Ah those kidz, what are they up to now? (Update: It has been figured out, see below) The image you see is from their “new” web page [www.skepticalscience.com/nsh/?] which is some sort of flash javascript program with a bunch of silhouettes of people that can be rotated and moved in a pseudo-3D way. All of the silhouettes are greyed out now, but one can rest assured they be filled in with cartoonish caricatures once the countdown clock on the lower right reaches zero.
(h/t from Kadaka K.D. Knoebel)
My guess? John Cook has likely put his failed cartooning talents back to work again. Given the juvenile fascination former cartoonist turned amateur psychologist and numbers bookie for the 97% John Cook has with smearing climate skeptics, this may reveal itself as some sort of interactive “name and shame” application for the top 100 climate skeptics worldwide.
I hope it does, because if so, and if it turns out to be as libelous as I think it will be, it will give a whole bunch of people a reason to sue the pants off that whole team of creepy playtime Nazi cross dressers. Bring it.
Of course it could also be a rah-rah application, where each of the silhouettes is a “real climate scientist”, and the popup text message is all about how they “feel” about climate change…like these clowns.
Whatever it is, it will likely be the caliber of the sort of lowbrow stuff we’ve seen before, like the “designed to be funny but actually horrifying” 10:10 video which blows up children who don’t want to go along with climate change in school.
UPDATE: Commenter Joel O’Bryan has found a hidden logo that gives it away. He writes:
There is a hidden logo in the middle of the field that says:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/nsh/images/q/nsh_logo.png
97 hours of consensus with a link back URL [sks.to/97]
97 hours of consensus? Wow. Just over four days worth of mind numbing claims about a 97% number that has long since been falsified and shown to be little more than a statistical fabrication of Cook and Co. With this episode, Cook’s fixation on that fake 97% number boils down to this:
UPDATE2:
UnFrozenCavemanMD notes:
A scan through the javascript reveals it to represent 100 experts each of whom offers a “fact” followed by a description of that person’s expertise.
UPDATE3: Brandon Shollenberger notes in a comment:
If you look at that page, there’s a fair amount of code written. That includes code for displaying avatars associated with specific IDs taken from a JSON file. Currently, a dummy set being used (represented by the 100 silhouettes you can see). If that’s changed, any avatars could be displayed. My assumption they intend to allow customized avatars to be created and then displayed.
There is also code which indicates the JSON file will include other information about those IDs. When you click on an avatar, that information will be displayed. It’s not entirely clear what information will be shown as this is the code for selecting it:
function getSFacts( s ) {
var facts = “”;
if ( s ) {
if (‘t’ in s) facts = facts + s.t + ” “;
if (‘n’ in s) facts = facts + s.n + “”;
if (‘i’ in s) facts = facts + s.i + “”;
if (‘a’ in s) facts = facts + “Expertise: ” + s.a;
}
return facts;
}
My current guess is the ‘t’ variable stands for title (like Mr. or Dr.) while the ‘n’ variable stands for name. That would explain why there is only a space added between them while there are line breaks added between the other variables. I’m not sure what ‘i’ would stand for, but ‘a’ apparently stands for some measure of expertise.
Anyway, it seems this is going to be used as a virtual hangout. People will be able to create avatars, input information about themselves and then join in. I don’t see anything in the code to indicate users will be able to chat/send each other messages, but that may be added (or I could have missed something).
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
“Given the juvenile fascination former cartoonist turned amateur psychologist……………..”
———————————
Is he ( John Cook) really a psychologist!?
From what I have seen with his obsession with the “97%” and the number 97 seems like he has covered only the first part of that word or title……. and still too far out of reaching for the second part, the “logist” part, and very probably he will be stacked (or be a stuck-up) permanently with the first part of that word or concept. Reminds one of the top leadership of the Nazis’.
I don’t think he and his co-mate Dana do [really] care one way or another about the fallacy of their 97% claim and the related potential psychological damage to their faithful flock of AGWers due to the periodically repeated “hammering” of such a claim .
For as long as that claim channels more and more power to them over their sheepishly following “flock” they will be happy, content and feeling very secure.
The most important thing to them seems to be only the maintaining of their acquired status-position-occupation and any “milk and honey” that comes with it.
The most sinister aspect of their 97% claim is the claim of authority through the most basic and primitive natural drive for and towards safety for most of life species (not saying all) is a claim of authority through the “safety in numbers’.
In one way it offers a safety and in the other hand it takes way the individuality and independency, especially from thinking.
We humans through our evolution, especially the civic one, have learned to avoid and rely as less as possible on “safety in numbers” does not seems to work well for us. Generally turns us against each other to a point of slaughter.
Our history shows that our evolution and our safety is dedicated and recognized to the minority. To the brighter minds, bravest of hearts, the wiser ones, the sacrificing lot, the just and fair. All this lot together does not make it even to 3% of humanity.
As we do not have a perceived predator anymore as a species and the “safety in numbers” mostly a pray necessity and behaviour, the implementation of such behaviour as a necessity will and does create a condition of pray-predator amongst us and turns us against each other and becomes a way of channeling power to the “good guardians” of the “inocent pray”……. the so much self proclaimed “pastors” or “shepherds” of the desperate flock…….like in this case of Cook and Dana.
For as long as their flock keeps taking that kind of mantra repeatedly and periodically as their main food for thought they will be subjected to the will of these two “little” dictators.
“Cook in a Nazi uniform” could very well be just the perception, a mirror image, the mental image, that he himself holds about himself. He just seems to have pictured exactly how he perceives and sees himself. Probably very atractive and powerful to him.
Seems like these guys will stop not to any limit, a human limit, I mean.
It seems like the latest relation to the 97% is the number 97 which by some “chance” or “coincidence” seems to point in space and time to a very specific and historical date, a date which to the sheeplishly “brainwashed flock” translates as the most modern vicious carnage of “predator-prey” image, and therefore…… further reminding them about the authority of 97% claim which offers them a safety and to their pastors-shepherds a continuity with power and abuse. A new method or trick on keep hammering the already exhausted flock.
The way the number 97 has being used, seems like a psychological trick enforcing further the already hammered in place “safety in numbers”
Seems like the “good pastors” can not withhold themselfs from abusing, profiteering, disrespecting and mocking in regards and towards the other people memories, sufferings, loss, deeply hurt feelings and still unhealed physicall and mental wounds.
Sorry for the rather long comment, but I had to express the view point I hold in this particular matter.
Cheers
[“pray-predator” may actually be more correct than “prey-predator” for the masses today…. 8<) .mod]
Since the resemblance of some of the grey profiles to characters from the Simpsons appears so obvious , does this dissemination of a copy on a public site breach copyright law?
Is there a lawyer in the house?
I’m trying to imagine why 97 merchants would come out and say “I’ll stake my reputuation on this Snake Oil, it really does grows hair and cures the measels!”
If they really are scientists, how can they simply spout propaganda while ignoring all the holes in their climate theory? This project appears to be career suicide for many.
“Oh you were one of those people who pushed the Global Warming Fraud. I’m sorry, but we abide by the scientific method here. Don’t have a place for you. But I think McD’s down the street needs a new night manager…”
Pure marketing ploy by Cook to attempt to communicate ‘something’ or ‘anything’ to regain trust in: his work product; his blog’s integrity; his blatantly biased pre-science activism.
Hey, he is trying . . . however, he is limited to ‘come-from-behind’ type strategies.
Actually, to me the idea of the marketing ploy shows some interesting creativity.
John
Not surprising…desperation not always brings about negative results…sometimes it can drive some to really step up their game.
If they’re letting people log in and post a “fact,” wouldn’t it be fun to inundate it with real skeptics?
Note; They have updated the logo image and removed the text stating the link back URL:
That URL was: sks.to/97. and it still works and redirects to:
skepticalscience.com/nsh/#
That’s not surprising. There was no reason for it to be there in the first place. It wasn’t visible, and it didn’t do anything. Odds are it was there inadvertently.
No. It has a purpose (maybe not a big one) or they wouldn’t have taken the time to recompose the png image, otherwise they would have just deleted it from the HTML code. The 97 hours means something to whoever is editing the app.
Welp, I can admit when I’m wrong. I was wrong.
I stand by my interpretation as the most sensible one though. The naming convention used in the code is wrong for what they did, and this app is just stupid. Why would someone make an app to show static content? Sure, for the next few days there is a bit of dynamicism to the app, but after that, this app will be nothing but a list of 100 quotes. That makes it a huge waste of time.
I guess that’s what I get for assuming the best from the Skeptical Science group. I assumed they used a sensible naming convention. I also assumed they made an app that’d be meaningful. A virtual hangout would take more work than this, and it would actually be interesting. This thing could be written in a day.
The sad thing is what I described could be done with this same framework. The backend would obviously need to be very different, but the frontend could left be virtually unchanged.
Poking fun aside, it is worth remembering that virtually every science based association or academy endorsed the IPCC and the IPCC largely based its projections on climate models that have since been falsified.
About that quote from Einstein — it’s not from Einstein. It has a sad story.
A correction from Einstein is good news, as in “my mistakes require an Einstein to diagnose.”
It’s from Alcoholics Anonymous. The quote is about dysfunctionality, by people who know all about dysfunctionality — up close and personal.
For details see section 2 here:
http://fabiusmaximus.com/2009/12/07/first/
Oh dear. This looks ominous. The page title says 97 hours which is 4 days and in 4 days it’s 9/11.
They gave Mann the first pitch, and it’s the usual laughable claims about “unprecedented” and multiple hockey sticks, I’m surprised he didn’t throw in his “vindications” too:
The cartoon style if definitely Cook’s, when you look at his style in his defunct “Sev Trek”.
Right now, among the 100 cartoon characters, there are 3 insane alarmists and 97 are kept hidden. So 97% will be against the climate alarmism up to the moment when John Cook fraudulently changes the remaining 97 silhouettes to alarmists, too.
The Trenberth quote is alarming. Basically all weather is now climate change related. Yikes
The guy with the guitar is the ice core expert, Dr. Talley.
What would be very interesting is add the dates to each of these quotes. Many of these quotes are quite old from what I can tell. Others like Mann’s seem to say that even if the evidence didn’t say one thing, we’d still know its true anyway – no matter what anyone or the evidence might say.