique at the Skeptical[-less] Science site will follow a path toward advocating the implementation of their ‘fun’ phantasy images. However, it is rather reasonable to keep a keen public awareness on any further signs of developments in their weird fun phantasies.
SEPARATE SUBJECT => As to the question of whether it is worthwhile going to Cook’s Skeptical[-less] Science site to debate. I recommend it is infinitely more effective to create independent venue dialogs that they (the denizens of Cook’s Skeptical[-less] Science site) cannot avoid participating in. : ). Then the playing field could be monitored much more objectively than @ Cook’s radically censored and manipulated blog.
John

BFL
August 6, 2013 5:45 pm

DirkH says:
August 6, 2013 at 4:42 pm
And BFL; you probably don’t know; but as a webmaster you upload your files wither with an ftp or with a web frontend. Both of them are always protected with username and password. You want to avoid that a guy you don’t know, say your friendly government, plants some kiddiepr0n on your web server to have an excuse to shut you down and throw you in a cage like they just did with that TOR guy. You will share the password only with people you trust.
So now you know.
———————————————————————————————————-
Sure enough, but it wouldn’t make sense, would it, that Cook and trusted company would allow that content in an SKS file on purpose. So perhaps an inside ringer or a hacker but still (probably) a skeptic (maybe even converted by Watts). For a good conspiracy: the Climate Gate leaker. Of course it’s always more fun to assume that Cook and Co. and/or friends are really that Batsh*t crazy.

Mark Bofill
August 6, 2013 5:55 pm

[Should the earlier (improperly formatted) item be deleted then? Mod]

Yes, please. Thank you.

August 6, 2013 6:24 pm

R.E.S.P.E.C.T.
Just a little bit? Just a little bit?
{apologies to Aretha Franklin}
I premise that Cook’s Skeptical[-less] Science site will not come to be respected by the currently growing legion of independents in science and in the general public who have significant critical arguments and work against the main positions held by Cook’s Skeptical[-less] Science site.
Forget respect. What can happen, in my view, is what happened to the RC site. That is, Cook’s Skeptical[-less] Science site continues to become increasingly an irrelevant backwater compared to the vigorous / open / independent dialog on climate science.
Anthony – thanks for your wonderful open, independent and vigorously supported venue.
John

John R T
August 6, 2013 6:32 pm

I looked at SkS, once, a couple of years ago.
A commenter suggested that J Curry was still angry that The Mann stood her up, some time in the past. Talk about CREEPY.

RobWansbeck
August 6, 2013 6:39 pm

Dana is pictured posing with Jo Grant (Katy Manning) who caused a bit of a stir by posing nude and in some instances Daleks were involved.
Sexist? Creepy? Irony?
(I won’t link to the pics but I’m sure serious researchers can find them 😉 )

BFL
August 6, 2013 6:46 pm

Eschenbach’s open letter may be creepy and sexist by a politically incorrect definition but it is at the writers discretion to provide the impact that he feels necessary and Willis is very good at that. I routinely tire of the “tried and true” formulas for this kind of effort and wish that more editorials would follow in his footsteps as after all variety is the spice of life. It’s a real shame that so many have the appearance of embarrassment from such a successful emotive effort. I can only say that when I see Willis put something into words, that I can’t stop reading until I am finished. The true sign of an original and inspirational author.

Sleepalot
August 6, 2013 6:47 pm

For those claiming “German, not Nazi”. The Uniform used for Cook’s image has a badge on the left breast pocket: that was where the Nazi party membership badge was worn.

Jeef
August 6, 2013 6:59 pm

I am Sparta!!

TobiasN
August 6, 2013 7:03 pm

To me this is not a big deal.
Each side does it. For instance the Hitler’s last days movie “Downfall”. A famous meme – w 100s of parodies. I think I have seen 3 or 4 where warmists are mocked as Hitler.
Don’t get me wrong, I am not a relativist – I don’t think the humor works equally.
plus Monkton’s got some serious abs there. Wow! I never knew he was so studly.

Jeff Alberts
August 6, 2013 7:19 pm

I haven’t read all 170+ comments, so apologies if someone already mentioned this.
It seems that the original abbreviation for SkS is more appropriate than we thought. Megalomania, narcissism, and brainwashing seem the order of the day.

August 6, 2013 7:21 pm

Yesterday Skeptical Science owner John Cook announced to the world that he thought Willis’s open letter to the new editor of Science was “creepy” and “sexist”.

At least one of the female commenters here did, and not just female. That part didn’t bother me so much (although I got their point). I certainly thought it was hastily written and overly emotional and personal.
And several people here thought that.

August 6, 2013 7:23 pm

John Cook,
If you want creepy read your own ‘Fury’ paper plus the ‘Moon’ paper it was based on. Willis’s open letter (which I thought was just representative American persona at large) does not register on the creepy scale comparatively.
John Cook, please come play outside with us. We guarantee enlightenment.
John

Eugene WR Gallun
August 6, 2013 7:25 pm

Jimbo Aug 6 8:28 am
“Skeptical Science or SS for short”
Haha — rolling on the floor
Eugene WR Gallun

DavidA
August 6, 2013 7:37 pm

SkS is a hang out for Napoleon Dynamite types. People who can kill you in 101 different ways with their bare hands – they got the list on the internet. Also see Gareth on The Office.

August 6, 2013 7:41 pm

If Willis’ letter was “creepy and sexist,” it is only because the PC Police have declared it so.

Nonsense.
I couldn’t care less if a guy asks a girl back to his place to see his etchings, as long as he’s willing to take no for an answer. However, combining a harsh series of criticisms with compliments about someone’s appearance is a bit odd and, at a minimum, very predictably open to misinterpretation.
Would a woman (or man for that matter) have criticised Einstein’s scientific understandings and biases in a public letter and in it comment about how good looking he is? How “Alpha” he is, having hung out with Marilyn Monroe and all?
I mean, she could do that, but it would appear unprofessional and beg the question of what that was about, wouldn’t it?

davidmhoffer
August 6, 2013 7:47 pm

Christoff Dollis;
Would a woman (or man for that matter) have criticised Einstein’s scientific understandings and biases in a public letter and in it comment about how good looking he is?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Oh gimme a break. Men are genetically programmed to NOT piss women off. The more attractive they are, the stronger the genetic imperative. That includes not telling them they are wrong, even when they ARE wrong. Which was Willis’ point, politically incorrect or not, poorly worded or not.

August 6, 2013 7:51 pm

Men are genetically programmed to NOT piss women off. The more attractive they are, the stronger the genetic imperative. That includes not telling them they are wrong, even when they ARE wrong.

I do not suffer from this particular malady. 😉
However, somehow you missed my point. It had nothing to do with how badly worded (and unedited) the open letter might have been. My point was about the combination of harsh insults in an open letter about science with compliments on someone’s appearance.
Believe me, I also do not suffer from the malady of reticence in mentioning to a lady what I enjoy about her appearance if the mood hits me. I just can’t see working it into this type of letter.

August 6, 2013 7:57 pm

I’m sure I could write an open letter intended to a wide audience filled with things I don’t like about Debbie Wasserman Schultz or Sarah Palin. But if I added the post script, “P.S. You’re hot,” it wouldn’t really support my broader message, now would it?
It also depends where you say it. For the record, I think both women above are fine looking. But this is just a random comment on a blog as opposed to a headlining article on the world’s most-read climate website. And I’m not actually combining harsh critique with commentary on their hair.

Otto Gabor
August 6, 2013 8:12 pm

this is the same John Cook who swallowed the Alene Composta hoax, hook, line and sinker (along with fellow genius Stephan Lewandowsky). You don’t need too many brains to be a warmist.
start here: http://verdanthopes.blogspot.com/2011/03/tomorrow-belongs-to-us.html

Robert in Calgary
August 6, 2013 8:16 pm

There was absolutely nothing wrong with Wllis writing – “you are extremely well educated, strong, strikingly good looking, and a wickedly-smart woman by all accounts ”
The only creepy aspect is how some prudes are attempting to twist it into a “Casus Belli”
I’m willing to donate $10 so we can send smelling salts to Lauren R., John Cook and Christoph.

August 6, 2013 8:25 pm

There was absolutely nothing wrong with Wllis writing – “you are extremely well educated, strong, strikingly good looking, and a wickedly-smart woman by all accounts ”

Very professional. Totally par for the course in scientific discourse especially when criticising someone.
/sarc
Even if not sexist, it’s incredibly condescending. In much the same way that criticising a male scientist in an open letter and complimenting his biceps and quad development would be.

August 6, 2013 8:43 pm

James Strom says:
August 6, 2013 at 12:05 pm
Willis sexist, creepy? I had to check. There are a lot of guys who can’t help themselves, and have to make irrelevant remarks about a good-looking woman. Initially I carelessly thought that that’s what Willis had done. But it’s not the case–writing to Marcia McNutt Willis mentioned her looks as a possible factor making it difficult for her to get honest feedback about her ideas or actions. And since his letter is ostensibly aimed at giving her advice on improving the magazine Science, his comments are quite relevant.
That said, I wouldn’t have gone there. No matter how relevant the remarks, in our adversarial culture not only would Willis’s opponents not get his point, the would deliberately refuse to see his point because of the wonderful opportunity to call him names. It’s not always prudent to say everything that’s true.

OK, that is a fair counterpoint.

Jorge
August 6, 2013 9:00 pm

[snip]

August 6, 2013 9:08 pm

Jeff Alberts [August 6, 2013 at 7:19 pm] says:
I haven’t read all 170+ comments, so apologies if someone already mentioned this.
It seems that the original abbreviation for SkS is more appropriate than we thought. Megalomania, narcissism, and brainwashing seem the order of the day.

Well I personally agree with you about those two letters being a perfect acronym for those knuckleheads. But it should be made clear that Anthony long ago decided to NOT allow that here in the comments, and it is his website operated under his name, and that’s good enough for me. I’ll use that term at other sites but not here in deference to him since it is his site and reputation he needs to protect.
In hindsight it looks like he was correct in that decision because of the tendency for so many non-critical thinkers to associate the comments with the site itself as if it is an extension of the beliefs of the site owner. That is fallacious thinking, shallow to the core and in fact is doubly painful because since Anthony does not use that two-letter abbreviation himself he has gone way above and beyond the call of duty to keep the comments clean by frowning upon it. In effect he has laid a trap for them and they walked right into it associating top him something he definitely does not support.
If the climate kooks at SkS really want to know what’s in the mind of commenters everywhere all they need to do is stop censoring their own forums and simply ask for critical comments of what we think of them.

August 6, 2013 9:23 pm

[snip -agreeing with you and completing previous snip above – Anthony]
Uncalled for.

Pamela Gray
August 6, 2013 9:29 pm

Sticking to dry technical debate in serious conversations is important. Willis added color commentary to his serious letter, thus harming its tone in my opinion. But when photoshopping or cartooning is the name of the game, all bets are off. That includes me. This tiny Irish in-denial nerd wants a tall, stacked, small waisted Rachael Welsh body. If that kind of fun makes me sexist, gimme a card so I can get into the club.

Editor
August 6, 2013 9:39 pm

Pamela Gray says:
August 6, 2013 at 9:29 pm
> If that kind of fun makes me sexist, gimme a card so I can get into the club.
You don’t need a card to get into our club!

jorgekafkazar
August 6, 2013 9:44 pm

arthur4563 says: “Not to be picky, but “Nazi soldiers” is not correct…Generally the ordinary German soldiers despised the Waffen SS soldiers, and that included non-Waffen German generals.”
True, Arthur. The German armed forces ordinarily used the military salute, as opposed to the Nazi “Heil Five” version. (There were later exceptions at some formal occasions.) Here’s a picture of the captain of the Graf Spee, Hans Langsdorff, attending the on-shore funeral of crew members killed in the battle. Note his salute, the sour expression on the Nazi behind him, and the priests giving the full Nazi salute!
http://www.maritimequest.com/warship_directory/germany/photos/cruisers/admiral_graf_spee/crew/hans_langsdorff/1939_12_15_funeral_for_crew_montevideo_neu.jpg
Here is Admiral Günther Lütjens giving the big AH a military salute to his face in public:
http://www.bismarck-class.dk/forum_images/luetjens_hitler_may_5_bismarck.jpg

dp
August 6, 2013 10:04 pm

The only creepy aspect is how some prudes are attempting to twist it into a “Casus Belli”

The inappropriate choice of words was a setup for the take down that followed. He lectured her saying her attributes could doom her to the mushroom syndrome where she is kept in the dark and fed night soil by those she depends on for information, and that she may suffer this completely unaware. Short of calling her a ditsy airhead blond and making a bobble head “ding dong” motion but not by much.
The offense was that Willis presumed she needed to be told any of this by a south seas islander scuba-diving, ex-cowboy, yachting fisherman turned self-taught climate wonk with millions of page hits to attest to his writing prowess and popularity. I imagine him making big eyes, talking slowly like Al Gore, and making air quotes with his fingers as described in another thread had this exchange taken place mano a mano. And rather than backing off, he’s back hoeing, digging deeper, and growing the circle of offended ladies as he goes. He’s Uncle Bob when he’s challenged. That’s not going to work out well in the long run but he doesn’t care and I don’t care. And what the hell what all that stereotyping about his Irish wife? He would flat fail any corporate behavioral guidelines I’ve lived with for the last 40 years. Casus belli? Hardly, but inappropriate? Oh hell yes. There is another story about what happens when you give a cowboy enough rope…

davidmhoffer
August 6, 2013 10:16 pm

Christoff Dollis;
I do not suffer from this particular malady. 😉
>>>>>>>>>
Yeah right. Either you are lying to yourself or (no offense intended) you are coming out of the closet. Men are what evolution has made us.

August 6, 2013 10:20 pm

You so don’t know me, David.

Tony Mach
August 6, 2013 10:42 pm

Probably these images are on the SkS server for the same reason they are now on the WUWT server.
Just a thought.

davidmhoffer
August 6, 2013 10:54 pm

Christoph Dollis says:
August 6, 2013 at 10:20 pm
You so don’t know me, David.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Don’t need to. If you are some sort of exception to the rule, well heh, I’ll take your word for it, you can claim to be anything you want. But for the majority of men, telling a woman she is wrong isn’t how we are wired.

johanna
August 6, 2013 11:20 pm

davidmhoffer – well, in a professional environment, it is not wise to tell anyone, male or female, that they are “wrong” in such blunt terms. There are respectful ways of pointing out errors, and as someone who had to manage a bunch of sometimes tetchy and arrogant policy analysts for many years, I had to learn how to do it.
I can assure you, though, that my male bosses had no hesitation in returning work they were not happy with for a rewrite, no matter who the author was. They didn’t write “you’re wrong!” on it, they just let me know what changes they wanted made. Why would they risk their own credibility by submitting something to the Minister that they were not satisfied with just because they thought the author was kinda cute? It doesn’t work like that in the rigorous and demanding environments that I was employed in. And, the author (whoever it was) learned from that experience, if they were smart and wanted to get ahead.
BTW, you should try being a female boss and telling a cocky young male subordinate that his work is less than perfect sometime. To say that this sometimes encounters stiff resistance is putting it mildly.

Patrick
August 6, 2013 11:55 pm

“davidmhoffer says:
August 6, 2013 at 10:54 pm
But for the majority of men, telling a woman she is wrong isn’t how we are wired.”
I’ve been on the receiving end of venomous looks, shrieks, gestures, slaps, punches and words both at the professional and personal levels several times when I have told a woman, justifiably, she was wrong. Wired for it or not, wrong is wrong. Don’t sugar coat the truth!

richardscourtney
August 7, 2013 12:04 am

Rational Db8:
At August 6, 2013 at 4:23 pm you say to me

@ richardscourtney says: August 6, 2013 at 3:41 pm
Thanks for the reply Richard. I’m not really looking for data problems/temperature adjustments, but the claims by AGW promoting scientists that X number of years must go by without warming before AGW itself is discredited… I think the first claim of that nature was either 10 or 12 years pause or decline necessary, then they upped it to 15, then to 17, and now higher… So I was hoping to find an article documenting those wildly different claims and when they occurred, showing how the AGW “climate scientists” keep moving the goalposts as soon as the actual temperature measurements come close to passing their earlier time period of significance type claims.

Sorry that I misunderstood your question.
Here is a link to a post I made on WUWT which addresses what I now understand to be your question.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/12/07/monckton-on-his-smashing-u-n-wall-of-silence-on-lack-of-warming-and-censure/#comment-1167407
I hope this answer is starting to provide what you want.
Richard

SandyInLimousin
August 7, 2013 12:18 am

Johanna
It’s the same for grey beards with cocky youngsters of any sex.

Jack Cowper
August 7, 2013 12:19 am

Mango Chutney,
Dana is more like Worzel Gummidge than Dr Who.

steveta_uk
August 7, 2013 12:31 am

I see that the genii at SkS have managed to make the directory non-browsable.
So they have returned all the images to the orginal location, so the original links to the images work again, but not to the directory.

Patrick
August 7, 2013 12:40 am

“Jack Cowper says:
August 7, 2013 at 12:19 am
Dana is more like Worzel Gummidge than Dr Who.”
And Worzel would put on his sensible head when talking about the science of climate change, unlike Dana.

Matt
August 7, 2013 12:52 am

Wow if that is meant to be used against the evil ‘D’ wrongdoers then well SKVD ? soz SKS are really dumb ! the lads on the picture will probably love it and have it framed for the office !

Ed Zuiderwijk
August 7, 2013 12:59 am

“I can’t think of a single sensible reason they would do that.”
Spoilt high school brats don’t need a sensible reason, just something that keeps their mind off girls and the activities that go with it.

johanna
August 7, 2013 1:23 am

SandyInLimousin says:
August 7, 2013 at 12:18 am
Johanna
It’s the same for grey beards with cocky youngsters of any sex.
———————————
Sandy, are you suggesting that I have a beard, let alone a grey one? 🙂
Actually, I was in my mid 30s when I began doing that job. But, I suppose I seemed ancient to the whippersnapper fresh graduates that I had to lick into shape! And yes, some of the female graduates were just as cocky. But I noticed that some (not all, by any means) of the guys either mistook me for their mother, or resented being pulled into line by a female boss.
The workplace is a minefield of sexual politics. IMO, the best way to handle it is to be absolutely professional – and that includes being fair and respectful, but firm, in correcting your subordinates.

Brandon Shollenberger
August 7, 2013 1:32 am

steveta_uk:

I see that the genii at SkS have managed to make the directory non-browsable.
So they have returned all the images to the orginal location, so the original links to the images work again, but not to the directory.

Priceless!

Pete
August 7, 2013 3:10 am

Re. Photo of Watts, Monckton and Delingpole, I have to say that it is a bit worrying. I mean whoever photoshopped this obviously lies awake at night thinking of said three gents in tight leather underwear and little else! And the spears, what does that say? Yuk, no offence to Watts, Monckton and Delingpole but I am off to bleach that image from my mind.
All that Nazi stuff? Do they dress up like this when they meet up in their rooms and the grown ups are out? All very very strange!

RC Saumarez
August 7, 2013 3:47 am

I’m on tenterhooks to see what Josh makes of this!

Brandon Shollenberger
August 7, 2013 4:40 am

Since the images were put back, just with the directory no longer listed, you can see all the images if you have the links. I saved an HTML copy of the page when I visited it, and it has every link. If you download it and open it up in your browser, you can click any of them.
I don’t know if they’ll leave the directory/files up, but as long as they do, that’ll let you easily navigate to them.

Brandon Shollenberger
August 7, 2013 4:46 am

Question. If somebody photoshops their face onto a Nazi soldier, is it still wrong to call them a Nazi?
I don’t think Godwin’s Law applies once you start dressing up as a Nazi.

August 7, 2013 6:09 am

The first four I clicked on are deleted, so I’m guessing the rest are too.

Editor
August 7, 2013 7:06 am

Brandon Shollenberger says:
August 7, 2013 at 4:40 am
> Since the images were put back, just with the directory no longer listed, you can see all the images if you have the links.
You may be seeing images from your cache. I see from a close-to-the-protocol perspective:
$ wget http://www.sksforum.org/images/
–2013-08-07 09:59:45– http://www.sksforum.org/images/
Resolving http://www.sksforum.org (www.sksforum.org)… 184.154.120.211
Connecting to http://www.sksforum.org (www.sksforum.org)|184.154.120.211|:80… connected.
HTTP request sent, awaiting response… 403 Forbidden
2013-08-07 09:59:45 ERROR 403: Forbidden.
$ wget http://www.sksforum.org/images/a11g0n3/sks_attacks.jpg
–2013-08-07 10:04:14– http://www.sksforum.org/images/a11g0n3/sks_attacks.jpg
Resolving http://www.sksforum.org (www.sksforum.org)… 184.154.120.211
Connecting to http://www.sksforum.org (www.sksforum.org)|184.154.120.211|:80… connected.
HTTP request sent, awaiting response… 404 Not Found
2013-08-07 10:04:15 ERROR 404: Not Found.
So they’ve blocked the ability to read directories and moved the files elsewhere.

Brandon Shollenberger
August 7, 2013 8:14 am

Ric Werme:

You may be seeing images from your cache.

I was going off the information provided by steveta_uk. He said the images were back. I didn’t verify that for myself. It’s possible he was wrong. It’s also possible they were back for a little while then moved again.

Reply to  Brandon Shollenberger
August 7, 2013 9:15 am

@Brandon and Ric – It was the cache. I copied and pasted the link to another browser and it came up 404.

Terry
August 7, 2013 8:20 am

I really like to concentrate on sticking to a site (here) that espouses science and truth so I have not visited this SKS site or whatever it is. It is mostly due to lack of time for mindless browsing. Am I to take that the site is run by climate alrmists that portend to be climate skeptics to make skeptics be crazy, nazi, gooballs (or whatever)?

DavidA
August 7, 2013 8:42 am

In future stories about SkS can we show that portrait of “Herr Cook” and caption it with “Skeptical Science founder John Cook (Source: SkepticalScience.com)”?
REPLY: No. – Anthony

milodonharlani
August 7, 2013 8:50 am

Rational Db8 says:
August 6, 2013 at 4:23 pm
You’re welcome. If there were an originally shorter time frame, you could probably find it in the WUWT archives.
Re. many comments on Nazis, maybe the SS narcissists prefer German uniforms since burning mass-murdered people is more acceptable (or even beneficial, to reduce “popullution”) to them than those “climate criminals” in the Allied air forces who released tons of carbon dioxide by burning cities.

Matthew R Marler
August 7, 2013 8:52 am

philjordan: Wasn’t it Prince Harry that thought dressing in a Nazi Uniform was funny as well?
Same as Mel Brooks. Did you see the video of Hitler figure skating on ice?

Reply to  Matthew R Marler
August 7, 2013 9:38 am

@Matthew Marker – twice! My wife insisted upon seeing the remake as well.

rtj1211
August 7, 2013 9:46 am

Nazi role play in fantasy does seem a very common feature of all kinds of things. We’ve had an MP who resigned for going to a stag party where he dressed up as a nazi. Prince Harry went to a party dressed up as a Nazi. An F1 administrator was stitched up by the NOTW for consorting with ladies of the night who gave discipline to nazis. There’s something rebellious for some, outrageous for others, disciplinarian for yet others.
Political smearing using nazi allegories would be just about the quickest way to get sacked as a media advisor for a political party. If there really is someone out there with nazi views, far better to let them come out with them of their own accord: they’ll hang themselves in most countries of the world in professional terms when they do. If you have to do that, it really does show you’re desperate. Most of the public are getting tired of ‘all politicians should be the pope’, so serial affairs, even children outside wedlock haven’t eliminate Boris Johnson just yet.They’re a bit more peppery about fiddling expenses and rather hot on hypocrisy. So a rabid Greenpeace supporter driving a gas guzzler would be manna from heaven. A skeptic’s harder to get, since there’s less to pin onto them directly. Best to steer clear of oil funding or tobacco funding unless you have complete editorial control on all publications, publicity and media stunts though.

Rational Db8
August 7, 2013 9:53 am

@ RoyFOMR says: August 6, 2013 at 10:55 am

For those of those with a strong stomach here’s the link:
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2013/aug/06/climate-change-scientists-moral-obligation
Anyone who likes clicking that ‘irritating’ Recommend button, to show support for those whose views you agree with, is welcome to join me over there. If you believe in ‘One Mouse, One Vote’ then exercise that right (Script Kiddies are NOT welcome)

The Guardian did heavy pruning of the comments last night and this morning – including removing three long posts of mine listing all the various eminent scientists who are in fact skeptics – they removed those without trace, after having left them in place for several days. I guess those had gotten too many positive votes, and too clearly proved that there is no 97% consensus.
And now suddenly I’m on “pre-moderation” which is apparently the “about to be banned” status – even though none of my posts violated their comment standards. It’s clearly a very unabashedly rigged game over there.

August 7, 2013 10:14 am

Nazi role play in fantasy does seem a very common feature of all kinds of things.

Yeah, a Jewish girl I know likes it.

Rational Db8
August 7, 2013 10:18 am

@ davidmhoffer says: August 6, 2013 at 10:54 pm

But for the majority of men, telling a woman she is wrong isn’t how we are wired.

In my experience as a woman working in a very male dominated, highly technical scientific/engineering field (nuclear), that certainly hasn’t been the case – and they don’t mind doing it in a very public fashion either and often far more so than they would towards other men. What’s worse, after they incorrectly claim you are in error, if you go on to show clearly that you in fact were correct (no matter how politely you do so), those men get very ticked off about it even though they were the ones who erred (or perhaps because they were the ones who erred).

Rational Db8
August 7, 2013 10:25 am

@ richardscourtney says: August 7, 2013 at 12:04 am
Thank you Richard! Yes, that’s exactly the sort of thing I was looking for, with solid references such as the NOAA quote you used.

Mark Bofill
August 7, 2013 10:25 am

Rational Db8 says:
August 7, 2013 at 9:53 am

And now suddenly I’m on “pre-moderation” which is apparently the “about to be banned” status – even though none of my posts violated their comment standards. It’s clearly a very unabashedly rigged game over there.

Yup. Don’t reward them giving you a chance to play on a crooked playing field by playing. Hold out for decent conditions, or take your conversation elsewhere.

August 7, 2013 10:26 am

I don’t think most people like being told they’re wrong.
My experience is telling a woman she’s wrong (in a social, not a professional sense, although it can be necessary there too of course if an organisation is to meet its goals) usually gets her attention and earns you points in the end. She may never agree with you, but she respects the fact that you’re not sucking up to her like most every other man is. I think most men are just too gutless with women.
Now there is a certain type of person who falls to pieces when being told they’re wrong, but I don’t think most women are this way in particular.

August 7, 2013 10:31 am

Are you in pre-moderation status, Db8? Sometimes a particular word will trigger moderation. For example, this comment of mine just a few moments ago was moderated, but most aren’t.
Perhaps you are being pre-moderated however. I’ll say that I’ve enjoyed seeing your perspective and while I don’t always agree, you bring important counterpoints and experience to the conversation.
Unfortunately, there does tend to be too much of a blind echo effect from several commenters from time to time, but I suppose that’s just how it goes.

August 7, 2013 10:56 am

Wow … does this represent an SkS “Shark” jumping moment or what?
“Jumping the shark” – from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jumping_the_shark :
Jumping the shark is an idiom created by Jon Hein that was used to describe the moment in the evolution of television show when it begins a decline in quality that is beyond recovery, which is usually a particular scene, episode, or aspect of a show in which the writers use some type of “gimmick” in a desperate attempt to keep viewers’ interest.
.

RC Saumarez
August 7, 2013 11:47 am

I have put several comments on the Grauniad 97% article linking to this post. They were all removed as the did not conform to the standards of the site.
Actually, since most of the commenters have a thought disorder and some have de la Tourette’s syndrome, who cares?

davidmhoffer
August 7, 2013 12:00 pm

Christoph Dollis says:
August 7, 2013 at 10:14 am
Nazi role play in fantasy does seem a very common feature of all kinds of things.
Yeah, a Jewish girl I know likes it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
OK, you’ve exceeded “creepy” by several orders of magnitude and gone to straight sick.

Bryan A
August 7, 2013 12:18 pm

I find the 300 image very appropriate as it is indicating the extreme minority (300) standing against the vast majority (The Evil Xerxes and his [Persian] Army) But which of the 3 is Leonidas
Monkton perhaps

davidmhoffer
August 7, 2013 12:24 pm

All,
Your “personal experiences” with the matter are immaterial because you have no control to compare against. You can’t say if your experience in a given situation would be worse, better, or the same if the genetic imperative did not exist. It isn’t a black and white issue.
To get some sense of this requires reading of studies that look at the issue via a variety of techniques to isolate the effect. Sorry, my reading of same is 20 years ago, I have neither links nor references to offer up, but the effect is real, much diminished in some circumstances (life or death decisions for example) and much pronounced in others.
I find it odd that this has become a central piece of the discussion, because Willis’ transgression in his article is hardly in the same league as being portrayed (by the hand of another or by oneself as the case may be) as a Nazi.

Pamela Gray
August 7, 2013 12:40 pm

Charlie Chaplin’s portrayal stands the test of time as the best of the mockingly best. Panning Hitler and his SS is by no means lifting them up as paragons of moral virtue and righteousness.
That said, and knowing history’s final comment on the real Hitler and his troops, as well as the German armed forces of the day, dressing yourself up for real or in photoshopped garb to highlight your supposed prowess as troopers for a cause is laughable!

August 7, 2013 1:11 pm

they didn’t photo shop a still of the heros in the ‘300’ movie… (Watts, Delingpole, Monckton)
They photo shopped a still of the ‘heros’ in parody of 300 movie, entitled ‘Meet the Spartans’
thus perhaps thinking, this is how the sceptics think themselves as heros, but in reality just meet the spartans.
Is that a thin bit of reasoning (and yes, It hurts trying to work out what were they thinking!)..
well John Cook (Skeptical Science owner and founder) did spend 16 years doing cartoon pardodies of sci fi and fantasy movies.
his website was called Sev Wide Web (wayback time only now)
http://web.archive.org/web/20101231044327/http://www.sev.com.au/
Parodies were ‘Sev Trek, Sev Wars, etc, it’s even got a wiki page by an ex Sev discussion board member…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sev_Wide_Web

DirkH
August 7, 2013 1:12 pm

BFL says:
August 6, 2013 at 5:45 pm
“Sure enough, but it wouldn’t make sense, would it, that Cook and trusted company would allow that content in an SKS file on purpose. So perhaps an inside ringer or a hacker but still (probably) a skeptic (maybe even converted by Watts). For a good conspiracy: the Climate Gate leaker. Of course it’s always more fun to assume that Cook and Co. and/or friends are really that Batsh*t crazy.”
As I said, it does make sense if they planned to plant their material on skeptics blogs in the hope that they hand it around. After which Diana and Herr John could have played the victim card.
Planting material is a run of the mill dialectic operation; governments do it all the time to have a pretense to take down operations they don’t like; google “TOR FBI” for the most recent example.
Looks a little better than outright breaking their own laws; google “Liberty Dollar” for an example of that.
So when you’re a dissident, and climate skeptics in the west are; you take extra care.
But Nucci and Cook don’t have enough brains to understand that; so they thought it might just work.

Mark Bofill
August 7, 2013 1:18 pm

DirkH says:
August 7, 2013 at 1:12 pm
——————–
Could be.
Or could be the whole thing was intended to come to light to generate counterfactual nefarious conspiracy ideation and serve as fodder for another study.
Or is that what they wanted me to think?
Yeah, I’m paranoid. Doesn’t mean Lewandowsky isn’t out to get me though.

tallbloke
August 7, 2013 2:19 pm

Pamela Gray says:
August 6, 2013 at 8:12 am
Photo shop me! Use the gal who starred in the 200 Zillion BC flick with the fur bikini.

Ahhh, Racquel Welch, or Squelch as we lustful young schoolboys called her.
https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRdy8E2SUBpDzO-VeaNQ4sG_6AO4eAGY28M1XbyuH6PxuIUWAEXSQ

August 7, 2013 3:16 pm

johanna says August 6, 2013 at 11:20 pm

BTW, you should try being a female boss and telling a cocky young male subordinate that his work is less than perfect sometime. To say that this sometimes encounters stiff resistance is putting it mildly.

The usual opportunity for doing so being ‘the annual employee review’; one wonders how the more cocky enjoy these ‘sessions’ which befell more than just a few of us? So much more enjoyable is the simple ‘life’ of a contractor (literally: a contract hire) where there isn’t this need to establish ego and look good in front of management for the next step in the process beyond the review (i.e. the “KPA” or Key Personnel Assessment) where the actual money is ‘handed out’ (the stage where management decides where/who gets the raises and the promotions.)
.

johanna
August 7, 2013 3:53 pm

Jim, saving it up till the performance review is bad management practice. It’s like training puppies – you have to give immediate feedback (positive and negative) for good results.
I loathed PRs as much as my staff did, and we mainly used it as a way of planning the next year’s work and training objectives. Quite often, the would ask me what they could do better, but only in extreme cases did I ever use those sessions as a way of raking over their shortcomings.

Nice One
August 7, 2013 4:56 pm
LamontT
August 7, 2013 6:00 pm

Anthony nice rippling pectorals you have there. I’m impressed, with those you should be able to crush any opponent with a mere flex of your arm.
Oh and anyone who found Willis’ open letter creepy needs their head examined.

Unite Against Greenfleecing
August 7, 2013 6:41 pm

Delingpole will have a field day with this story, can’t wait for his take on it.

richardscourtney
August 7, 2013 11:35 pm

Nice One:
re your post at August 7, 2013 at 4:56 pm
The only things “creepy” about your having posted that link are that anyone would want to make such a sexually deviant photoshop construction and that a creep would want to link to it.
Richard

August 8, 2013 12:14 am

I hardly ever write commentary, nevertheless I
looked through quite a number of reviews here at Skeptical Science takes ‘creepy’ to a whole
new level | Watts Up With That? and had a couple of important questions for you if you wouldn’t mind. Could it possibly be just me or do quite a few of the remarks look as if they could be generated from really dumb people? And, if you’re article writing on some supplemental webpages,
I wish to stay in touch with you. Could you put up a list of
all of the social media sites such as your linkedin user profile,
Facebook site or twitter feed?

richardscourtney
August 8, 2013 3:54 am

Natasha:
At August 8, 2013 at 12:14 am you ask concerning posts in this thread

Could it possibly be just me or do quite a few of the remarks look as if they could be generated from really dumb people?

It is just you.
Things always seem “dumb” when you lack the intelligence and/or wit to understand them.
Richard

August 8, 2013 4:03 am

richardscourtney,
Natasha is a spam robot: mouse over her name to see the link.

richardscourtney
August 8, 2013 4:11 am

Jonathan Jones:
Thankyou very much indeed for your post to me at August 8, 2013 at 4:03 am.
Yes, You are right! Thankyou.
And I add a warning that others should avoid the link and avoid providing the personal invitation the spam robot requested.
I wonder if the expected new WUWT system would be able to prevent such devices posting on WUWT.
Richard

Hot under the collar
August 8, 2013 7:09 am

Well, I admire their honesty in ‘coming out’ and what legal activity they partake in behind their own doors is no concern of mine (including their Gladiator, Nazi and Megolamania fetish).
Perhaps a discreet email (with a link to a therapist) requesting they keep their Gladiator and Nazi uniform fetish pictures to their own homes and bedrooms wouldn’t go amiss.
Somehow ‘sick’ just doesn’t cut it.
SkS (SS) who knew?

AlexS
August 8, 2013 11:14 am

Sks being a soviet rifle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SKS would call for Soviet uniforms… anyway both Nazis and Communists being socialists they are not far off.

richardscourtney
August 8, 2013 1:50 pm

AlexS:
Neither Nazis nor Communists are socialists. Only a Nazi could be deluded into thinking they were.
Richard

Mark Bofill
August 8, 2013 2:04 pm

richardscourtney says:
August 8, 2013 at 1:50 pm

Neither Nazis nor Communists are socialists. Only a Nazi could be deluded into thinking they were.

Richard,
I’ve always held you in the highest respect, still do, for your obvious brains and integrity. Since it seems extremely implausible to me that a man of you intelligence and character could possibly mean by the term ‘socialist’ the same thing I mean when I say ‘socialist’, I’ve always shrugged this difference off. Actually, I’ve wished for the opportunity to discuss this with you on some more appropriate forum, so I could come to understand your perspective, I’ve never thought WUWT was the appropriate forum for this.
I have to respectfully disagree with you here. I don’t think I’m a Nazi, and I can’t say I understand the distinction you are making. I would prefer to believe that I am ignorant from your perspective, and I have evidence that leads me to believe that I don’t understand what you mean when you use the word socialism, but regardless; I don’t understand the distinction and I don’t think that makes me a Nazi.
As always, very best regards sir.
Mark

Hot under the collar
August 8, 2013 2:45 pm

Although my comments above regarding a Gladiator and Nazi uniform fetish and megalomania were made ‘tongue in cheek’ can anyone think of a logical explanation why they would photoshop pictures of themselves onto Nazi uniforms?
All they need in addition to prove the megalomania is a few mad scientist and doctor members……oh……..now they’re busted!

Nice One
August 8, 2013 3:38 pm

@richardscourtney, I see the blending of Joanne Nova and our likely future PM, Tony Abbott as he famously paraded about one day. The sexual slant is of your own making. Say more about you than it does about me.

BFL
August 8, 2013 4:20 pm

@DirkH says:
August 7, 2013 at 1:12 pm
Wow! Your conspiracy theory is much better than mine. Congrats!
Juvenile is as juvenile does.
/Sarc

Zeke
August 8, 2013 4:55 pm

Rockin cape bro.

Merovign
August 8, 2013 8:01 pm

richardscourtney says:
August 8, 2013 at 1:50 pm
AlexS:
Neither Nazis nor Communists are socialists. Only a Nazi could be deluded into thinking they were.

It’s a spectrum disorder.

richardscourtney
August 9, 2013 12:45 am

Merovign:
re your post at August 8, 2013 at 8:01 pm
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/08/06/skeptcial-science-takes-creepy-to-a-whole-new-level/#comment-1385050
Yes, I think you must be right when you say

It’s a spectrum disorder.

On WUWT American right-wingers
* have repeatedly claimed H1tler was left-wing (yes, really, they have),
* have asserted that socialists are communists and naz1s (when socialism, communism, and naz11ism are each mutually exclusive),
* have accused me of being “an excuser of Stalin”,
* have repeatedly – including on this thread – said I and all other socialists are naz1s and communists.
Each of these claims and assertions is so wrong as to be silly. Taken together they show such a distorted world-view that it amounts to insanity.
Indeed, in this thread we have an example of me and other socialists being called Naz1s and communists with the name-callers taking offence when I replied, “No, you are”.
The name-callers obviously fail to recognise that the gross misrepresentation and insult is at least equally untrue and offensive when they make it against socialist and I make it against them. Indeed, it can be said to be more offensive when addressed against socialists because Naz1s attempted to exterminate socialists: the name-callers would not dare to make the same assertion about Jews whom the Naz1s subjected to the same treatment as socialists.
Richard

Mark Bofill
August 9, 2013 11:23 am

Richard,

On WUWT American right-wingers
* have repeatedly claimed H1tler was left-wing (yes, really, they have),
* have asserted that socialists are communists and naz1s (when socialism, communism, and naz11ism are each mutually exclusive),
* have accused me of being “an excuser of Stalin”,
* have repeatedly – including on this thread – said I and all other socialists are naz1s and communists.

I do not assert that socialists are communists or Nazis. I do not accuse you of being an excuser of Stalin. I do not suggest that you are either a Nazi or a communist.
However, I must again protest that I do not believe it is insane not to understand whatever perspective you proceed from. Let me ignore the issues surrounding the term ‘left wing’, as my working definition has been based on inference from popular usage and is quite possibly without reasonable basis. Instead, let’s examine the source of my confusion regarding the terms ‘socialism’ and ‘communism’ (I apologize for using Wikipedia as my source. I got up to look for my old copy of ‘the Communist Manifesto’ and can’t locate it. Still, if memory serves I don’t think it misrepresents what Marx wrote, so from the Wikipedia article on Communism, paragraph three):

According to Marxist theory, higher-phase communism is a specific stage of historical development that inevitably emerges from the development of the productive forces that leads to access abundance to final goods, allowing for distribution based on need and social relations based on freely associated individuals.[5][6] Marxist theory holds that the lower-phase of communism, colloquially referred to as socialism, being the new society established after the overthrow of capitalism, is a transitional stage in human social evolution and will give rise to a fully communist society, in which remuneration and the division of labor are no longer present.

Obviously, socialism and communism are not identical, and anyone suggesting otherwise should examine the terms more closely. However, according to Karl Marx they are related. Socialism according to Marx is a transitional stage precursor to communism.
I understand that it is entirely possible that you disagree with these distinctions and or definitions laid down by Marxist theory. I will not venture to say you are incorrect. However, once again, I will suggest that it is not unreasonable that people do not understand the distinctions you are making. M