Climate "wall of infamy"

Wall of infamy Art Installation

Wall of infamy Art Installation

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.

Read more:

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”.

254 thoughts on “Climate "wall of infamy"

    • “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.

    • 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.

      • 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.

      • 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.

    • 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.

  1. 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

  2. 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.

  3. 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.

  4. “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

      • 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.

      • 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

    • 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.

      • 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.

      • 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.

      • 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.

      • 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.

    • icouldnthelpit,
      One good post from you would make a change, old son.
      Were I a WUWT moderator, yours would always read “snip – boring”.

    • 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.

      • 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.

      • 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.

        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.

      • 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?

  5. 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.

  6. Lest We Forget Those Who Denied

    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.

  7. 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.

    • Tom Wolfe wrote about this long ago back in the 70s in The Painted Word,

      Wolfe’s thesis in The Painted Word was that by the 1970s modern art had moved away from being a visual experience, and more often was an illustration of art critics’ theories. Wolfe criticized avant-garde art, Andy Warhol, Willem de Kooning and Jackson Pollock. The main target of Wolfe’s book, however, was not so much the artists as the critics. In particular, Wolfe criticized three prominent art critics whom he dubbed the kings of “Cultureburg”: Clement Greenberg, Harold Rosenberg and Leo Steinberg. Wolfe argued that these three men were dominating the world of art with their theories and that, unlike the world of literature in which anyone can buy a book, the art world was controlled by an insular circle of rich collectors, museums and critics with out-sized influence.[1]

  8. 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.

      • 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.

  9. Well they can’t put too many names on it, or they’d have to admit how many people disagree with their precious consensus.

  10. 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.

  11. 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!

  12. 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.

  13. I think that David Rose deserves also to be on it (given that it seems to be reserved for UK sceptics). I hope he’s not too disappointed.

    • He’s an obvious omission. Something off about that.
      Perhaps the failed hatchet job by Dana at the Guardian was noticed. A former Guardian editor endorsed Rose as being an honest journalist when he worked at the Guardian.
      It was actually quite hilarious.

  14. I laid a broken hockey stick in the snow in my driveway, and spelled out Michael Mann above it and Nobel Laureate below it in a warm yellow fluid. I had to drink several beer and wait between writing sessions. (I misspelled Laureate… but I was tipsy)
    My art was better.

  15. Hey, great idea! How about a “wall of shame” listing the biggest Climate Liars like Gore, Mann, Pachauri, Holdren, Hansen, etc. etc. We could even vote on potential candidates. Fun!

    • Carved out of a slab of coal, mounted in a mock fireplace with simulated open fire effect? I like it!

      • No, on a block of ice. And it won’t melt (it is still quite cold here in upstate NY but at least the icebergs here finally melted away about a week and a half ago!).

  16. The amount of self back patting the elite know it alls do might have something to do with the self esteem generation. Maybe that’s why they call themselves progressives. They are the only ones calling themselves that.

  17. If the sceptic position is so ridiculous, why try so very hard to belittle and shame others with a different opinion? I think it goes “Me thinks thou doth protest too much”

  18. ” Lest we forget” is the first line of a poem commemorating those who gave their lives in the two world wars.
    Presumably this artist feels that the people mentioned on his plywood plaque are doing their best to overcome evil forces as the allies did in both of these wars?
    Why plywood as well? This requires consumption of CO2 to cut the wood into thin sheets and then glue them together, he would have been better off cutting the end off a tree trunk, ideally like this:

    • andrewm…, your remembrance is correct and affirms our hero’s deeds. With the conflation of WW II and current climate contention the “artist” knowingly seeks to elevate Alarmism to the status of heroism and impugn disagreement by aligning it with Nazi genocide.
      May I suggest that another “artist”* take an ax to the display.
      *Only a performance “artist” with the proper credentials, of course.

  19. I’m in college and I’m liberal. Therefore I know everything about a scientific issue without actually looking at any of the science. Now pour me more champagne and pass the kale chips

  20. ‘a continuous stream of engine oil drools symbolically over the “deniers’” names, ‘
    So they bought some oil , and therefore giving ‘evil oil companies money to further their evil capitalists profits ‘ and then they decided to use it wastefully, there by making the ‘coming oil crisis worse’ and afterwards they are going to throw it away , there by added to the ‘toxic waste mountain that is killing our planet ‘

  21. I see that as a badge of honor. Be proud that they think so much of you to be included on that list.

    • Absolutely right. Lest we forget 5 people who did their bit to stem the tide of the Green barbarian horde.

      • Look, you may have your problems in the UK, but we have a Green Governor running amuck in California who seems to be getting all the press, making outrageous demands and wants to take us back to the life before the barbarians marched. We need at least 5 people locally who can pushback his agenda and will be forever gratefully inscribed on a pressboard tablet complete with lingering formaldehyde odor.

  22. That crappy piece of art will be worth good money in about 30 years..I wonder how much they want for that? if nobody buys it they should put it up at the Smithsonian in rememberence so this unethical breach of science that created this scam will never happen again.

  23. Couldn’t the artist have used something renewable rather than a precious petroleum? Perhaps baby seal oil?

  24. I’m a little miffed, too. With the name “Spencer” I should have been accorded “honorary British sceptic” status or something.

  25. Congratulations!
    In what other discipline would members of a marginalized minority (3%: 100%-97%=3%) receive recognition like this?

  26. James Delingpole: English columnist and novelist
    Christopher Booker: journalist and author
    Nigel Lawson: British Conservative politician and journalist
    Christopher Monckton: British Conservative politician and journalist
    Melanie Phillips: British journalist, author and public commentator
    Owen Paterson: British Conservative Party politician
    Not a single scientist amongst them. Speaks volumes, doesn’t it?

      • Well, I’ll start the ball rolling with 3; David Bellamy, Philip Stott, Paul Reiter. I’m sure we could come up with more without even trying!

      • @MCourtney
        A paper published 16 years ago which has only been cited three times. And the author holds a diploma in philosophy.
        How is this helping your case? 🙂

      • Well, three things in its favour:
        1) The author has spent a lifetime in research and has many papers published – so its existence refutes your implication that there are no British scientists who have refuted AGW.
        2) It has been published and that means it scales the lofty heights of peer review. Inconvenient data shouldn’t be rejected just because it is embarrassing to your case.
        3) Obviously, the paper is sound as you didn’t dispute it’s arguments or content. Discussing the author and its publicity say nothing about it’s correctness. Therefore, I conclude you cannot fault what it actually says.
        It seems you’ve put your foot in it by assuming that no-one has ever disagreed with your opinion in the published literature. But you should have checked.

    • Yes, because the hotheads can’t deny the data presented by the skeptical scientists.
      The old lawyer saying is — if the facts are on your side, pound on the facts — if the law is on your side pound on the law — if neither the facts or the law is on your side pound on the table.
      The hotheads have their own version — since neither the data nor the laws of nature are on their side the hotheads pound on the skeptics.
      Eugene WR Gallun

    • Gore: Politician
      Pachoury: Engineer/novelist (Disgraced former head of the IPCC)
      Ban Ki Moon: Politician
      Gaurnout: Economist (The “architect” of the Australian “price on carbon”)
      Hannam: (Sydney Morning Hearld, Australia, writer on the environment, in particular climate change)
      Rudd: Politician (Australia. Who said “…climate change was the greatest moral challenge of our time…”)
      Wong: Politician (Australia. Former environment minister)
      Brown: Politician (Australia. Former Greens leader)
      Milne: Politician (Australia. Current greens leader)
      De Caprio: Actor
      Blanchett: Actress
      All seem to know AGW is proven but not a single scientist amoungst them.

    • Tall Bloke still holds a place of honour.
      He got a dawn raid by the police.
      Frankly, I’m glad I’m a nobody.

  27. Lest we forget the good fight that those original few have put up, indeed.
    I know it could give copyright issues a bit of a grope but could say Josh or someone put together a mockup poster that could be downloaded, customised with the names of the purchaser and their besties that could be hung on the walls of homes and offices as a sign of solidarity with the named ‘few’ ( in the sense of the Battle of Britain or the Agincourt / Henry V ‘few’ – we few we band of brothers/sisters’ etc).
    A sort of Je Suis le Few type giving the ‘bird’ to these CAGW morons.
    As an Australian writing a few days after the centenary of ANZAC DAY, ‘Lest We Forget’ has particular resonance ( as for the Kiwi’s and Brits too).
    (Apologies to French skeptics for the ‘we few’, and ‘the bird’ references – collateral damage, no pain intended)

  28. This act of public shaming, disguised as art, actually won the university’s 2015 Sustainability Art Prize. The amount of £250 and a certificate was presented to Ian Wolter by the head of Anglia Ruskin’s art department. It just goes to show that the left doesn’t really hate shaming, bullying, or name calling. They just want to have a monopoly on it.

      • Actually, how can it possibly be ‘Sustainable’ if it uses oil? Somebody screwed up in their enthusiasm, methinks.

      • ‘Sustainability Art’ is a program using other people’s money to sustain would-be artists who will never make a dime in the real marketplace because their work totally sucks.

      • It’s unrelated to sustainability and entirely about politics. The pump is (evidently) powered by a utility line. There’s not a thing about it that’s sustainable per se. Propaganda only; little or no art. It won a prize for being PC. Meh.

  29. In a few years this “art” will be worth as much as any other political memorabilia. Like unopened cans of Billy Beer.

    • Actually will it last as long as “a few years”? I doubt it unless someone comes along with an oil change every other year.

  30. Objection! When/where was the competition published? What were the application criteria and deadline? And who where in the selection panel?
    Having lived in the UK, regularly confessing my CAGW/CACC/CACD thought-crime in public and annually celebrating Earth day with peak energy consumption, I should be at least considered.

    • Jakko i’m building a nice paper mache one as we speak. Patience now, art takes time. I will allow skeptic Englishmen as well as yanks on this list. Hell I’ll even throw in couple Germans and Danes. I’m growing an unkempt beard and working on my passive aggressiveness as well as my understanding of pre-worn jeans with holes that cost $300. You can see my in SoHo at my wine social community fund raiser. My masterpiece will be on display for all to behold.

  31. The piece, which won the university’s 2015 Sustainability Art Prize, was the creation of third year fine art student Ian Wolter.
    Wolter has explained his meisterwerk thus:
    “With this work I envisage a time when the deliberate denial of climate change will be seen as a crime because it hinders progress towards a low carbon future.”

    [bold mine]
    Someone should take Ian’s nose and rub it in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:
    “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”
    (See, this is exactly the point I was getting at in a recent controversial post of mine.)

    • Max nobody is protesting the freedom to make any kind of artwork that anybody wants to create or purchase.

    • Good point, Max. I suggest rubbing also the Article 12 with the same token:
      No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

    • I’m with you on that Max! By the way since I don’t have the computer skills to do it why don’t you post Goya’s depictions of the pedants at school just to show that nonsense being taught in school is nothing new.

  32. It is a wonderful thing , the “Law of Unintended Consequences” .
    This artist’s “creation” led to comments that made me check what T shirts , etc are available from WUWT should I want to make a contrary statement to that of the artist.
    That led me to the comments on that page , and in one of them I come across a weather data set that I had not seen mentioned before :!climate;ws=28752;ctum=0;cth=500;ctmy=15;ctsy=1949;ctey=2010
    it has very interesting historical data ( based on airport stations) which showed for cities in Europe a decline in annual mean temp from 2006-2010, but a warming , or status in North America . Putting in Manchester gave me a record throughout the year , for past decades, of max and min temperatures .
    A very interesting website , but why have I not seen it mentioned before (in last 12 months ) . Did I just miss references to it , or is it in some way not “respectable” to either side in the AGW debate ?
    Who runs it?
    Assuming it is kosher , it showed the lack of obvious warming in my neighbourhood , which is probably not the result that this artist was striving for.

  33. Idea for Josh:
    Show the next logical step in the pogress of the climate concerned:
    The assigning of prominent bright patches to be shown on the clothes of skeptics

  34. “Lest We Forget…”. How ironic! I confidently predict it will be the alarmists who want to forget their ridiculous predictions.

      • The ants will have fun harvesting it. Also the rats. Especially the rats, they will eat the wood, too. If it is the sort of ants we have in Arizona, they would not only eat the board but carry it off, too.

  35. So let’s see, we’ve got pride, envy, and maybe 1/2 of gluttony.
    If I could get 7/2.5 on the Kentucky Derby, I’d be a happy deadly sinner.

  36. A lesson I learned when the POTUS said, in a State of the Union Address, that he was going to put me out of work: “Judge a man by the reputation of his enemies.” — Arabian Proverb.
    I salute the Anglia Six!

  37. Someone, please, create a similar plaque naming the warming alarmists and keep it in a safe place. When the world looks back decades from now, let the historians know who stood for what.

  38. Wow, I hope to make it on one of these engravings/walls some day too. I’ll probably have to wait for my first check from Big Oil (TM). I have been assured that check is on the way, so many people seem convinced it’s a matter of time. 😉

  39. And surely they should launch their attack upon the actual evidence:
    The temperature record from UAH and RSS over the last two decades showing zero warming.
    The surprising total absence of N American hurricane landfalls over several years.
    The physical expansion of the area of Antartic sea ice.
    Etc etc.
    They could at least bother to make mention of that one ultimate climate denier, nature.
    Unfortunately, nature has so far shown scant regard for the news of her demise.
    But, definitely “nature” belongs at the top of that list of theirs.
    On account of her committed contrarian behaviour over the last few billion years.

  40. Wasn’t it an artist that lead Germany from 1933 to 1945 and tried to take over the world. He caused about fourty million deaths and the destruction of several cities. I believe it was a performing artist that killed Lincoln.
    I was trying to find other do gooder artists that had caused great harm. Any suggestions?

    • I am watching the Smithsonian Channel at this moment. It is a story about those who tried to stop Adolf. There are monuments to them now. I hope to live long enough to see monuments to those brave people who have led the fight against CAGW alarmists who are trying to bring an end to industry and freedom.

      • Jim Francisco April 30, 2015 at 11:52 am
        … those who tried to stop Adolf.
        Let’s not forget these these guys.
        Under the banner of Judea, the Jews of the world declared war on Germany in March of 1933.

        In a meeting held at the Hotel Knickerbocker on March 21 by the Jewish War Veterans of the United States of America, former congressman William W. Cohen advocated in support of a strict boycott of German goods, stating that “Any Jew buying one penny’s worth of merchandise made in Germany is a traitor to his people.”

    • He was a writer as well as an artist, and not a good one either. Struggled to sell his work. The first copy of his book was an abject failure. When he came to power, his second book was compulsory reading imposed by the state.

      • “his book”? Good grief. Winston Churchill wrote dozens of books. “The River War”, his second book I found a bit dated and stilted, but still a rich history. I have not read his first book, “The Story of the Malakand Field Force” (1898), written when he was 24 years old. His six-volume work “The Second World War” is magnificent writing by any standard, and was the major reason he won the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1953. Have you been taking lessons in despising Winston Churchill from Barack Obama?

      • Belay my last – I thought you were discussing Winston, instead of Adolph. Apologies!

      • ‘his second book was compulsory reading imposed by the state.’
        any proof of this or do you just ‘know’ ?

      • The 2nd book was “given” away “free” and it was “expected” and “obligatory” to accept the book from the state without question. His books became “popular” after he came to power (In 1933?). This seems reasonable given that many other books/material that did not “fit” Nazi ideology was burnt. This is from memory in a documentary and I cannot find any reliable links, or “proof”. There is some information on Wikipedia, but I don’t trust Wikipedia for accuracy on this.

      • Andrew Russell,
        I agree about Churchill. Many years ago I was given a birthday gift of his 4-volume History Of The English Speaking Peoples. It opened my eyes to history that was never taught in the schools I attended.

  41. The piece perhaps might become a tribute to their vigilance, should oil and coal be the energy that gets civilization through another LIA, or better yet to zero pop. growth.

  42. 91% going on 97%. It only took 70 years. How long will it take this time?
    From 1946, all you need to know about CAGW (note the C, without the C, you need to know much much more), from the master and the “master-race”. Hermann Göring, quoted by Jon Krakauer in “Where Men Win Glory: The Odyssey of Pat Tilman”.

    Naturally, the common people don’t want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it’s the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it’s always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it’s a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship…. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to greater danger. It works the same way in any country.

    CAGW is the moral equivalent of war. /sarc

    • Goering was a thug, but he had his moments. When the police tried to prevent a 1937 modern dress performance of Richard III (think Brownshirt and SS uniforms without the insignias), Hermann intervened. Germans revered Shakespeare above many German authors.
      But Goering may have been more intrigued by director Jürgen Fehling’s giving Richard a club-foot, a transparent reference to his rival, Josef Goebbels. The play, alas, soon closed. Who would dare to see it? [Jürgen Fehling survived the war, so he must have had protection from someone in high Nazi circles after his all-too-clear dig at the Hitler regime.]

      • Most sociopaths have the skills to operate in society.
        Even high-society.
        Did I miss your point ?

  43. a faux-stone slab (made out of plywood)

    A subliminal allegory for the cult of AGW – and its ability to last.

  44. I wonder how much power the pump consumes and if it has EPA approved oil containment systems? Are there proper flammability warnings in the immediate vicinity?

  45. ‘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.
    ‘The piece, which won the university’s 2015 Sustainability Art Prize, was the creation of third year fine art student Ian Wolter.’
    C’mon folks, agree or disagree, you’ve sure gotta’ give our dear Ian one whole heckuvalota credit for artistic suffering and dedication. Think of it; minute after minute, hour after hour, day after day, week after week, month after month; glued to his artwork and laboriously hand pumping that symbolically drooling oil as it drools, flows, and runs down around along those deniers’ names. Pump. Pump. Pump. Crank. Crank. Crank. I mean, such a powerful, oh so creative statement, a vision of such undeniable brilliance and originality, could not possibly be jeopardized by any power source behind its flowing oil that was any less natural, less sustainable, less PC, less earth-loving than Ian’s own hands, and arms, and legs, and feet cycling, rowing, pumping and cranking away.
    Unless, unless…could there? Could there be a plug in electric motor powering that flowing, running, drooling oil pump? Oh, please God that it isn’t so.

  46. I’m not sure where this piece of art (sic) is located, wouldn’t it be a good idea to add our names with post-it-notes?

  47. LOL. Bet they didn’t think it would be regarded as meritorious by sceptics.
    Instead of a Wall of Infamy, howabout a Hall of Shame for all the scaremongers and their biggest dud predictions.
    Al Gore and his sinking Islands, the British berk and his breeding pairs surviving on the Antarctic, whoever thought the carbon intense windmill turbines would save the planet, the dick behind the carbon trading scheme in Europe rorted on a massive scale.
    LOL, pack of dopes worthy of being the Coyote in the Road Runner cartoon.

  48. Idle thought; wasn’t Ian Wolter’s work of “art” good enough to be hung on his mom’s refrigerator?

  49. “…prizewinning art installation at Anglia Ruskin, one of Britain’s largest universities…”
    Is there a prize for “thinnest excuse for a prize”?

  50. Anglia Ruskin University……produced from combining the Cambridge School of Art, the Cambridgeshire College of Arts and Technology and the Essex Institute of Higher Education.
    It has a science faculty but no department of physical science.
    The “wall of infamy” is no more than you would expect from an arts student at a regional university, or a major university for that matter.
    Heart on sleeve, well-meaning but ignorant.

  51. Anglia Ruskin is one of the world’s best universities. Certainly amongst the top 5000 or so in the UK.

    • Anglia sounds like a term describing the constant desire to go fishing, to a hoosier like me…

  52. Has anyone else noticed that anytime a Leftist makes ‘Art’ it has to be an attack on something? From “Piss Christ” to Feminist Plays to this week’s jab at climate skeptics, the constant theme is Hostility. And beauty or talent are often in short supply. It truly is a travesty that ‘The Arts’ have been taken over by those with no art in their soul.

    • Have you heard about the problem that some colleges in the US are having with “The Vagina Monologues”?
      Seems that it can’t be performed in such open-minded venues because it does NOT include women who do not have vaginas.
      Political Correctness: the gift to satire that keeps on giving.

  53. Eric, you have to be in the pay of big oil to get on that plaque. I’d be thrilled to be on it but, alas, its for Britishers only. Perhaps the real message is that there are only 5 dissenters left in the UK. Sad. I think the 5 of them should have an annual celebration with a facsimile art printed on to table napkins, coasters and neckties. Drink Guinness, it looks most like crude oil. Actually, we should have an international dissenters day with pod casts from the mighty five and drinks all around – would be a better blast than earth day. I’m awaiting a post by Monckton here on this thrilling honor.

  54. It would be interesting to sue here personally for defamation of character by suggesting that disbelief was not a badge of honour for those superior enough to question the, clearly based on forecast accuracy, low IQ climate fraternity.

Comments are closed.