With the 2014 Bloggies Awards coming up next weekend, I thought it would be good to offer our own award. Given what we’ve recently learned about the behind the scenes behavior of The University of Western Australia and Dr. Stephen Lewandowsky self inflicted car crash in handling valid ethics complaints, now dubbed “Lewgate”, I thought that he deserved to be nominated for some sort of award.
Therefore, I’m nominating him for this first annual ‘Climate Duplicitist of the Year’ award. However, to be fair, there are others that might be more worthy of such an award, so I am giving readers a chance to place nominations in comments. See below.
Source: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/duplicity
In 48 hours, the nominations will be tabulated, and the top 5 nominees will be presented for a vote in a subsequent post. If you feel Lewandowsky deserves the award as I have nominated him above, you can also list him with any other nominees you present.
Rules:
- Nominations are open for 48 hours and close at 6PM PDT Wednesday March 26th.
- Voting for the top four nominees (determined by number of nominations) will open Thursday March 27th at 9AM PDT
- Voting will close on Saturday March 29th at 9AM PDT
- The winner will be announced at 6PM PDT (9PM EST) on Sunday March 30th.
- Nominees must be living, real, persons that have had some statement, forecast, prediction, claim, or other utterance related to climate that is inherently duplicitous or misleading.
- Organizations, such as IPCC, NOAA, CRU etc. are also eligible to be nominated.
- Nominations must include a citation, URL, or excerpt that represents the reason for the nomination.
- You cannot nominate yourself or your organization.
- The winner will receive a gift (TBD) sent by US mail, illustrating their award with an inscription along with a permanent status in the awards page which will remain resident on WUWT and updated yearly. A press release will also be made.
- No wagering allowed.
I think that if there is to be a Duplicity award, the, Lewandowsky, Flannery, Cook, Hansen, Al Gore, Trenberth, Gleick, Mann, England, Karoly, Kerry, and Obama should all have an equal share as co-winners. Rather like a sort of Nobel Duplicity Award.
The Award Trophy should be in the form of a large silver Pig-Trough, large enough for them to all get their snouts in it, at the same time.
Chris Turney gets my vote, not because he was the most two faced climate scientist (though I admit this is highly debatable ), but because he said things like
” As the Shokalskiy attempted to leave, however, we found ourselves surrounded by a mass breakout of multiyear ice”
Climate change science can be mundane and boring, but Turney and his merry men kept me amused for many days.
I see England’s windy-ocean theory paper gets another hot pick at Mother Jones http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/03/climate-change-malaysia-airlines-370-search. Now it is responsible for the anguish and heart-ache of hundreds of mourning families. I can’t blame England for the Greens appetite for sick voyeuristic opportunism. But I would blame him if he offers silent ascent to Mother Jones behaviour. Shame on them for trying to score ideological points off a tragedy!
Say, how about Rajendra Pachauri?
Surely Maurice Strong filters in here somewhere 🙂
Omigod Onyabike- I had forgotten all about Matthew England (and his little mate Andy Pittman). Not Turkey though (or Gergis)- too insignificant.
There are just too many worthy winners.
Excellent idea. Credit where credit is due, I always say. I further suggest, however, that the award would gain particular added meaning if associated directly with any one of the several towering figures well known for truly stupendous achievements in science by deceit. “The Mann Prize” immediately springs to mind, of course, but surely a few other candidates may be no less deserving of such perpetual recognition for their efforts.
As an Australian I would have to nominate Gillard. “There will be no carbon tax …”etc. Flannery second but we didn’t vote for him.
I would like to nominate those scientists that form the 97% of all scientists making up the ‘consensus-bloc’ stating the ‘science is settled.’ The award can be given to Al Gore (Al-G) on behalf of those scientists.
I will cite common knowledge in place of a URL, link, or journal cite.
G.S. Williams says:
March 24, 2014 at 10:37 pm
Say, how about Rajendra Pachauri?
Holy duplication Batman! How did we forget the grinning Commissar? Where’s ya quote/URL GSW? I’m sure there are a bundle from Raj. He’s always pretty pleased to contradict his own organisations findings when he has a microphone. Too… many… choices… Argh!
Man oh Mann…..
Then again, what about the Schmidt?
I have to go with Kevin Trenberth. He set the stage with his out of year “travesty” comment. Doubled down with the “heat is in the deep blue sea” gift to the suspension of the laws of thermodynamics.
But his race to the finish was the happy notion of seawater effectively piling up on the surface and just waiting for the opportunity to “slosh” back. (He will, my models tell me, take personal credit for the possible El Nino coming this year. “See, see….there is the warm water sloshing back.” I am pretty sure as he takes that credit he will not explain how that same water has sunk to the depths of the deep blue sea.)
Meanwhile, as Mark Steyn has seriously lawyered up I fear that Mann may be road kill before he is able to pick up his consolation award for Miss Congeniality.
Duplicity? Certainly Lew for this year — but doesn’t Michael Mann deserves a lifetime achievement award?
Eugene WR Gallun.
Political motivated or based Nobel Duplicity Award?
Sun Spot says:
March 24, 2014 at 7:34 pm
The EU is not a nation. It’s government by an unelected, unaccountable bureaucracy is probably the most duplicitous organisation of modern times, but unfortunately outside the nomination criteria for the award.
I nominate the Royal Society, for masquerading as a scientific body so successfully and jointly Lord Debden and Tim Yeo, for supporting scary non-science while enriching themselves at public expense. I second Michael Mann for a lifetime achievement award for using every artifice except disinterested scientific inquiry to keep his hockey stick at the centre of the CAGW narrative. Lew is about as duplicitous as a 9 year- old. His almost total lack of Machiavellian skill precludes me from supporting him.
Anthony, can you give your readers a copy of the citation for the Duplicity Award? It might help narrow down what is fast becoming a ridiculously massive field of contestants.
Something like “For their persistent effort to corrupt their own personal ideals in the pursuit of deception. In keeping with the highest ideals of the Machiavellian politics the Duplicity Award goes to… (insert name)….”
BTW, excuse the saddle soap but have thoroughly enjoyed your informative and sometimes hilarious blog for some time. Kudos to you and your team
Dana Nuccitelli for the agonizingly convoluted claims and excuses
As imoira says: March 24, 2014 at 7:52 pm
“IPCC. Duplicity is its reason for being.”
And I second that after pondering the extreme difficulty of choosing among such a wide array of candidates, there can be no greater duplicitous doyen of duplicicists than our global ignobel IPCC
The Dynamic Duo:
http://s1039.photobucket.com/user/kulaki/media/Cartoons/GorePachauriTheGigIsUp.jpg.html
If there is no date cut-off, ie; last year or any year, I nominate Chris Hill from Albury (Australia). Apparently according to Chris, daylight savings is the cause of Global Warming (2008).
http://img73.imageshack.us/img73/8080/droughtxc8.gif
H/T to handjive @ur momisugly JoNova
http://joannenova.com.au/2014/03/nick-cohen-deniers-have-won-gets-startlingly-close-to-the-truth/#comment-1409575
grumpyoldmanuk says:
March 24, 2014 at 11:55 pm
So right it makes me grumpy.
Lew is my choice for several reasons. It’s good with a clear cut example to carry the first prize so to avoid misunderstandings of what this prize is about, or it could end up like the Nobel Peace Prize. Lew is also the right shoddy company nobody wants to be associated with – perfect company for next years loser.
I would say Bob ‘fast fingers ‘ Ward , but his actual job is to BS , so has a professional rather than amateur I am not sure is allowed.
To save time, here is the article from the Border Mail, 01/10/2008;
Chris Hill, Albury. Border Mail, 01/10/2008
Drought trigger clear as day.
When I was a kid we never had drought after drought.
Then we started with daylight savings. We started with a little bit, but now we have six months of the year daylight saving.
It has just become too much for the environment to cope with.
It is so logical, for six months of the year we have an extra hour each day of that hot afternoon sun.
I read somewhere that scientific studies had shown there is a lot less moisture in the atmosphere which means we get less rain.
I believe this one hour extra sun is slowly evaporating all the moisture out of everything.
Why can’t the Government get the CSIRO to do studies on this, or better still, get rid of daylight savings. They have to do something before it’s to late.
-CHRIS HILL
Albury
As Anthony would say…….the stupid, it burns.
The IPCC and all who serve that sinking ship. Ref: AR5