The 97% Thunderdome is revving up! Brandon Shollenberger has issued a direct challenge to Cook and UQ, and has published the threatening letter about that “secret” data for Cook’s “97% consensus” study that was published under an “open” Creative Commons License. From that “openness” Jo Nova made the hilarious graphic at left for her essay on the fiasco. Send her chocolate.
Shollenberger writes:
As most of you know, I recently received a threatening letter from the University of Queensland. This letter made a variety of threats and demands. The the strangest one was it suggested I’d be sued if I showed anyone the letter. Today, I intend to challenge that claim.
Some people suggested I should have immediately published the letter. I understand that view. It was my immediate reaction upon receiving the letter. The idea of a university from another country suing me because I published a letter in which they threatened to sue me was laughable. It was as empty a threat as I could imagine.
Still, I’ve been told I let myself get baited too easily. It seemed unwise to act hastily rashly when the issue of a lawsuit was at hand. I thought taking a few days to think about matters was sensible.
I have now, and I’ve talked to a number of people about this. Everything I’ve seen and heard agrees: The threat against me publishing the letter was bogus and pathetic. It might have even been unethical.
…
Until I do, I want to challenge the University of Queensland to stand by what it has said. I’m calling their bluff. I’ve published their letter, and I await the legal proceedings we all know will never come.
…So here’s the challenge I want to propose to the Skeptical Science team, to the University of Queensland, and to anyone else who thinks I shouldn’t release the data I possess:
Tell me what material I possess could cause harm if disseminated. Tell me what agreements or contractual obligations would be impinged upon if that material were released to the public.
If you are unable or unwilling to meet such a simple challenge, I’ll release the data and you can bite me. I mean, sue me.
================================================================
Read it all here as well as see the letter: http://hiizuru.wordpress.com/2014/05/18/a-direct-challenge/
In other news: Popcorn futures are expected to open at record highs tomorrow at the Chicago Board of Trade. Here’s last week’s closing numbers:
Darragh McCurragh says:
May 19, 2014 at 7:23 am
“Oh, great, as far as I know, coercion is a criminal offense….”
______________________
Did you forget your sarc tag?
James formerly from Arding says:
May 19, 2014 at 4:12 am
“Hey Anthony! Want a really big conspiracy theory? P-)
What if this was not just about Brandon Shollenberger and the UQ – and they were after bigger fish like Jo Nova or yourself?…”
__________________
Have you seen anything at all which might lead you to believe that anyone in the climate fearosphere is that smart? We’re talking one, maybe two moves ahead…
Do you really think a highly regarded university would make hollow threats?
Yes.
The first reason being that universities do not hire top-tier lawyers.
“Do you really think a highly regarded university would make hollow threats?”
But of course, we’re not talking about a “highly regarded university” here, are we?
Uncle Joe Bob’s Skewl of Pickin’ & Grinnin’ has higher academic standards than they do.
Obviously someone at the University of Queensland doesn’t understand the Creative Commons licence.
“So they do say “will be” the subject of “action”. WOW. What action? They did not say legal action, so maybe they meant they will have a coffee and bitch about it. Any way we can rest assured that there will be some ACTION.”
They will stamp their widdo feets on the ground and they will hold their breath until they turn blue. THat’ll teach ya!!!
Patrick, thanks! I don’t actually expect a response.
tonyb, I’m not convinced the University of Queensland had any involvement with this project. For their sake, I hope they didn’t.
As for Jane Malloch, she may be a “nice ordinary person,” but she’s a trained professional. She has no excuse for writing a letter like this. I have no problem forgiving people for making mistakes. I just expect them to be accountable for those mistakes.
But yes, people should definitely keep this civil. Attacking her as a person is pointless. Not only is it bad in general, it’ll sabotage any efforts people might want to make.
cedarhill, there may be a lot of money in the “industry,” but that doesn’t mean there is a lot of money available from it at the University of Queensland. Most organizations don’t like to spend money filing lawsuits.
Arfur Bryant, thanks! I like that idea, but trying to contact that many people would be a huge pain. I’m not sure I’m up to it.
Kate Forney, I agree, except I believe a perfunctory response is sometimes inadequate. This letter contained a number of claims. While I agree about dismissing the copyrighted letter aspect, I believe the rest of the points ought to be called into question.
I wouldn’t give these wailing watermelons a second thought Brandon as the University of Queensland’s action here is symptomatic of of the left in general in Australia at present. After a long spell in Opposition under the Howard Govt, they were naturally ecstatic at having a Labor Govt at long last and the outpouring of emotionalism and hope for the future and a brave new world as usual, was quite tangible.
It all started out with a marvellous kumbayah gabfest of ideas and then it was all downhill from there as usual. When PM Rudd was deposed as a maniacal psycopath at the time (yes he was their measured, sober choice of leader to begin with), they consoled themselves that replacement Gillard was a first woman PM and things would be different but again it was the same old same old. Lots of policy thought bubbles and promises of the vision splendid with disastrous outcomes due to poor management and any real business experience and it all turned to manure and they were swept out of office in no uncertain terms. You guessed it. Oz by this time was racking up deficits at a rate of knots that Europeans would have been proud of, although Labor had been left with a zero debt Treasury and a substantial annual surplus.
With the bitter disappointment of a Labor/Green coalition by that stage they were left to sulk and lick their wounds. They’d largely blamed Abbott, Abbott, Abbott for it all rather than the sheer incompetence and buffoonery of their champions so all they could do was whinge and snipe at the object of their misery as they viewed it. Well the Abbott Govt has just announced its first Budget with a rather mild attempt to get the finances back in shape and that means trimming back the big ticket items like health, education and welfare largesse and all Hell has broken loose. There’s no doubt a lot of that has to do with the fallout from Copenhagen and the demise of their hold on the commanding heights of being seen to be Green, but with their overall fall from grace they have become catatonic at lashing out at all and sundry, Anything but self introspection; and you, Brandon, have copped a taste of it from UQ. Forget these people as they’re just frustrated watermelons, spitting bile and venom at all and sundry, in order to hide their own inadequacies and incompetence. The thought they could mount a serious international court case of any consequence is laughable under the overall circumstances.
Brandon, you made the right decision. Checking it out before you published was prudent.
Machiavelli wrote, “Men are bad, unless compelled to be good.” Your action in publishing the letter will at least compel them to stop making empty threats.
Both Cook and the university are despicable. WUWT is always far ahead of them in traffic. The truth is that the ‘consensus’ is right here. Cook and realclimate heavily censor, and most people dislike that. It shows in the numbers.
And besides we’d crowd source them financially back behind their secret society cloisters again and with even modest budget cuts they wouldn’t have much truck for the fight 😉
What is very interesting is the lack of any news from SKS. If, as UoQ claims then SKS are in the shit too for not protecting IP. Perhaps they would like this problem to just go away.
Admad (re. Arkell)
You’re very welcome. It’s nice to have an opportunity to use it!
Brandon Shollenberger: The problem in this case is they’re not just withholding data, but refusing to explain why it needs to be withheld.
I am glad that you emphasized that.
Good Luck!
Lets say I’m some random person and I spot a empty parking lot. Even though I have no connection to the parking lot, set up a stand to collect parking fees. No one challenges me because I look official. This is a form a fraud — a confidence scam.
What is the basis of UQ’s claim that they are property owners? That is not a rhetorical question. I haven’t been following this extremely closely, but is UQ listed as a grantee on the CC license? If not, then either Cook gave a license for something he didn’t own or UQ is playing a confidence game. Either way, the University has a duty to clarify. This is a question they can not simply ignore.
read the letter, copied it to my young son to indicate how not to do science,
can they sue me too please ?
It looks like it is too late for that UQ department. Based on the recent headline, the conservative coalition is cutting their budget on Global Warming studies from 5.75 billion doen to 500 million. http://dailycaller.com/2014/05/19/aussies-to-slash-90-of-global-warming-funding-from-budget/
One approach would be to write the University a letter in which you furnish a copy of the Creative Commons License that Cook issued. You inform the University that you have a valid license to the data. You tell them that if they believe that Cook has improperly licensed it to you, then they will need to provide you with (1) documentary evidence to their claim and (2) a copy of a cease and desist letter that they would be obligated to send Cook.
If it was published under Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license, why not go ahead and make it available for anyone to download? Let’s wikileaks this, let the whole world have copies of it . . . except it isn’t “leaking” because it was made publicly available in the first place until they changed there minds. I’d like a copy, please.
You’ll never guess this. I was driving down the street to my favorite fast food restaurant. Now, since I’m semi-retired, ‘fast’ is not really a criteria for my restaurant choices, ‘cheap’ is. Anyway, fast food aficionados may remember when the Angus burger was all the rage. Well, now it’s the Shollenburger (yeah, I know the spelling’s different but a burger is not a berger). Anyway, the fascinating thing with the Shollenburger is that it’s not Cooked. No, the Shollenburger actually cooks the Cook. How do you like your Cook: well done; medium; medium rare; or rare? Doesn’t make any difference really. It’s ’cause you just have to have the nerve to eat it and spit it out.
Brandon Shollenberger
” A millennia ago we abandoned our belief in the supernatural , Now you are asking me to sabotage that achievement …. to send us back to the dark ages of superstition and ignorance and fear? NO!”
I have slightly changed it
@ur momisugly mpaul says: May 19, 2014 at 11:12 am
Interesting. That would mean that the author did not have rights to the data that he used. That would be the only logical way that the Uni could rightfully claim ownership of it. It also begs the question of why haven’t they sued him or given him a dismissal for ethics violation(s).
Tom In Denver It should have been cut to ZERO dollars not 500m its ridiculous money for a non-event..
I see a new twist in crime stories. The criminal sends someone a death threat, and in paragraph two he claims copyright to the letter and threatens criminal charges if the receiver shows it to anyone.
Mentioned on the Volokh Conspiracy blog:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/05/19/is-it-copyright-infringement-to-post-a-lawyers-cease-and-desist-letter/
I doubt they will sue you Brandon. If they’ve learned anything from the Mann suits they will not. But if they do, as soon as they do, file discovery motions for all of the data. I suspect it will have to be made public for the “trial”. Since that is what they are trying to avoid in the first place…well…maybe all those perfessers can figger it out…