James Delingpole, and other prominent British skeptics, have been immortalised on an art installation “wall of infamy”.
According to James;
I am one of several climate change sceptics to have been celebrated and immortalised in an exciting new, prizewinning art installation at Anglia Ruskin, one of Britain’s largest universities. (h/t Liam Deacon)
It comprises a faux-stone slab (made out of plywood) engraved with my own name and that of five other British climate sceptics – Christopher Booker, Nigel Lawson, Christopher Monckton, Melanie Phillips, Owen Paterson – beneath the legend “Lest We Forget Those Who Denied.” The sculpture has been described as an “oil painting with a difference” because a continuous stream of engine oil drools symbolically over the “deniers’” names, like tragic sea otters after an Exxon spill.
I must say I’m a little jealous of my friend James. Where is my art installation wall of infamy? I mean, how many of these climate articles do I have to write?
Given the amount of publicity this political stunt has generated for the artist who created it, hopefully there will be some copycat attempts before too long. Please make sure you get the spelling of my name correct – that is “Worrall” with an “A”.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Can we buy copies to celebrate their hard work.
Looks to be a list of future Nobel prize winners. I’m more than a little miffed that my name is not there.
“Wall of denial” is an acute piece of Conformist Art. There is nothing subversive or illuminating about it. All other global warming art I have seen here has been subversive or fun-poking. “Wall of denial” is just conforming artistic snark…unless I’m reading it wrong…
Nah, you got it right.
It’s a memorial to ignorance… just not the way they intended it…
Presumably the oil needs to be pumped, using electricity and generating more poisonous carbon……
No wait the oil is made of carbon, and the wood was made by plants that breath carbon dioxide. Without Carbon Dioxide, this installation would not have been possible.
There you go! Well said.
I can only aspire to reach these heights. That will not prevent me trying though.
Infamy! Infamy! They’ve all got it in for me!
O/T: Over at NTZ, Pierre Gosselin is having trouble with the “post comment” (REPLY) function from Word Press. Perhaps savvy individuals could help by posting their thoughts here.
http://notrickszone.com/2015/04/30/academics-seeking-power-over-global-policy-launch-australian-german-college-of-climate-energy-transitions/?replytocom=1026308#comment-1026308
I didn’t make the cut. Again.
Guess I’ll have to work harder next year.
You could change your name to Melanie Phillips.
I see the names are foolishly listed alphabetically, leaving little opportunity for adjustment in the next revision.
That would be the only thing they do not adjust.
If you love the planet, don’t use engine oil. Sounds about right.
Ok got it. So what happens next if we all stop using oil tomorrow?
We all grind to a halt. Remake of the remake of “The Day the Earth Stood Still” I hear Leonardo diCaprio is looking for a part in it! #Sarc
@Mark philincalifornia gets to find out: Jerry Brown announced by executive order they are going carbonless. Cars are a big target. I was browsing here to see if there is any background on the UC Berkeley guy that is being touted as the brains behind the move.
Isn’t the paint made from oil? Is it an ‘oil painting’? Or an oily painting? Acrylic is oil-based too.
Are they aware of the irony?
Regarding the names, I too would like to meet my Waterloo.
Good grief! That means another wave of Californians fanning out across the fruited plain.
“The Road”
Crispin wrote: “Isn’t the paint made from oil?”
That is not even 0.1% of the hypocrisy.
The engraving machine was manufactured from ores dug from an open pit mines, metals refined in huge foundries, parts built in factories from around the world, and once finished, powered by fossil fuel.
The same is true for the museum the exhibit is housed in, the vehicles used to transport the goops who come to stare at the “art”, the food the goops put into their bellies that morning, etc.
The stupidity of these people is bottomless and fathomless. They have no concept at all of how difficult it is to build a civilization, or how fragile those civilizations are.
If we made a “wall of infamy” that listed the names of climate alarmists who continue to use oil while telling everyone else to stop using it, and we labeled it “Lest We Forget The Hypocrites,” they would call us bullies and haters. (It would also have to be a very large wall.) But for some reason, it’s not hateful or an act of bullying when they do it.
The looney ‘artist’ is POLLUTING the university with…oil!
Arrest the vandal.
Don’t worry about me mate. Myself my kids and my grandkids will be using engine oil for the foreseeable future, but it’s a choice and others can walk if they want to.
[SNIP policy violation – personal name calling, derision -mod]
Yep I would love to be on one. Then I could sue them for defamation of character or somesuch. Why do greenalist always create labels of meaningless dribble, like “climate denier”, or just “denier”? I know of no sceptic who denies the “climate”, or even that the climate “changes”. The true “deniers” are those warmistas who “deny” that the climate has changed many times in the past, & will do in the future, the paleogeological evidence demonstrates that this has happened & therefore is most likely {95% 😉 } will happen again!
Alan loses 97 points for not using the utterly convincing and indisputable 97% certainty assertion.
Alan the Brit
“Dribble”?????? Considering the nature of the “art piece” was choice of that word deliberate or just an accidental mock.
Eugene WR Gallun
There will likely come a time when this will be seen as a roll of honour, not one of shame, and who then will have the last smile.
Congrats to all those brave souls who have stood up for free speech and the scientific principle. The world owes them a debt of gratitude, as the coming years will show.
That is why it is made from plywood; by the time they are proven in error it will be just so much carbon dioxide and water
If it gets cold enough in the coming years, someone is likely to pull it down and burn it to keep warm, especially if there’s no relief from the current British insanity that is humorously called an “energy policy”.
Hear hear!! Congrats indeed. I admire these heroes enormously. Where are the young artists paying tribute to them? They are all sheep following the current fashion.
I’d like to see it transformed into a lapel pin and for a small additional charge you can have your name added as the 7th skeptic.
Even in plastic it’s got to worth $9.95 +S/H.
And for ordering now we’ll throw in an extra pin at no charge. (just add S/H)
I’d wear it proudly.
Maybe put it on book markers, hats, tee shirts and mouse pads.(the list is endless)
I wonder if Ian would consider a small percentage as a license fee?
I’ve done a few of these little lapel pin projects for websites, *very* nice (color laser printing, polished “gold” plating) ones are about US$2.50 depending on quantity of course. The biggest hassle is always order fulfillment.
PP,
Why not provide a few proposed samples to Anthony? With way over a million views of WUWT and 1,000,000+ reader comments, maybe a small lapel pin would have a market. Might even help support the best climate site on the internet. ☺
Thanks db, I guess I could send some samples of previous pins (I still have a few old leftovers). Message sent via contact form.
For prompt response, will a set of Ginsu knives be included?
“I must say I’m a little jealous of my friend James. Where is my art installation wall of infamy? I mean, how many of these climate articles do I have to write?”
one good one.
keep trying
Mosher will get his name on a wall too.
Mosher just might be one of the first “up against the wall, when the revolution* comes!” 😉
* The revolution against Global fascism
Whenever totalitarians take over, the useful idiots are always the first ones to be gotten rid of.
Thinking about it… considering repeated bloggie awards etc… how did Anthony escape? Musta been a UK thing.
Given how this country is going (health & safety) I’m actually surprised that this ‘dripping oil’ exhibit hasn’t been shut down – as a chemical incident. And no, I’m not joking. A hospital here (last year) had an incident where an Accident & Emergency dept. of a hospital was closed down after two people were admitted with the effects of weedkiller. Then mass hysteria broke out. People were said to be ‘decontaminated’ and the A&E was allowed to re-open. It was one of the worst cases of over-reaction we’ve had here yet, but I suspect there’s more to come.
http://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/Police-cordon-E/story-21939092-detail/story.html
Or on a fence, more likely.
I’m sure Josh could come up with a good cartoon based on this, possibly with a list of all of us who want to have our names added to those already there.
I would consider it an honour to have my name included. But I’m sure the “artist” would not find that funny.
My name and that of most of my family are already written on the walls of our home mostly in pencil on the bare plaster under the wallpaper, Each time I decorate I write something new about us all as a sort of time capsule with just a line about us and a date.
James Bull
What about one that’s better than you’ve ever written ?
Mosher – you have to play “court jester” like the Brit skeptics did.
Parachute into Paris this December and ask some pointed questions.
Ask about the Emperor’s New Clothes. That’ll do it for sure.
But you’ll always be remembered for “outing” the Gleick.
Kurt,
I agree. Mosher was very prescient and astute in fingering Gleick. Despite Steven’s infatuation with models (which I understand, since that’s his business), he will always be remembered for that call.
I believe Gleick caved, and ‘fessed up largely because of that. If Gleick was half as smart as Mosher, he would have just kept his mouth shut.
By that standard, his name should be up there 100 times.
(Another wasted effort by a banned sockpuppet. Comment DELETED. -mod)
What scientist makes that claim?
Names, please.
We’re not ‘being sensitive’, we’re just laughing at the daft ‘artist’.
(Another wasted effort by a banned sockpuppet. Comment DELETED. -mod)
icouldnthelpit, I’m not sure you understood my words that you quoted.
Saying that climate sensitivity (to CO2) is zero ±1ish is not saying that the concept has no meaning.
Nor is it saying that the climate sensitivity is exactly zero. That would be claiming CO2 is not a GHG. But, as is pointed out, no-one says that.
It is saying that it’s not important. And, as the Pause demonstrates, it’s impossible to distinguish from the unknowns over those time periods.
(Another wasted effort by a banned sockpuppet. Comment DELETED. -mod)
icouldnthelpit, you have misunderstood. I am pointing at the physical evidence.
The climate is not controlled by CO2 during the Pause, obviously. So why are we sure it will be in the future?
Also, you seem very surprised at the the idea that heat may be going into the ocean and thus warming the water. This is not proven but certainly not controversial. Kevin Trenberth has promoted the idea.
If that is the case then increased evaporation is not improbable. Warmer water gives off more water vapour – that’s not too outrageous a scientific argument for you, is it?
More water vapour can form more clouds. Clouds block the Sun and can cool the planet (go outside while a cumulus cloud passes over the Sun and feel it).
So yes, more CO2 can cool the planet. Not saying it does but it is quite reasonable. Heat is not temperature, remember.
And as this negative feedback would prevent runaway climate disaster from a forest fire or volcano in pre-history then there is some reason to think that plausible. Unlike CO2 only having a warming mode.
(Another wasted effort by a banned sockpuppet. Comment DELETED. -mod)
icouldnthelpit is unable to produce his list of names of people who think that the sensitivity number is zero.
I don’t mean screen names of commenters. Anyone can have an opinion, and anyone can say anything. I mean recognized scientists in this field. The only one I am aware of is Dr. Ferenc Miskolczi. There may be others, but I’m not aware of any.
(Another wasted effort by a banned sockpuppet. Comment DELETED. -mod)
icouldnthelpit, sorry if you are baffled. I tried to keep it simple.
I’ll try again:
Zero is not 0±1.
Zero is no relationship.
0±1 is a relationship that is indistinguishable from the noise.
And yes, it could be a negative feedback as well as it could be a positive feedback.
Not saying it is (noise, remember) but it could be.
(Another wasted effort by a banned sockpuppet. Comment DELETED. -mod)
icouldnthelpit,
One good post from you would make a change, old son.
Were I a WUWT moderator, yours would always read “snip – boring”.
(Another wasted effort by a banned sockpuppet. Comment DELETED. -mod)
An award for rejection of Science and Scientists. To be admired, or…….
Al Gore, Pachoury and the IPCC got an award, a NON-scientific award, a while back. And Mann does a “me too” cry and creates his own copy of it.
I see warren is still trying to convince himself that you can’t be a scientist unless you agree with him.
Mark W,
An ethical scientist follows the Scientific Method, and provides all of his methods, data, methodology and metadata to any other scientists upon request. Transparency is the key to scientific progress and veracity.
By that standard, practically none of the scientists promoting dangerous MMGW, like Mann, Trenberth and the like are honest scientists. Warren doesn’t get that.
Without transparency of all methods and data, including adjustments and exactly how they were made, how can others falsify results? Falsification and testability are the same thing. See Prof. Langmuir for a complete explanation.
Scientific Method? That’s so 20th century. In the new and improved version of science, scientists are rated by how well they support the narrative.
Any who has followed DBStealey’s posts will recognize his rendition of an ‘honest’ scientist: Not a PhdD doing research. Not one who is published in a peer reviewed journal. And certainly not one of the 97% that agree Man’s burning of fossil fuels is warming the planet!
@warrenlb,
Your definition of an honest scientist is one who has published in a journal. My definition is given above.
I think even unethical scientists would laugh at you for that nonsense. And of course, your preposterous “97%” silliness has been so thoroughly debunked that no credible scientist takes it seriously any more.
And @ollieb: if you’re going to denigrate someone, you had better show conclusively that you’re right. That includes getting both sides of any story. So far, being right would be a first for you.
Two words Stealey…..” Iris hypothesis”
ollieb,
Two words: ‘So What’?
Posting the words “iris hypothesis” has nothing to do with scientific ethics, which is what I posted about and to which you added your 2-word non sequitur. (The iris hypothesis has never been falsified, but that is neither here nor there.)
Please go away until you can follow the discussion.
Falsification of the irisi hypothesis:
Here:
.
http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/1520-0442%282002%29015%3C0003%3ATIHANO%3E2.0.CO%3B2
.
and here
.
http://www.atmos-chem-phys.net/2/31/2002/acp-2-31-2002.html
ollieb,
I asked you before to drop it, but you’re fixated. So you can’t.
As stated before, no one will ever change your mind, which is closed tighter than a submarine hatch. Dangerous man-made global warming is your True Belief, and all the facts and evidence in the world can’t put a dent in it.
The links you posted merely show a difference of degree from Lindzen et al.; they do not “falsify” anything. They certainly do not falsify the iris effect, which was your bogus claim. And if you read the Climategate I, II, and III email dump, you will see that the climate pal review system that you seem to be so impressed with has been so thoroughly corrupted that it is essentially worthless.
Further, the opinions you linked only differ in degree from Lindzen. If Lindzen was wrong, or was “falsified” as you wrongly assert, he would have issued a Corrigendum correcting it. You know, like Michael Mann was forced to admit by McIntyre & McKittrick.
You’re batting average is .000, ollie. But maybe you’ll get a hit if you get up to bat enough times.
ollieb,
You don’t even have enough sense to understand what you’re being told.
Run along now, back to your alarmist blogs where you get your misinformation from. You’re running low on talking points.
You’re wet behind the ears here; a noobie who just showed up. Many of us have been here from the beginning. But all you can do is post insufferable insults like:
But that is to be expected from someone that is ignorant of the actual science.
I’ve probably forgotten more than you will ever learn about this subject. And Prof. Richard Lindzen was head of the Atmospheric Sciences department at M.I.T., arguably the best engineering school on the planet. The ones you linked to aren’t fit to shine his shoes.
I’ve read almost all of Lindzen’s papers — which are more than you can count on your fingers and toes. His CV contains twenty dozen peer reviewed publications — far more extensive than any of your alarmist grant trolls.
Wake me when you can quantify AGW. Until then, you’re talking thru your hat.
@olliebourque@me.com
DBStealey is still trying to ‘disprove’ AGW by claiming there is no climate ‘measurement’ that confirms it, while ignoring the fact that 90% of the global heat unbalance is absorbed by oceans, and only 3% by the atmosphere — making any short term (less than 30 year) statistical correlation of Climatic temperatures with atmospheric CO2 ppmv meaningless.
But he’ll keep pointing to the ‘pause’, because if instead he were to consider ocean heat absorption, or long term climate trends, or the calculable increase in Greenhouse Effect and the measured rise in greenhouse gas concentrations since 1800, the inevitable conclusion would undercut his belief system.
[Snip. ~mod.]
warrenlb:
The planet hasn’t warmed in almost 20 years, despite continuous predictions and scare mongering otherwise, followed by a predictable moving of the goalpost to 5 years later, when the end is nigh. How many of years of no warming will it take for you to question your hypothesis? You seem to be creating new justifications for why it hasn’t warmed each year. Why didn’t you predict the non warming in the first place, if the science was so settled? Do you really believe this, or are you so thoroughly entrenched in your position that your ego will not allow you to see anything contradictory?
warrenlb says:
DBStealey is still trying to ‘disprove’ AGW…
As usual, wlb is fabricating. I’ve never said that AGW was ‘disproven’. I just point out that no one has ever produced any measurable evidence showing that it exists.
warrenlb doesn’t understand that. He never did.
And every day that the “pause” goes on makes the alarmist crowd more wrong. Global warming stopped many, many years ago, and there is no indication that it will resume.
Planet Earth is debunking everything warrenlb believes. Normal folks would have admitted they were flat wrong long ago. But not warrenlb. MMGW is his religion, and as his religion, he takes it on faith. No evidence is necessary.
William R,
warrenlb deliberately misrepresents what others write, and his imaginary pal “olliebourque” is just another site pest. Those are the kind of commenters who try to convince rational readers here that dangerous MMGW exists. But they can never produce any measurable, testable evidence to support their Beliefs. No wonder they can’t convince anyone else.
warren, when you find that you have to lie about what others have said, you should just go ahead and admit that you have already lost the argument.
BTW, the 97% claim has been refuted so many times that only the terminally clueless still cling to it.
BTBTW, nobody said that CO2 doesn’t warm the planet, we just point out that the affect is small.
warren, ah yes, the oceans ate my heat. We’ve been hearing that evasion for decades now.
Well, warrenlb, I must say you are rather brave holding the views you do. Since they invalidate all the climate modeling, none of which reflect oceans capturing 90% of the “global heat unbalance,” [sic], I can’t imagine many in the global warming community welcoming you with open arms. Without those models, just what do they have?
Worse, when/if models are created to accommodate your theory, and incorporate how trivial amounts of added energy are dissipated in the oceans, the result of the models will be no future global warming. That community will be calling you a denier. But have hope. Maybe you will get your name engraved on a work of art one day.
We can only hope, friend warren, that the oceans have stored enough heat to see us through the next solar minimum, coinciding with a negative PDO and a cold PDO… or maybe the increase in CO2 will offset the historical cycles?
Oops, a cold AMO, rather.
this is some sort of a reference to the people who gave up their lives so that the rest of us didn’t have to suffer under a totalitarian regime.
Yes. in Australia and New Zealand particularly.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ode_of_Remembrance
(Find “lest we forget” in the page)
Zem, its a reference to the people who put their reputations on the “chopping block” (so to speak). Not to mention all the “life” that this struggle has extracted from them. We can only hope that the “totalitarian regime” part never get’s off the ground.
This sounds like libel to me. It tries to lump skeptics in with those who deny that the Holocaust happened.
Every scientist and everyone who cares about science should be a skeptic. Anyone questioning the validity of any science is doing what they should.
1 – Accusing a skeptic of being a Denier is false and those uttering the accusation should be expected to know that.
2 – Accusing a skeptic of being a Denier is a clear attempt to injure their reputation or character.
3 – Some people (Pielke Jr. comes to mind) have been damaged by such accusations.
The above three points are necessary to win a libel case. If Michael Mann can drag people into court on (imho) weaker grounds, surely someone can start dragging these defamers into court.
It’s much easier just to wait some years, then the alleged “infamy” will turn automatically into “fame” !
Don’t forget: Galilei died as a “denier” of “divine truth”, but today he belongs to the eternal heroes of science and enlightenment.
In the long run it is inevitable that the same twist of fate will happen with todays CAGW “deniers”…
I don’t think there will be any heroes of this time period. destroying our economy on behalf of poor science and good intentions; mass genocide on behalf of Allah; slow slide into world socialism; etc. This can’t end well. I hope future generations forgive us and learn from our mistakes.
In Australia and New Zealand at least, I suspect that the positive message from the words “lest we forget” would overwhelm the negative. This art looks like a foot shot.
Yes, as metaphor, it succeeds only for the skeptical side.
Hearty congratulations to all the winners.
The more flak you get the closer you are to being on target.
Consider that if there was a “Wall of D***** Achievement”, it would put to rest the ‘97% consensus’ myth — — there would only be some 50,000 – 60,000 names … … … … …
Totally O/T: John Cook’s ‘on-line-how-to-debunk-climate-den*********’ is up and running. An “attendee” wrote about the first installment of the six-week “course”. Hope someone here is ‘attending’, so we know what John says/thinks (not that we don’t already know … … …)
I’m signed up. I’ve done worse. I lost count of how many time he used “denial” in the first episode.
Brave lad, taking one for the side. We’ll raise a glass in your honor.
I want to be on this list!!!!!
Please pass my name on – Ian Magness
That is a work of art? Now that is art I can do myself, none of these fancy artworks with paint all over it, but just some words.
Tom Wolfe wrote about this long ago back in the 70s in The Painted Word,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Painted_Word
I’m a fan! A good read too, as was “From Bauhaus to Our House” on Modern architecture.
That’s a commissioned, high school science fair, politically correct entry.
While the definition of what is art and what isn’t long ago broke the bounds of the rule that most great artists throughout the centuries would have applied–that without craft there is no art–and while art has likely been political since the first artist put his hand to creation, something as this only further demonstrates, if such was required, the emotional immaturity and small perspective of some of AGW’s faithful. At this level they really cannot be called proponents or advocates anymore; they are simply the faithful doing what the faithful have always done, dismissing all views that do not correspond to their own. At least the faithful who act for God do so in the name of an indisputable higher authority; the AGW faithful act on behalf of no higher authority save their hubris.
It is very childish, and little more needs to be said.
it is quite childish, I was disappointed that it is made out of plywood. I think that it is important for an artist who wants to infer something to ( in this instance ) put his hand in his pocket and make the thing out of brass or bronze.
Could he get a govt grant to cover the cost?
Here in the UK, public works made of brass or bronze are promptly stolen for their value as scrap metal. Basic law and order is now seen as less urgent than preventing the oncoming climate change apocalypse.
That situation suits the criminals now common all tiers of society.
yes froggy and also stone. I used to see all sorts of milestones dotted about but they seem to have all gone, likely the work of itinerant immigrants who have no respect for the mouth that feeds them, hopefully not for much longer if sense prevails in forthcoming elections.
“zemlik
April 30, 2015 at 11:10 am”
Stealing metals for scrap, wherever from, is nothing new for the UK and nothing to do with the vast rash of migrants entering the UK motre recently. Lead from church roofs has been stollen for hundreds of years and sold for scrap.
I can no longer vote in UK elections as I no longer [live] there however, I have a feeling Cameron will form the next Govn’t. I don’t see a swing to UKIP, I see a swing away from the Green and Labour. Cameron has made some fairly smart decisions one being the over the over 65’s with private pensions, they can plough thousands of pounds from their pensions funds into 1 to 2 year term deposits with gauranteed returns. Not sure how the Govn’t will pay for that, we’ll see.
But I will be watching the news for updates to see how things go.
Well they can’t put too many names on it, or they’d have to admit how many people disagree with their precious consensus.
I hope the pump contnuously pumping engine oil over this “art work” is powered by solar or wind. Would be rather hypocritical to use coal/gas generated electricity. Mind you, plywood does burn really well.
Especially after it’s been soaked in motor oil.
Ever tried pumping fat-free Greek yoghurt?
I tried pumping a fat free Greek once.
🙂 🙂
if they would spend more time trying to prove their beliefs…instead of deriding people that question it….
…because their beliefs don’t make one damn bit of sense!
When an artist reverts to political statements in order to make his art relevant, he loses the title artist and gains the title political editorialist.
In terms of the political statement, it could be worse, like being included in the Climate Hockey Museum.
Alx
Climate Hockey Museum — got to love it.
Eugene WR Gallun
It is not the Hockney stick
outstanding!