Where's Lewandowsky and Cook when they are needed to look at REAL 'conspiracy ideation', like murder plots from 'big oil'?

Wow, this is just bonkers.

climate-scientist-fears-murder-by-hitman

From the Saturday Times, big hat tip to Barry Woods

Lewandowsky and Cook would have a field day with this one, except, Dr. Wadhams is on their team (the warmist team) and thus would never think about accusing the good doctor of such psychological aberrations.

It’s a Big Oil conspiracy! The possible murder of three fellow warmists may be connected, says Cambridge University Dr. Peter Wadhams according to this story in the Telegraph:

Professor Peter Wadhams said he feared being labelled a “looney” over his suspicion that the deaths of the scientists were more than just an ‘extraordinary’ coincidence.

But he insisted the trio could have been murdered and hinted that the oil industry or else sinister government forces might be implicated.

Asked who might have wanted them out the way, he replied: “I can only think of the oil lobby but I don’t think the oil lobby goes around killing people.”

Big Oil must be omnipotent, as the evil oily elite were apparently able to arrange a targeted lightning strike:

The three scientists he identified – Seymour Laxon and Katherine Giles, both climate change scientists at University College London, and Tim Boyd of the Scottish Association for marine Science – all died within the space of a few months in early 2013.

Professor laxon fell down a flight of stairs at a New year’s Eve party at a house in Essex while Dr Giles died when she was in collision with a lorry when cycling to work in London. Dr Boyd is thought to have been struck by lightning while walking in Scotland.

Apparently, it gets worse:

Prof Wadhams added: “I thought if it was somebody assassinating them could it be one of our people doing it and that would be even more frightening. I thought it would be better not to touch this with a barge pole.”

His suspicions drew outrage on Saturday from Prof Laxon’s partner, who was also a close friend of Dr Giles. When told what Prof Wadhams had said, Fiona Strawbridge, head of e-Learning at UCL, replied: “Good god. All of this is completely outrageous and very distressing.”

Why yes, yes it is. And here Lewandowsky and Cook have a peer reviewed paper telling the world that its’s the climate skeptics that are the conspiracy nuts to be feared. I guess they forgot to look within their own peer group.

When you believe stuff like that, it’s easy to believe your own theories of climate catastrophe. Such as Wadhams big Arctic collapse prediction in 2012:

wadhams-collapse

One of the world’s leading ice experts has predicted the final collapse of Arctic sea ice in summer months within four years…

Prof Peter Wadhams of Cambridge University calls for “urgent” consideration of new ideas to reduce global temperatures…

“This collapse, I predicted would occur in 2015-16 at which time the summer Arctic (August to September) would become ice-free. The final collapse towards that state is now happening and will probably be complete by those dates”.

Still there:

N_bm_extent[1]

Readers may recall we noted Dr. Wadhams forecast was about to be falsified, so he moved the goalposts:

Over the past few years the Arctic expert, Professor Peter Wadhams, has strongly predicted an ‘ice-free’ Arctic no later than 2016. Late this year he changed it to 2020 without apparently giving an explanation.

You can watch his latest set of wacky Wadham predictions below.

NOTE: This post was updated about 30 minutes after publication to include the scan from the Saturday Times, rather that the satirical news channel image featuring professor Wadhams.

Advertisements

159 thoughts on “Where's Lewandowsky and Cook when they are needed to look at REAL 'conspiracy ideation', like murder plots from 'big oil'?

  1. *sigh* If people like Wadham, Cook and Lewy were placed on this Earth for amusement purposes it appears to be working out quite well.

    • Wadhams is reinventing the nutty professor character. When I was a kid there was a nutty professor in every comic magazine, but they went out of fashion years ago. Welcome back nutty professor.

      • He is not the only nutty professor. Remember there are many climate alarmists who are just as daft – James Hansen, David King, Keith Trenbreth, etc.
        Jerry Lewis would have had many a whole gaggle of nutters to copy for his film.

      • It must be very depressing to spend your life studying a subject only to find at the end of it you still haven’t got a clue.

  2. I guess Wadhams never heard of the wooden-hulled ships that sailed the Arctic’s Northwest Passage back at the beginning of the 20th century. Is he Austin Powers’ grandfather?

    • Professor laxon and Dr Giles were ‘taken out’ by eco-warriors ninja assassins because their Cryosat2 data was just about to reveal that Arctic ice volume had recovered by 50% in one year.
      They were clearly traitors to “The Cause” who were putting the lives of future generations at risk by denying climate change in the Arctic.
      “Dr Boyd is thought to have been struck by lightning while walking in Scotland.”
      The official cause of his death remains uncertain, but in reality he was tazered by the hitmen.
      Only those flying in the face of reason and still declaring in public that Arctic ice is in a death spiral, are safe from the hit squad.
      /sarc
      Telegraph: “Professor Peter Wadhams said he feared being labelled a “looney” over his suspicion that the deaths of the scientists were more than just an ‘extraordinary’ coincidence. ”
      Nooooo, do you think so? Well he hasn’t completely lost the plot then. At least he is still conscious of the fact that he will be perceived at nut-job, though not enough to prevent him saying so in a major national daily newspaper.
      This is the same Prof Wadhams of Cambridge University that wants us to let him play sorcerer’s apprentice by geo-engineering our climate, right?
      I guess the chances of that happening have just receded sharply.

  3. Every word out of this guy’s mouth for the last 15 years has been wrong, so what’s the surprise?

  4. As the Big Oil even bribes Mother Nature to stop a warming trend, they would do anything to discredit real scientists.

    • By the look of it Big Oil has invented a weather machine that can change the climate to their liking and kill off scientists they don’t like by lightning strikes.

      • it’s a big freaking UV laser, attached to a shark’s head; you just create a sharknado, then the flying shark discharges the uv laser at the targeted warmist and the ionized air column conducts the naturally occuring static charge to the target, instant lightening strike! The only tricky part is targeting, of course brain implants transpond the targets location, which helps here. The only sure defense is a grounded (earthed if your British) tin-foil lined hat; obviously Dr Boyd used the much inferior aluminium lined hat.

  5. He was losing his status as one of the worlds leading ice experts, so he bumped off his comrades?
    After all when one of these creatures from the Cult of Calamitous Climate is making these kind of accusations, it usually turns out to be 100% self projection.
    So is this the confession of a serial killer?
    Yes I jest.
    But it is so difficult to parody this cult as they continually exceed my worst expectations.

  6. The professor seriously need professional medical help and sooner rather than later. My condolences go out to those who are already grieving for their lost friends and family. I wish Peter Wadham a speedy and full recovery from his apparent psychosis.

    • Roy
      Whether or not we agree wth his ice predictions wadhams is an intelligent man who seems to have worked himself up into a state that needs professional help.He is suffering from some sort of psychosis that causes him delusions.
      Tonyb

  7. As I commented elsewhere
    Interesting, but unlikely to be a coincidence.
    There may be an important common element, which I am very familiar with.
    I often come across something in a data file, and however unlikely when it confirms my expectations, I wander down the road oblivious of the surroundings, unable to get it out of my head until I can glimpse some kind of resolution.
    These scientists died in early months of 2013, while Arctic Sea ice extent in the late 2012 hit new low.
    http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/plots/icecover/icecover_current_new.png
    All three were very intelligent highly educated people, I suspect they knew perfectly well that this could not have been consequence of the CO2; but what is it and why?
    Lack of concentration while riding a bike even for few seconds in London traffic, or coming down stairs (I did it once, had bruised ‘lower back’ for months, my wife see only funny side of it). Going to a UK hospital on Sunday, let alone New Years day with a life threatening injury, a very slim chance of recovery. In the third case could be simply carelessness and ignorance of the elements by walking in a thunderstorm while the mind is preoccupied by some other matter.
    Professor Peter Wadhams you are wrong, not succession of assassinations, as your own case confirms. Of course you wouldn’t be also loosing concentration while driving and daydreaming about “ that the North Pole will be exposed (no ice) this summer – it’s not happened before” as you claimed some years ago, or some other nonsense, but for some reason a crazy lorry driver didn’t like your climate politics.

  8. Maybe when Tim Curtis at SkS said “would you please stop posting as Lubos Motl. There is reason to doubt his sanity,” he really meant to say Wadhams?

  9. “Professor Peter Wadhams said he feared being labelled a “looney” over his suspicion….”
    Finally a prediction from a climate scientist that proves correct.

  10. All Wadham needs now is a death by water of a climastrologist. Have any died of disease or pestilence?

    • So mad as in nutjob, not mad as in angry. Or maybe mad as in foaming at the mouth rabid?

    • That’s a mistranslation, Bloke. The original Latin, quem deus vult perdere, prius dementat, actually means The gods would destroy anyone who is nuts about the Prius.

      • The statement dates to Greek plays at the dawn of literature, centuries before the Roman.

  11. What government would be interested in murdering such scientists.
    Most of the governments with the resources to pull of such wetwork are solidly in the warmest camp.

  12. I wouldn’t say that he’s “looney”, just that he’s a few bricks shy. His barge pole doesn’t quite reach the bottom of the canal.

  13. Big Oil doesn’t need a lobby: It stands on its own two feet. Unlike, oh, “climate science”…

  14. Check out the “Death by big oil!” comment on his white board. Is that paranoia or what?

  15. OK then.
    Some folks here seem to be missing the big picture. Dr. Wadhams may be using misdirection to throw the police off the scent. It is possible he is behind the elimination of all the rest of the UK experts in his field. Always look to who benefits. And as a scientist he just may have borrowed some lab’s lightening machine to take out the one guy. As a potential murder suspect he may be trying to make himself look victimized.
    Yes sir, we may have the makings of a major motion picture on our hands here. 🙂

    • I’ve come across a few large van de Graaff generators: there was a large one in the Science Museum in South Kensington which was fired up twice daily – a 750kV spark IIRC. Even larger was the one at AERE Harwell, which could produce 5MV – but I never saw the spark escape the building in which it was housed.

      • Clever misdirection lures the victim into the generator lab and one ZAP!! later the body is loaded into the boot and dumped in a convenient patch of heather. Be sure to mock up the usual environmental tell-tales of a lightning strike and viola!, the perfect crime.

    • LoL LoL LoL why do we find nutters sooo funny? We should be showing pity – but that is not what humans do …NEXT please

    • “This year likely to be hottest on record.”
      …because they’re taking climate temperature measurements from the middle of a forest fire? I bet that one day with a high of 568.4°F really raises the monthly average. ○¿●

  16. Dishonesty; fabrication; smearing; promulgation of junk science (notably the false “97 per cent Consensus” claim); identity theft
    John Cook is an Australian blogger who runs a website called Skeptical Science whose raison d’etre is to rubbish skeptics (or as I’d spell them, sceptics). His hobbies include dressing up in Nazi uniforms and identity theft (he has just been exposed as having impersonated online a sceptical scientist called Lubos Motl). I pass no judgement on such activities: I like a chap with a bit of hinterland. But I do think the seriousness with which his dodgy papers and articles are treated by everyone from the left-liberal media to President Obama is somewhat misplaced. And that when a man of his predilections accuses someone else on Twitter of being “creepy” it does make you wonder when he last looked in the mirror.
    From Brietbart.

  17. Better send out a call to Sky Captain on the Marconi at once!
    Prof. Totenkopf is up to no good for sure.
    Ha ha

  18. In the Times it says “A Cambridge professor has said that assassins may have murdered scientists who were seeking to reveal how rapidly global warming was melting Arctic ice.”
    It sounds a bit different to real scientists who would be trying to test the truth or not of a specific hypothesis. And as such he does a disservice to his sadly departed colleagues.

  19. I find Wadhams’ suspicions perfectly plausible.
    1) “Professor Laxon fell down a flight of stairs at a New year’s Eve party …”. Without the profligate use of fossil fuels, very few residences would be built that require a flight of stairs. The increased wealth, stronger building materials and labor-saving construction equipment made possible by fossil fuels has increased the number of two and even three story residences enormously compared to pre-industrial times. Back then everyone lived in single-story cottages with dirt floors — much softer to cushion any fall.
    2) “Dr Giles died when she was in collision with a lorry when cycling to work in London.” Hello! Did any one notice that little word “lorry”? If everyone else in London were walking or riding bicycles, collisions would be much less serious and Dr. Giles would most likely escaped with just some scrapes and bruises, or no injuries at all. Only with fossil fuels can you build and power these monstrous kinetic killers called “lorries” and then turn them loose on paved roads to reach lethal speeds and crush the life out of pedestrians and cyclists.
    3) “Dr Boyd is thought to have been struck by lightning while walking in Scotland.” I smell a cover-up here: “thought to have been” indeed. But even if we buy that, the fingerprints of dirty energy are all over this. As Al Gore (PBUH) has been saying for years, we have dirty weather from using dirty fuels. Severe weather — including lighting storms — is becoming more common, so of course more people are being hit by lighting.
    Maybe executives of Big Oil didn’t actually order these hits, but this might just as well have. It’s only a matter of time before Big Oil kills us all, but the hits will be disguised as accidents, disease and natural disasters.
    Trigger Warning: the foregoing may be unsuitable for the sarcasm-impaired.

    • Someone needs to revise the game of Clue to handle these Big-Oil-related deaths: near a loch; with lightening; by Mr. Chevron.

    • You seem to have struggled with finding the direct relationship between the Big Oil funded global warming denialist conspiracy and the death of a man from a lightening strike in Scotland.
      Perhaps I can help.
      Prior to the intervention of denialists the alarmists were racing ahead covering the countryside of Scotland with large wind-turbines.
      Due to the height of wind turbines and their incorporated lightening conductors it is impossible to be struck by lightening when near to one.
      The wind turbine takes the hit for you.
      However, Big Oil conspired to foil the turbine roll-out, by planting anti-onshore-wind scare stories in the Daily Mail.
      And now as a result of this plot a good man has died.
      Exactly as Big Oil planned, whilst meeting in their evil lair under a volcano.

  20. Did he check where John Cook (now known as Cooky Biggs) was at the time?
    I heard a rumour that someone wearing a Nazi Uniform and calling themselves ‘Lubo’ was seen in the vicinity at the time of these deaths.
    /sarc

  21. If man can control where lightning strikes, then controlling global temps should be a piece of cake.

  22. you have to love The Times for juxtaposing the article with another headlined: “This year likely to be hottest on record”. subtle, what?
    Wadhams’ tale is picked up in the Booker article comments:
    25 July: UK Telegraph: Christopher Booker: How Arctic ice has made fools of all those poor warmists
    The belief that the ice was vanishing has been for the warmists the ultimate poster-child for their cause
    In 2007, with the aid of scientists such as Wieslaw Maslowski and Peter Wadhams, the BBC and others were telling us that the Arctic would be totally “ice free by 2013” (the Independent even cleared its front page to announce that the ice could all have disappeared within weeks).
    By 2011, the BBC’s science editor Richard Black was telling us that the ice would “probably be gone within this decade”. In 2012, his colleague Roger Harrabin was reporting that the sea ice was now melting so fast that more had vanished that summer than “at any time since satellite records began”…
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/11763272/How-Arctic-ice-has-made-fools-of-all-those-poor-warmists.html

  23. “Climate scientist fears murder by hitman”
    ========
    Never a thought given to the hardships endured by the hitter during the set-up.
    Typical.

  24. If he’s so convinced that what he’s predicting is so serious with deadly consequences for mankind, why is he smiling his way through the interview? Creepy.

  25. “Dr Boyd is thought to have been struck by lightning while walking in Scotland.”
    Reminds me of an old joke. Three retired businessmen were in a rest home and explained how each made his fortune. The first had a store, but wasn’t doing very well. A fire broke out and burned the building to the ground, after which he collected the insurance. The second guy also had a business that was failing, but a water pipe burst, flooded the building and he also collected the insurance. The third guy explained how he had a business in Florida, it wasn’t doing very well, when a hurricane came through and destroyed it; he also collected the insurance. The first two guys looked at each other, then at the third guy and asked, “How did you manage to make a hurricane?”
    So, how did big oil manage to generate lightning?

  26. He keeps saying ‘this is where we should be spending our money’, ie. studies on the release of methane from the Siberian continental shelf. Who does he think should be paid to do this [research]?

  27. Big Oil? Oh for Pete’s sake. Why would “big oil” assassinate warmists when the warmist’s position continues to fall apart? If you want a realistic ‘conspiracy’, why not the greater possibility that these people were killed because they were going to publically admit the warmist position is wrong?

    • If I pay (and I do) $65,000.00/gal for an exotic boutique petro-chemical or I pay $2-3.00/gal for gasoline, where do you think ‘big-oil’ would rather send their limited petroleum feedstocks?

  28. I notice from watching the video, that Prof. Peter Wadhams is extremely keen on blinking. He seems to like blinking several times per second.
    As an ad hoc experiment, me and my mirthful partner Carol have tried imitating his rate of blinking and we felt…well…blinkered.
    Blinkered and befuddled. Befuddled and confused.
    I recommend this experiment to anyone.
    Watch a few minutes of the footage and then try to imitate the facial expression and blinking and see how you feel.
    But seriously, the man has made the mistake of making a very public and very precise prediction. He has staked his reputation upon a clear prediction which can be checked against reality.
    This was a big mistake.
    Reality has not acted in his interest.
    Predictions should always be vague and tentative, and coded in uncertain terminology.
    Now, Prof. Wadhams is the victim of his own over-confidence.
    He had deeply embarrassed himself.
    And in the process, he has gone stark raving mad.
    Maybe he needs a holiday.
    Not for his benefit.
    But for ours!!!

  29. OK. What’s crazier?
    The Times reporting his paranoia?
    Or the Guardian reporting his catastrophism?
    Both are ridiculous.

  30. “Our children only have a future if we take action now”. Given that very little action is being taken, and not likely, our children should be terified of dying from global warming. Poor kids!
    “Everything is increasing exponentially”
    “no-one is doing anything because of cowardice” Oh, just like we’ve never bothered to address any of the world’s problems in the past or find any solutions.
    “There are now vey few politicians or statesmen with credibility. The only person who has real respect and unquestionable moral status in the world, is the Pope.” (does that include his views on birth control, homosexuality and dealing with paedophile priests?).
    Anyone who is convinced all peer-published academics are infallable and morally sound geniuses should watch this.

    • Actually, Francis has taken strong action on the latter matter. (Should have been done decades ago.)

  31. the little i heard of the following on radio this morning sounded more like another CAGW scary story to me:
    AUDIO: 25 July: BBC Science Hour: Arctic Ice
    A new paper just published in Nature Geoscience shows that in 2013, which was a slightly cooler summer than average, arctic ice had grown, by 41% on the previous year. The study, uses data from ESA’s Cryosat 2, which incorporates not just the surface area of ice, but the all-important number – the volume. Adam examines the results with Rachel Tilling from University College London…
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02xdr1h
    TWO POLAR PIECES ON LAST WEEK’S PROGRAM:
    AUDIO: 11 July: BBC Science Hour:
    Global Warming and the Arctic Tundra
    An international team of scientists, led by the University of Edinburgh, has carried out one of the biggest ever studies of key vegetation in the Arctic tundra. It found “strong evidence” that “dramatic” changes in the region are being driven by climate warming, researchers said. Tundra shrubs, which act as a barometer of the Arctic environment, were found to grow more when temperatures are warmer. But the study also suggested that increased shrub growth, driven by recent and future warming in the Arctic, could cause further warming in the area and the planet as a whole. Taller shrubs can prevent snow from reflecting heat from the sun back into space, warming the Earth”s surface. They can also influence soil temperatures and thaw permafrost…
    Ice cores
    Next year, scientists from around the world will start to place glacial ice core samples from across the world in a vault in Antarctica, an underground ice tunnel near the Concordia Research Station. Marnie Chesterton investigates…
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02w8y8k

  32. Wadhams is a nut but what I find interesting is that The Times even published this drivel. I know that standards have fallen low in so many journalistic quarters, but this article puts The Times on the level of supermarket tabloids that blare headlines about alien abductions and fictitious celebrity scandals.

    • Wadhams is an aggressive nutter from one of the most prestigious universities on the planet – and that sets him apart.
      He’s been roughing up people using his status as a shield / weapon for too long and this is probably only a minor inconvenience before he gets pensioned off…. to provide rent a quotes for the usual suspects….
      Can’t say I wish him well – but do thank him for a steaming plate of schadenfreude – which I hope is added to with early retirement and an “I love me” jacket next week.

    • Perhaps the Times is starting to have doubts about the whole global warming thing.
      Start by pointing out some of the lead supporters are not altogether sane, then start asking harder questions about the science.

  33. Professor Wadhams need to turn in his PhD and resign his professorship. Apparently, he hasn’t heard of insurance speak – “Act of God” or “accident.”
    Do you suppose that perhaps God, Buddha, Allah, Krishna, Jesus Christ, and even random fate are opposed to AGW?

    • If he is going to pretend to be an Arctic ice specialist, he also needs to look at the biomarkers that indicate that for the first 2/3 or so of the Holocene, Arctic sea was mostly a perennial winter occurrence.
      Arctic sea ice is anomalously high compared to all but the last few hundred years of the current interglacial.

    • Yes, in fact Prof. Peter Wadhams’ keen insight has led him to connect the dots and discover a heretofore unknown conspiracy. The only problem is that he has fingered the wrong suspects. Clearly what Wadhams has revealed is that God herself is a CAGW skeptic. Now, that should certainly be fodder for headlines…

  34. i referred to the second BBC Science Show prog with 2 polar pieces as being “last week’s program” when it’s 2 weeks old; however, i heard it last week when it was being repeated.

  35. This post is not a fine hour as far as I am concerned. Loved ones died and loved ones had grieving to do. This kind of thing can cause that grief to come back as if it were fresh. We should not be a party to it.

    • wrong adress, pamela –
      it’s saturday times + the guardian who are seeking riots by fabricating
      ‘conspiracy ideation’, like murder plots from ‘big oil’
      ____
      these are the adresses that you should be concernd with.
      Hans

  36. Dr Boyd was hit by lightning. Only a Climatologist would believe that professional hitmen have Tesla lightning generators and weather control devices.

  37. “Over the past few years the Arctic expert, Professor Peter Wadhams, has strongly predicted an ‘ice-free’ Arctic no later than 2016. Late this year he changed it to 2020 without apparently giving an explanation.”
    And he gets paid

      • ‘Other People’s Money’ a marvelous Thatcherism. Heh, knowledge of which is sometimes a clue to ideology. ‘People’ have rarely heard of it; ‘Other People’ are sick to death with it.
        Not measuring you by this oft unreliable metric.
        =========================

      • Oops, P. G. Wodehouse has precedent:
        “There was the usual announcement that the President – that old Good Time Charlie, bless his heart – was planning to spend a billion dollars of other people’s money on something or other,……”
        from ‘Laughing Gas’, copyrighted in 1936.
        ====================

  38. No doubt the good Professor has evidence to back up his claims. I’m sure the output of his computer models detailing the unfortunate demises of his colleagues will be available for all to see any day now, actual code will of course be withheld.
    (Yes, I was being very sarcastic here. I am saddened by the untimely passing of these people.)

  39. Anonymous lorry driver: Am I accused of murder?
    Anonymous person at top of stairs; Am I accused of murder?
    Anonymous lighting bolt thrower; Yeah, it was me. He was waving around a 1 iron, and I had to prove I could hit it.

  40. Prof Wadhams has said that that 97% percent of computer models have predicted that all warmist climate scientists will be assassinated by 2020 – so who is laughing now?
    Probably still us…..

  41. Warning, I have been drinking.
    Sigh, I think Professor Peter Wadhams may be right. First I cannot see any “human” bothering to take out these people. They have better things to do and the governments involved do not see it in their interest.
    This leaves only one possibility Divine intervention. No please hear me out.
    Think of the Pope”s resent actions. Did the “great Watchmaker” finally decide to intervene? Perhaps. Remember the “G’ guy is all Knowing,all righteous, He is the past, the present, and future. So He saw what was going on and said to himself, hmm I need to rescue these people before they make even greater dunderheads of themselves. So he calls them home, to sit by his right or left toe. Remember time doesn’t matter to the “G” guy. Myself I’m Byzantine Catholic, and though under the Pope, we are Very Byzantine.
    Now I think that if Professor Peter Wadhams really believes that someone is out to get pro-AGW people, he should alert His Holiness that it might not be the Oil Companies, but someone none of us want to get playful with. (If the Watchmaker does exist.) And His Holiness should recant.
    Now off to the fridge for a beer.
    michael

  42. One was killed by ‘big truck’, one by ‘big fall’ and one by ‘big spark’
    The last one is best, he was killed by a lightning strike while on a walk in Scotland. Maybe ‘big oil’ can control the atmosphere after all.
    Just off to double up on my tinfoil hat so ‘big oil’ can’t control my mind. Two layers, one with the shiny side pointing in so they can’t read my thoughts. One pointing with it pointing out so they can’t implant them.

    • [quote]The last one is best, he was killed by a lightning strike while on a walk in Scotland. Maybe ‘big oil’ can control the atmosphere after all.[/quote]
      To be fair, the article said [quote]”Dr Boyd is [u]thought[/u] to have been struck by lightning while walking in Scotland.”[/quote]
      which either means that they’re speculating or it’s really really bad reporting. I suppose it’s POSSIBLE that he was abducted, zapped to hell in an electric chair or similar, and thrown where-ever he was found. Not likely, but not impossible for big-oil. 🙂

  43. Obviously in the one case it wasn’t a lightening bolt.
    It was a CO2 laser mounted on a fossil-fueled drone with carbon composite wings and body.
    In the stairs case, graphite was likely spread all over the top step. (A very slippery form of carbon.)
    In the lorry case, if the lorry had been battery powered she would have heard it coming.
    Oh wait. Maybe not. That one was probably an accident.

  44. The impression I get from watching him on the above video is of senility.
    He says in his introduction that he’s been studying the arctic and antarctic oceans for 40 years, yet watch at the 10:00 minute mark of the video as he is discussing methane release north of Siberia. He turns to the arctic map behind him and points to (close enough) the East Siberian Sea. Then he points further west to (correctly) the Kara Sea, but then points even further west to the Berents Sea and calls it the Laptev Sea. Professor, the Laptev Sea is EAST of the Kara Sea, not west of it. My Gosh, if he doesn’t even have basics like that still in his grasp then what else is there to trust from him? And it wasn’t a careless misstep either because a few moments later he repeats his geographical confusion placing the Laptev west of the Kara.

    • It took him more than two -2- years to realize that there is someone after him, allegedly. That isn’t what I call ‘quick thinking’.

  45. Wadhams’ belief that three accidental deaths of climate scientists were the result of a hitman is most likely a statistical cluster. If you look at the data enough, such clusters pop up all over the place. For instance the second and third US Presidents both died on July 4th 1826, the fiftieth anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. The fifth President died on the same day five years later. There is no evidence to suggest this is anything more than a cluster.
    It says a lot about how Wadhams, Lewandowsky & Cook look at cause and effect in complex data. They have strong opinions about how the world is structured, so anything that deviates from this perception is the result of human design. There must be a reason for things happening’ so somebody must be responsible. Random clusters, or things that we might night be able to explain due to inadequate information, are possibilities that never enter their heads. But to really understand the complexities of climate, being able to grapple with the issues of statistical anomalies, personal bias and the limits of knowledge are a prerequisite.

    • Also a facet of Wadhams and his ilk thinking they are way more important than the really are.
      Its an EGO thing.
      I mean, Wadhams and his predictive ability can only HELP the sceptical/realist argument… why would anyone want to get rid of them.
      Ridicule is a far better weapon!
      I reckon.. let them keep making predictions, fun for all. !.. 🙂

    • If Dr. Wadham would follow RGB’s posts, he would realize that p-happens, sometimes with tragic consequences. But then again, he probably would have toned down his ice predictions too.

  46. This comment stream is typical Climate Change Scientists Assasinated Denialist bilge.
    All the computer models prove that they were assasinated.
    …_

  47. ‘The lorry driver involved, James Matovu, was described by the coroner as having been “oblivious” to having struck Dr. Giles, and stopped his vehicle once an off-duty police officer flagged him down as he drove along Victoria Street.
    The Standard reports that he ran back to the junction where the collision had happened, the newspaper adding: “members of the public tried to stop him seeing the horror of the scene.”’
    You’re literate, Pamela – not running solely on Oestrogen?
    Hans

  48. The coroner Dr Shirley Radcliffe,
    sitting on the inquest of Dr Katherine Giles, who was killed while riding her bike by a left-turning tipper truck in Victoria last April, says cyclists have to be aware of the danger of riding up the inside of lorries.
    _____
    You understand, Pamela – the english ‘turning left’ is the normal ‘turning right’.
    ____
    And it’s the NORMAL behaviour of governmental paid to go on bicycle from HOME in a world metropol to WORK in a world metropol.
    Luxury that 99 per cent of world inhabitants can only dream of.
    ____
    and they have the arrogance not to care about traffic – its always the usual suspect lorrie drivers on their stinking diesels: /who make the world going round!/
    Never heard of ‘Pamela good doers’.
    It’s always beeing ‘Pamelas hypocrits’.
    Hans

  49. Its nice to be skeptical, but too much conspiracy quickly becomes a psychosis.
    If you spend any time in the East, you will quickly find that everything is controlled by Mossad. You can have a simple car crash in Dubai, and the word on everyone’s lips will be that Mossad arranged it.
    Loonies, the lot of them.

  50. Peculiar lack of response to this article by the usual warmist trolls. Is it possible that they have a sense of shame?

  51. Yeah because these three were the big triple threat to the oil industry.
    It constantly astounds me how intelligent people can sometimes be so damn stupid.

  52. Just has well climate ‘science’ provides a happy home for such people, because otherwise would be hanging around bus stops annoying others we there mad rantings.

  53. Not only will we direct the weather to strike you with lightning if we don’t like you but we will hide the heat where you’ll never find it. — Big Oil

  54. In the unlikely event someone still wonders what is the big deal, let me introduce you to an interesting scientific question posed by Lewandowsky where he presents an argument that can mean two very different things, and reveals an intense bias because of his choice:
    (from: http://www.shapingtomorrowsworld.org/lewandowskyLib.html)
    “if you are a victim of an assault, you are between 4 and 5 times more likely to be fatally shot if you had a gun available than if you didn’t have a gun”
    This can be restated as “IF you are between 4 and 5 times more likely to be shot, you are also more likely to have a gun available.”
    It is a correlation with no clear causation (it is probably circular: living in a high crime area persuades people to buy guns which also persuades criminals to buy guns and it becomes an “arms race”).
    As we now see, one might claim “X” percent of conservatives believe in conspiracies; but what is the “control group”? How many warmists believe in conspiracies? Nearly all it would seem — Koch is behind all denial. Now of course we have conspiracy to eliminate ice scientists in the UK.

  55. Peter Wadhams is also a scholar of psi-ology
    http://www.spiritoday.com/cambridge-professor-peter-wadhams-on-matters-of-life-and-death-and-higher-consciousness/
    “Peter: Yes, I have always been interested in psychical research”
    Consider the implications here:
    “Impossibility of getting even conclusively positive results published in a mainstream journal. Results is a Catch 22 – this research can’t be anything but fraudulent because it isn’t published in a mainstream journal; because it can’t be published it must be fraudulent”.
    Same with skeptical climate science.
    “Peter: Yes, I have precognitive dreams occasionally, and in one case a very vivid one that preceded an unusual event by 10 days. This was published in “Paranormal Review” (newsletter of the SPR), and it was such a clear case that I feel we have to really rethink our concepts of time and causality, if an event can be foreseen in detail 10 days ahead.”
    The problem of course is not knowing which dreams are going to come true in 10 days (or ever) from those that don’t. It is like a climate model — one of them might be somewhat correct but there’s no way to know which one until after the event forecast has happened (or not).

  56. The learned professsor also thinks that there’s still an outside chance that the Arctic will be icefree this summer and so fulfill his own outlandish predictions. I guess that the stress caused by the uncooperativeness of the sea ice has left its marks on his mind.
    Bizarre.

  57. At Real Climate Comment by Jim Hunt — 19 Jul 2015 @ 4:12 PM
    “I’ve arrived here somewhat late in the day via a link from the Arctic Sea Ice Forum. In all the circumstances perhaps I might repeat here what I recently said over there.
    In a personal communication Prof. Wadhams informs me that:
    “My SIPN prediction is an outlier but it is in fact what is predicted by the 5-year trend in ice volume in September. In 2013 and 2014 the volume in summer came in above this trend, but since then we have started a new El Nino which tends to increase air temperatures more. I am just staking this area out as a marker, and expect to be shot down in flames”.
    [Response: Of course he will be. This is posturing, not science. – gavin]”
    So there you go?

  58. Peter Wadham makes a rather serious accusation regarding this article. According to him, not only does he not believe what this article claims he believe, the author of the article, Ben Webster, violated a promise of confidentiality in writing the piece. If that’s true, Webster acted in an incredibly unethical manner unbefitting any journalist.
    Basically, what Wadham claims is Webster contacted him, and they had a discussion about the Arctic. During it, Webster asked if there were any other people he should talk to. In response to that, Wadham told him about the coincidental deaths of the three scientists. In doing so, he admitted he had initially thought they weren’t just accidents due to a near-death experience of his own around the same time, but, and this is a key point, he changed his mind when their deaths were investigated.
    If Wadham had a near death experience around the same time three people in a relatively small died, it’s understandable he’d worry there was some connection. Having a bit of an irrational reaction to nearly dying is understandable, and recognizing it was all just coincidence due to investigations showing it was is a sign of a healthy attitude. If he told Webster all this, Webster should have never ran this story.
    Especially since according to Wadham, he told all this to Webster off the record, and Webster agreed he wouldn’t use any of it in a story without talking to Wadham about it first. If that’s true, Webster flat out lied, broke confidentiality and ran a story he knew to be false. And because of that, Wadham’s reputation got trashed, and this site helped inadvertantly play a role in trashing it.
    Now, maybe Wadham’s complaint isn’t true, but… maybe it is. If so, he’s owed a huge apology.

    • Poor Brandon- always the first to parse against skeptics, and even quicker to defend climate kooks.

  59. They did not die of mysterious causes at all. Nor were they murdered.
    The accuser is a loon. Wacked enough to believe end of the world apocalyptic claptrap… Oh wait, he *makes* end of the world apocalyptic clap trap….

Comments are closed.