Josh writes:
If you read the comment threads at Climate Audit then you will be familiar with a character called Nick Stokes who argues the impossible and indefensible with great tenacity. Steve’s patience with him is exemplary and this thread, in particular, prompted the cartoon.
Josh
“Clevah, noun, someone who thinks they are so much smarter than those around ”
We have that in North American, but we call them “Clavens”, as in “Cliff Claven”, bar stool intellectual from “Cheers”.
Yes, Nick can be exasperating, but blogging just wouldn’t be the same with out him. And as mentioned above, he is polite. I hope he realises this is affectionate teasing. BTW he has quite a famous ancestor: http://diggingintheclay.wordpress.com/2011/07/18/curious-connections-in-climate-science-1/
Nick fakes me out all the time. I keep reading and get the rest of the story though.
Definitely smart, persistent, civil.
Can’t peg him. Seems like “paid” is possible.
First cartoon on XKCD nailed him
Anyone ever meet him in person? If yes, what’s he like?
RR
Forgot to say – Josh absolutely nailed it!
@Sherry Moore says:
March 3, 2014 at 10:19 am
“Bearing time constraints I should be able to find who Nick is. I have started with much less in my profiling work.”
You should apply your profiling talents to Wotts, who runs the And Then There’s Physics warmist blog…
Verity Jones says: March 3, 2014 at 11:06 am
” I hope he realises this is affectionate teasing.”
Thanks, Verity, yes I quite liked the cartoon. I’m used to being characterised as a Black Knight, so it’s a relief to just have a topological problem.
Sorry to be late to the threadjacking, but as Sherry has now figured, I think, I do live in the land where koalas grow, and it’s 6.30 am. As to being paid, well, I’m afraid Sherry’s “white male between 45 – 65 years old” is a little on the optimistic side. I’m enjoying my retirement.
I’m with you, Anthony – I think he is a paid shill/propagandist. But apart from being a minor annoyance to the rest of us, he’s utterly ineffective.
“Tom in Florida says:
March 3, 2014 at 8:17 am
JohnWho says:
March 3, 2014 at 8:10 am
So, did you hear the one about two pieces of rope who got drunk and tied one on?
=====================================================================
I’m a frayed knot.”
Did they get hitched?
John Carter says:
March 3, 2014 at 7:53 am
Dodgy Geezer says:
March 3, 2014 at 8:01 am
Nick is doing his best to push policies that he knows hurt, impoverish, and even kill the poor. You can rub his tummy and blow in his ear all you want, you can say he deserves respect and we shouldn’t poke fun at him.
Me, I stand back, look at what his polite and “not dishonest” claims cost the poor of the world, and spit on him. He deserves no respect at ll, none. He’s doing his best to cast honest men as liars, and liars as honest men. For him, truth is immaterial, as long as he doesn’t have to admit that he is wrong. This is not innocent behavior. It’s not funny or cutesy. It is damaging and destructive.
For me, he’s playing games with his damn word fiddle while Rome burns. I don’t think he even believes many of the ideas he puts forward, and indeed, as you can see by the cartoon, in many cases there’s no way his ideas make coherent sense.
But the ideas he pushes and supports are still hurting, impoverishing, and killing the poor, and while the cartoon is funny, the end results of his actions are not humorous or entertaining in the slightest.
w.
Believe it or knot, a ‘two-fer’!
Seen on a bumper sticker:
Dyslexics of the World – Untie!
Nick Stokes is a dyed in the wool leftie who worshiped Julia Gillard and Kevin Rudd whilst they were Prime Ministers of Australia and they were fleecing the Australian people. No respect from me.
Willis,
That’s true. Maybe I’m so starved for opposition that will at least give me the legitimacy of civilized argument that I overlook that. God knows I clown around in the face of this with my lame attempts to be funny, and as you say, real people are getting hurt, impoverished, or killed.
Sobering thought. Not one I enjoyed hearing, but maybe I needed to. Thanks.
But most important of all, Nick Stokes is an anagram of Coke Stinks.
Willis, there was something bothering me about this FAWNING I was reading. YOU GOT IT! Thanks for a rapier sharp wit as usual.
[snip – over the top -mod]
Hey! I really like the “new” Willis say it as it is..and of course he’s mostly right! as for Stoke’s..stick your head above a parapet and??
Nick Stokes says:
March 3, 2014 at 11:36 am
“…Sorry to be late to the threadjacking…”
*
😀 I do like this, it gave me a chuckle. I’m glad you like the cartoon, Nick, in your shoes, I’d have it on my wall by now. I will add that, although I don’t agree with your arguments, I do enjoy reading any thread you contribute to. The conversation can get enjoyably lively sometimes and keeps me reading.
And yes, Willis does have a point.
Mycroft,
Stick his head above a parapet and what?
Willis has a point, this isn’t a game. I’m not going to go reading more into what Willis said than he actually said though. If the point is to kick Nick’s virtual butt on this thread, you can count me out. Using WUWT to do that is like using a bull dozer to crush a weasel. Maybe I’m a wussie who lacks the courage of his convictions, whatever, I’ve live with that. I think I’m done on this topic.
Nick Stockes is a paid shrill. He comes here to obfuscate and confuse and neutralize. He is definitely here to try to keep the AGW hype going and especially when evidence is 100% against and serious repercusions for all the AGW University jobs etc.as posted in CA. BTW he is a result of the very poor higher education that Australian Universities became in thje mid 80’s. Skeptical Science *web site) people are also a result of that, its obvious…
I’m willing to give Nick Stokes honesty the benefit of the doubt. By that I mean that he seems to honestly believe the CAGW stuff. But I haven’t encountered him as much as some of you so maybe I’m wrong.
If he’s more honest than deceptive then I hope he takes the cartoon as Reagan took this. He loved it.
As Willis makes such good points, maybe Stokes should be disallowed at sites like this….
My analogy for arguing with Warmists is that it’s like ‘trying to nail jelly to the wall’.
The moment at which you present them with scientific facts or evidence which contradicts their beliefs they simply yield and immediately assert a new and usually unrelated article of their faith.
They do tie themselves in knots…but mostly there’s no substance to their arguments!
Is Nick Stokes paid to argue? I don’t know – it doesn’t matter to me.
Does he promote policies that I believe are harmful? Yes, but that is why I disagree with him. And I often think he has got the wrong end of the stick with respect to proxies and models.
But I still want to hear from Nick Stokes. He argues his case well. Whether for money or conviction doesn’t matter to me. His case is well put without scorning his opponents.
To me this is a case of freedom of speech. If he is mocked then his words are weakened and our counter-arguments can’t be honed on weak speech.
The open and welcoming commenting policy is one of the great virtues of WUWT.
I am only an irregular commenter here and recognise that my opinion is just one in many – isn’t it nice that you can hear it?
Jeff says:
March 3, 2014 at 12:05 pm
Did they get hitched?
——————————
If they did, it’s noose to me.