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 have to go with Mann on this one. His attack on Judith Curry, while in the process of suing Tim Ball and Mark Steyn for defamation, is duplicity at it’s finest.
OK….How about these…
CMIP5 – for not being able to tell anything about the future or the past.
The Science Journals that only publish one point of scientific view and force closings of sub-journals that have the audacity to publish the other side.
The “peers” who review the papers being published on the warmist side.
The news organizations that will not allow any dissenting comments to articles hyping AGW.
The Met Office in Britain.
The list goes on and on….
NOAA
I nominate Bill Nye for the “High School Science” fiasco of a few years ago. http://wattsupwiththat.com/climate-fail-files/gore-and-bill-nye-fail-at-doing-a-simple-co2-experiment/. Two key failures: a) not actually doing the experiment, b) when caught, suggesting it was not important to actually do the experiment. Why is he more culpable than Al Gore: a) Gore is in the end just a politician and an opportunist, but Nye claims presents himself as a scientist and thus bears more culpability, and b) Nye has placed himself as a mentor for elementary school pre-scientists, and thus has extraordinary responsibility (James 3:1)
so we have:
Al gore
Chris turney
Obama
Camille parmensan
Mikey mann
John Cook
, Sarah A Green5,
Mark Richardson6,
B?rbel Winkler2,
Rob Painting2,
Robert Way7,
Peter Jacobs8 and
Andrew Skuce2
Brad johnson
American Geophysical Union
Peter Gleick
Lewandowsky
Discovery Channel
Kerry
IPCC
Kevin Trenberth
TIm Flannery,
Julia guillard
Davis Suzuki
Jean-Pascal van Ypersele
Kook, Nucitella, Redfearn, Suzuki, Steffen
Nick cohen
Bill nye
Robert evans
Phil jones
James west
Flannery
Hansen
England
karoly
Rajendra Pachauri
Maurice Strong
Schmidt
Eugene WR Gallun
Royal society
Lord debden tim yeo
Dana nuccitelin
Chris hill
Bob ward
Tony abbott
Dame julia slingo
Richard mueller
David cameron
Monboit
Laurence topham
US EPA
Paul erhlich
CIMP5
NOAA
WEW!
have we come to an agreement on what the award is actually for?
oh, and my nomination: Clive Best. why? Duplicity!
1st he says: ‘resonant dust coulds’ = lots of hot air
2nd he says: lunar and solar tidal cycles = a lunatic shooting for the stars
c’mon Clive we know its SUV’s and Cow farts.
Can’t forget NASA
I nominate Macquarie University for the way it behaved to Prof Murry Salby. The citations are here: http://wattsupwiththat.com/tag/murry-salby/
davidmhoffer says:
March 24, 2014 at 8:54 pm
I am surprised in this forum I have to keep correcting bad information: it was not a U.S. Senator, but U.S Representative Hank Johnson (my congressman) who made this particular blunder during a hearing.
I will not go so far as to claim that a U.S. Senator couldn’t be capable of an equivalent blunder, but in the interest of accuracy I must correct davidmhoffer on this detail.
I also need to opine once again that Representative Johnson is better than his predecessor, Cynthia McKinney — you be the judge.
It seems from a quick scan through the nominations thus far that Mike Mann has an edge, although I am surprised at so many votes for Chris Turney.
@Alan Watt – While there is no question that Johnson is not as bad as McKinney, he does appear to be more stupid. But he does not have the “kiss of death” that Old Winny McKinny has (cozying up to Saddam – dead, cozying up to Gaddafi – dead.)
Curious, no nominations for Joe Romm? Or is he just a re-packager of other peoples’ duplicity?
If we’re talking about just this year, then I nominate Mann for his fighting disclosure in his most recent lawsuit and and Lewbaby for this kind of….well….he needs his diaper changed.
(From this latter post https://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/03/25/quote-of-the-week-the-lewgate-fussbluster/)
I think that when this is actually put up for a vote the ground rules need to be clarified. Are we voting for “this year’s” or “lifetime”?
For this first one, maybe both categories should be included?
Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7 says:
March 25, 2014 at 1:23 pm
If Screamin’ Joe Romm, then how about Weepy Bill McKibben & all the slackers at 350.org?
Long-time and frequent visitor; first-time commenter… I’d like to suggest that ALONG WITH, and in direct contrast to, this duplicity award that there also be an award for that person, organization or group that has done the most to further the knowledge of real climate science whether the contribution supports our skeptical view or not (more likely it WILL support the skeptical view of climate science but we should be open to where the science takes us). In other words, provide the positive feedback so desperately needed for those actually following the scientific method and furthering the science. Something akin to a new, more credible “Nobel prize” in climate science as determined by a group that seems to have their thinking caps on (as opposed to typical liberals that seem to have taken over most of the previously prestigious science related awards). I think a press release that includes a positive award, in addition to the award pointing out the supreme silliness of the climatstrologists, will have more traction.
I also agree that a few categories for the duplicity award (solo, organizational, media, and lifetime achievement) are needed.
My duplicity nomination goes to Michael E. Mann (PSU) for his self-contradictory monologue in his book and for his non-scientific behavior in his supposed scientific research (see A. Montford’s book ‘The [Mann] Hockey Stick Illusion’).
John
I think the award is the wrong one. I think it should be for the best non-duplicitous global warming scientist as this limits the choice somewhat.
I nominate….er….er….er….er…er…er…er…er….
Needs a better name than Climate Duplicitist – Climate Denier, Climate Wacko, Climate Un-Scientist, Cimate Conspirer, Climate Clown, Climate Snake.
slightly OT except relevant to the past and future performance of Michael Mann as climate charlatan and demagogue:
Wow! For the relief of anyone who may have been concerned when Mark Steyn dismissed his former legal representation, he has announced a potent team of some of the most accomplished free-speech attorneys alive today:
Mark Steyn announces “Dream Team” of legal experts
Mikey Mann is not going to know what hit him….. something like a thundering freight train of legal, cultural, scientific, and personal criticism.
[cross-posted at Bishop Hill]
Ed Milliband.
For our former colonial cousins, this is the leader of Her Majesty’s loyal opposition in the UK and the individual/twerp most responsible for the insanity of the the UK’s current energy policy.
A policy that is guaranteed to produce blackouts and sky high electricity prices in the not too distant future.
Skiphil, thanks for information that Steyn the lawyer no longer has a fool for client, not that IMO he ever did.
==================================================================
Climate Charlatan?
http://www.ask.com/wiki/Charlatan?o=2801&qsrc=999&ad=doubleDown&an=apn&ap=ask.com
But I think the wiser course is a name that won’t bring Mann’s legal gnats buzzing around. Though I like “Climate Charlatan”, perhaps it’s best to leave it as something that describes the actions rather than the person.
Skiphil says:
March 25, 2014 at 2:29 pm
===========================================
Every nuke needs a guidance system.
From the replies received so far, it seems that there should be two awards, one for individual and one for corporate.
James the Elder – the mammoth flash flood and freezing is detailed in Otto Mucks Opus The Secret of Atlantis. Don’t let the title fool you – this is a scholarly, masterful piece ofwork and should be required reading for all geology students
Oh, congratulations on this one. I can see this award developing into something to rival the Oscars or the Nobel.
I had a quick scan through the above nominations. Can’t say I’d be disappointed to see any of them take the title, all well deserving. But If I can make my nominations, that I don’t think have been mentioned as yet (though I could be wrong, sorry) I think all the Kids over at Skeptical Science are very deserving, for their tireless efforts to promote the scams of all the above mentioned.
Also I think the notorious Climate Models deserve a special mention for their consistency in their heroic failure. I know this is breaking the rule Nr.5, but some look upon these as more than mere machines, with a mind, a heart and a life of their own.
I’m off now to organise my Tuxedo for Sundays award ceremony.
At the very least there needs to be several categories.
Scientists or alleged scientists
Journalist or media figure (not sure if there are any journalists left)
Politicians or those who are known to be dishonest to start with.
Just a couple of comments
Don’t know the specifics of her exploits but the Parmesean woman sounds pretty cheesy. Forgive me I could not resist.
Mikey Mann has always impressed me as an evil Pepa Pig.