Guest essay by Eric Worrall
People who believe they are on a mission to save the world frequently behave as if their great mission excuses their personal failings.
FIXING SEXISM AT THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL PANEL ON CLIMATE CHANGE
A sexist remark at a recent meeting prompted some soul-searching among the world’s top climate scientists. How can they prevent women’s expertise from being excluded?
SOPHIE YEO
At the recent meeting of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the science body of the United Nations, there was an unusual announcement halfway through the week: a reminder to the scientists present that this was a meeting of experts, and that everyone’s expertise must be respected.
…
In one instance, Friederike Otto, an associate professor at Oxford University specializing in extreme weather events, was being introduced to a group of men. She’d said her name and where she was from—she was wearing her lead author badge—when one of her interlocutors asked who her supervisor was, implying that she must still be a graduate student. In fact, she’s deputy director of Oxford University’s Environmental Change Institute.
As a young female scientist, Otto says she’s familiar with these kinds of insinuations, but this particular incident left her speechless. “I was just particularly annoyed by it, because it was at the IPCC meeting, at a lead author meeting, where clearly the setting is we’re all equal,” she says. “I should have asked him who his supervisor is.” In a subsequent email exchange between the two, Otto says, the male scientist was reluctant to acknowledge any wrongdoing.
…
Read more: https://psmag.com/environment/fixing-sexism-at-the-intergovernmental-panel-on-climate-change
In 2015, former head of the IPCC Rajenda Pachauri was forced to resign over allegations of serious sexual harassment.
Pachauri’s alleged misbehaviour obviously went well beyond the odd sexist comment. But the decision by people close to Pachauri not to speak up over the extended period of Pachauri’s alleged abuses should be a serious concern. Maybe people close to Pachauri didn’t value their female colleagues enough to put their own careers at risk, by publicly demanding Pachauri cease his alleged deviant behaviour.
I agree with the author that sexism exacerbates the risk of disregarding the contribution of colleagues who are the target of that sexism. But the alleged rampant sexism problem has deeper implications for the scientific integrity of the IPCC and other climate groups.
Sexism is effectively a nasty form of bullying. The kind of people who think it is funny to bully women for being female likely also have no qualms about bullying their colleagues over scientific issues – especially colleagues who hold unpopular scientific views. But then we knew that already from Climategate.
prompted some soul-searching among the world’s top climate scientists…..
typical climate science….start out with the impossible
Talking of the impossible, what ever happened to Patchuri’s prosecution? Seems to have gone amazingly quiet in the last couple of years. Seems he was charged and then the corrupt Indian legal system just decided to let matters lie.
I suppose in a country where gang raping 12 years is only just getting police attention, you can’t expect much progress on simple work place sexual harassment.
Talking of the impossible, I thought you were referring to climate scientists not having souls.
Well, do they? I do know they don’t have a conscience.
There are mines everywhere…
+1 And they are adding more every day.
It’s even worse in France, where there are Mimes everywhere.
A mind is a terrible thing to waste.
A mime, not so much.
So….is the problem at these conferences males heating up or females heating up?
(With the occasional femailman heating up.)
I wouldn’t mind a little femail every now and then, been awhile.
Sure beats Email…
Here’s some femail goldminor:)). That preening young associate professor seems to think an older man should know what an expert she is even though she’s under 30. He was presuming she is young and without a lot of experience or research under her belt – and he would be right. And besides, who dare question anyone on the climate science bandwagon, or mention lead authors somefimes don’t have their PhD’s yet?
… she says. “I should have asked him who his supervisor is.”
Yes.
And then move on, like maybe a petty faux pas is beneath the offence threshold of a deputy director of Oxford University.
We don’t know that it was an innocent mistake. Perhaps the person asking the question intended it to be a sexist insult.
We don’t know that it wasn’t either.
I’ve met a lot of so called feminists who go around looking for an excuse to be outraged.
In liberal circles, the most outraged person wins.
Liberal feminists always defend women….unless those women happen to be Conservatives !! ( or anywhere right of the extreme left ! )
Just ask Hillary and Slick Willy.
Or perhaps he was just an old guy who thinks nobody under 60 could be a lead author.
oh please for God’s sake……in another 20 years she will be wishing she still looked young
…perhaps the person asking the question did not intend it to be sexist at all
give me a f’in break….stop encouraging more snowflakes
That reminds me of the apocryphal tale of the young man who made the mistake of opening a door for an ardent feminist.
“Don’t treat me like I’m helpless, because of my sex,” she snapped. “I’m perfectly capable of opening my own doors.”
“Oh, I’m sorry, ma’am,” replied the young man. “I didn’t open the door for you because of your sex, I opened it for you because of your age.”
Perhaps a more potent reply might be:
“I opened the door out of respect for my elders.”
That melts the ice much better.
Just in case she’s a cougar
That’s funny, but thanks for reminding NOT to open doors for young women. They can bloody well open it for themselves after I let the door close to their toes. Only for the elderly that may need it.
On snowflakery:
Thank you Latitude.
The snowflakes are finding more and more reasons to take real or false offence at the slightest of slights.
I suggest that people who are this uber-sensitive are far too fragile for their own good, and should stay safely indoors and never communicate with anyone.
This especially applies to sugar-frosted snowflakes, the ultra-uber-fragile among us, who need to be completely protected – especially from themselves.
Maybe it is because of our education system, which is dominated by leftist ideologues who have little real-life experience. These imbeciles cling to Harpo-Marxist fantasies that killed several hundred million people during the 20th Century and destroyed the freedoms of billions more.
Can you imagine members of the Great Generation, who suffered through the Great Depression, fought in World War 2 and Won the Peace believing Al Gore’s global warming hysteria?
Can you imagine the current crop of ultra-delicate “snowflakes”, who take great offence at the slightest slight (real or imaginary), interacting with veterans and civilians who survived the horrors of WW2?
My first degree is in Mining Engineering, a profession that is not known for uber-sensitivity.
In my career I have managed two armed invasions where my people were held at gunpoint, and everybody got to go home unharmed. I have been through numerous police, army, border, and “other” armed checkpoints. About the only thing that offends me now is when someone points a gun at me – and that I still find offensive.
I recently took a highly public stand to shut down a dangerous critical sour gas project that could have killed up to 50,000 people or more – a potential Hiroshima-scale disaster. I did find the criminal conduct of the thugs who ran this project to be offensive – so maybe I am becoming a bit over-sensitive in my old age.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/03/18/approaching-grand-solar-minimum-could-cause-global-cooling/#comment-2307521
One of my buddys is a quadriplegic, in a wheelchair now for about 30 years from a car accident, and the challenges he faces daily to just survive are daunting. His bones are brittle and he suffers frequent fractures – also painful muscle seizures for which he takes powerful meds. When he is not in pain, and even when he is, he cracks “crip” jokes about his afflictions. He makes everyone else look PC.
I think that the only proper response to these politically correct snowflakes is to dismiss them with scorn. I do not support rudeness or abuse, but those uber-snowflakes who seek to find offence where none exists are not worthy of respect or consideration – at best, they should be ignored as irrelevant cringing imbeciles.
Best personal regards, Allan
“I do not support rudeness or abuse,”
So pleased to hear it.
“but those uber-snowflakes who seek to find offence where none exists are not worthy of respect or consideration – at best, they should be ignored as irrelevant cringing imbeciles.”
Oh dear, maybe you have a different definition of rude to me.
Simple Simon:
I am so utterly devastated if I upset your delicate psyche. My apology follows, in Latin and in English:
Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa…
Instead of getting out the willow branch and flogging my back, I’m going to have a congratulatory glass of Scotch.
“A drop of water to release the serpents…” … Aaaaahh!
Your humble servant Sir! 🙂
___________________________________________________
Confíteor Deo omnipoténti
et vobis, fratres,
quia peccávi nimis
cogitatióne, verbo,
ópere et omissióne:
mea culpa, mea culpa,
mea máxima culpa.
Ideo precor beátam Maríam semper vírginem,
omnes angelos et sanctos,
et vos, fratres,
oráre pro me ad Dóminum Deum nostrum.
I confess to almighty God
and to you, my brothers and sisters,
that I have greatly sinned,
in my thoughts and in my words,
in what I have done and in what I have failed to do,
through my fault, through my fault,
through my most grievous fault;
therefore I ask blessed Mary ever-Virgin,
all the Angels and Saints,
and you, my brothers and sisters,
to pray for me to the Lord our God.
To be clear Simon:
This feigned-hurt reaction of the snowflakes, who claim to be deeply wounded by the slightest of slights, is a form of micro-aggression. It is a dishonest attempt to label the other person as a bully, and is a tactic used by people of low integrity to shift the topic of debate to their advantage.
Regards, Allan
My thoughts exactly Latitude.
Who really cares?
A woman held a door open for me yesterday. It is just common courtesy.
Maybe not so common now.
If we all cared for each other, it would be a good thing.
I always hold the door for someone behind me or at a close approach. Doesn’t matter who they are, it’s just nice to be nice.
And a smile and a thank you are bonuses.
ERIC :
GOOD……Glad to see them “falling-out” !
THAT has to be a good sign that there are tensions within their clique.
“We” should NOT be offering “Them” any sort of outside advice on how to
better behave and respect one another and amicably resolve any
such “bun-fight” !
I would gladly encourage any such dispute and antagonism and would
happily support the supply of ammunition to ANY IPCC internal conflict !!
It might be nasty….but it might be quicker and easier for the rest of “us”
if “They” self-destruct !!
Yes, Eric. It is possible she is just very young in appearance, which might also prompt the same comment/thought. Still, having experienced both ends of the spectrum I know it would be pretty irritating.
Maybe he thought that she was too young to be a lead author. That bit of shrapnel in her eyebrow signals a somewhat juvenile predilection (see picture). http://www.eci.ox.ac.uk/people/fotto.html
Of course, another possibility is that she came over as so stupid and scientifically uneducated that no reasonable person would assume she didn’t have a supervisor. Where global warming alarmists are concerned, and in the absence of further facts, I lean towards this view. This is probably not a genuine sexism story.
The problem is with Professor Otto and her excessive sensitivity to innocent statements which are intentionally construed by her to be sexist (or any other type of …ist).
Come on, if it was innocent, it was also bloody stupid. Read the badge!
Only if that questioner is a liar. It appears that at some point hence, she presented him with her damage and he “was reluctant” to play her little game…good for him! These numbskulls need to hear “up yours” more often, IMO.
If he continued and made a sexist insult, then surely this educated Associate Professor and Deputy Director could put him in his place.
There was a suggestion in Climategate to call Soon and Baliunas “Astrologers”, then lie it was a mistake if challenged. I think we need to take claims of deniable bullying seriously.
Perhaps we could start referring to them as “astrologers” (excusable as … “oops, just a typo”)…
That’s Alinsky #5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.”
A criminal conspiracy.
Since the ‘Metoo’ movement went from
Justice movement to Revenge movement, ‘Man the Oppressor’ must be eternally punished and emasculated. Except when we need you, which is constantly, to: fix the flat tire, fix the car, fix the plumbing, fix the appliances, fix the lawnmower, dig the fence posts, till the garden, build roads, build the bridges, build our house and buildings, build the dams, drive the heavy machinery, fix the heavy machinery carry heavy stuff, fight in the wars….
And also to be less masculine and bring out your feminine side… you know, and do everything women do too:))). Except when we need you to be tough and protective.. then you need to switch gears gears real quick…
Michael Mann always gets a free pass when it comes to Judith Curry.
Michael Jankowski :
YES…….and lots of “us” obviously agree with your comment !
HOWEVER…..Judith Curry is an articulate and confident person and if
SHE does not retaliate then THAT is her choice.
My Parents always told me:
” Don’t descend to their level in an argument ,they will simply drag you
down to their level and then BEAT YOU WITH EXPERIENCE !”
SO….I think that Judith Curry sets a brilliant example for others to emulate.
ALWAYS take the path less trodden…the higher plane.
RESPECT is earned , not conferred or ( as in Mann’s case ) assumed !
Those watching and listening to the pair of them MAKE THEIR OWN
DECISIONS and I doubt that Mann was the victor !
Trevor, although I agree, Trump is a perfect example of someone who fights back dirty. His style is starting to grow on me. Although I struggle to listen for more than 10 minutes, he has a certain flair for trolling the left.
The poor ole fanatics on the Left go nuts over *anything* Trump says now. I think they sense they are losing and they can’t stop it, and this really drives them off the deep end.
When the radical Left talks about “American values” they are really talking about radical Leftist “values”. The radical Left does not speak for the American people, they speak for a minority on the far Left. Their control of U.S. media gives them more impact than their numbers deserve.
Derg, there is an old ‘philosopher’ who pointed at that the first insult that goes unpunished, only encourages and begets more insults.
George W Bush took the position that responding in kind to insults was beneath the office of the POTUS. Look what that got him. His lack of response was taken as confirmation of the insults and negative talk about him.
Seems either way the critics can claim your actions vindicate their vindictive. Might as well do as Trump and give some verbal blows back in kind.
G.W. Bush and many of the Republican elites in Washington DC want to be loved by the Leftwing News Media, so they let the Left lie about them without fighting back and correcting the record.
We see the power of the Leftwing Media when they are out to get someone, Trump being the best example, and other Republicans are not prepared to stand up to such a firestorm of attacks, so they allow Leftwing lies to stand because they are afraid of the consequences of them fighting back.
Trump does not need to be loved by the Leftwing Media and he fights back and gives better than he gets, which just infuriates the Leftwing Media and they double-down on their character assasinations.
But to no effect so far. It may even be backfiring on them. Trump’s support among Republicans is as high as ever, and the hateful, lying Leftwing Media are alienating more people every day with their attempts to smear Trump.
The Leftwing Media truly are deranged, and their attacks on Trump are showing just how delusional they really are. They live in Trump Bizzarro World and think they are living in the real world.
Derg :
And I think it is JUST FINE for POTUS TRUMP to fight
however he sees fit !
He has intelligence , experience , wealth , status and confidence
PLUS the power of his office !
“They” are doing ” their” damnest to bring him to heel or to
bring him down but his PRIDE won’t let them !
I think that HE NEEDS and is WORTHY of “our” support and
I HOPE THAT THIS MESSAGE IS BEING CONVEYED TO
HIM , loud and clear, THAT HE HAS LOTS OF SUPPORTERS !
What he has achieved so far is considerable and what he may
achieve IN A SECOND TERM will be EVEN MORE SO !
With any luck , OTHER LEADERS ARE GOING TO FOLLOW
HIS EXAMPLE and “pull out of the Paris Accord ” ,
cease funding “STUPID SCIENCE” ( CAGW ) and DEFUND
the Universities that produce ACTIVISTS instead of
what they are supposed to be producing and what “our” society
really needs , BRILLIANT and PRICELESS ACADEMIC ACHIEVERS !
“He has intelligence (huh, covfefe that?), experience (not as a politician he doesn’t and it’s showing. Eaten alive by Putin the other day), wealth (even that seems to come and go), status (only with the rich who he supports and the hillbillies who are gonna work out soon they got nothing from him) and confidence (I’ll give you that one, although he looked lacking in it the other day with Putin.)
PLUS the power of his office (hopefully not for long)!
Trump runs circles around his opponents, domestic and foreign.
Six more years of Trump will put the USA and the world on the right track.
How is Mann behaving sexist? Bloody psychobitch, yes, but sexist?
Australia has had Penny Whetton as a lead author for IPCC reports and representing Australia in a senior role at the Paris agreement.
The lead article here might be too simple in concept.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penny_Whetton
Geoff.
Who is her undertaker?
Oh that is a neat way of calling someone old!
Even worse:
Who is his/her undertaker? The horror, an underlined missing female-expectation.
Oh, she IS transgendered? That was accidental of me. I was just thinking the sexism in using ‘her’ in here.
Just read Penny’s bio. I love the euphemism used there that she underwent “gender affirmation surgery”. It makes the genital mutilation of Peter so he could become Penny sound very benign.
Snide comments about transgender people seem distinctly tangential in a blog about climate chane
The “snidery”, I guess, was against that nauseatingly PC euphemism “gender affirmation surgery”.
Do you mean you had a sex-change operation? Then bloody say so!
Yes, dysphoria in general and gender dysphoria in particular will always exist. Those afflicted should be treated fairly. We don’t need to elevate their rights above all others, however, and metaphorically, we shouldn’t immediately promote them to pilot the ship.
Even “sex-change operation” is a misnomer, since your biological sex cannot actually be changed. Your reproductive equipment under the hood will still be there after you trade your penis for a cervix, or vice versa. Your chromosome pairing will still be the same XY or XX you started with. Your endocrine glands won’t spontaneously change the hormone cocktail they secrete.
Certain species of fish and amphibians are able to naturally switch sex under the right circumstances. Certain species of arthropods are naturally hermaphroditic. We are neither.
(We’ll skip over transvestitism, which is technically a birth defect.)
hmm to me it sounded as if she was born she
is now- but mightnt have been always? lesbian(the two kids)
and stuffed if I can work out wtf got reassigned as male I guess? from the pic supplied
frankly I dont give a sh*t and the world didnt need to know either.
another wanna be “special” snowflake ffs!
The Liability of Liberalism: Hypocrisy and/or No Sense of Humor
It’s almost universal among would-be tyrants that they’re immensely self-important and have a chronic inability to laugh at themselves.
There are numerous examples of the ‘right minded (left leaning)’ higher-purpose persons exhibiting egregious behaviour without apology, because they feel entitled to do so, getting a pass on the grounds of their self-perceived moral superiority.
As a young female scientist …
… among older male scientists, maybe ?
… where “Who’s your supervisor” could have the implication that “your youthful looks belie the usual image of a seasoned researcher”, … which could be taken as a compliment.
I would need more context to make the sexist call or not.
Hyper-sensitive, knee jerk reactions to innocent comments can happen, when people are poised to be defensive.
Yes, it could have been a compliment. Oh well.
Robert, but we’re in the business of fighting for truth against liberal left lies. If it means being slightly less than comprehensive in our fact checking, so what? Ends surely justify means here.
If it was intended as a compliment it was even more sexist – it wouldn’t be a compliment addressed to a man!* That is the definition of whether a remark is sexist, there doesn’t have to be an intention to offend.
*But these days it gets more complicated…..
“That is the definition of whether a remark is sexist, there doesn’t have to be an intention to offend.” Feminism is equality for women and so automatically excludes men. That’s sexist and offensive. There’s a perfectly acceptable, non-sexist word for equality: egalitarian.
Sexism works both ways, I read an article recently by a father who looks after his young child and suffers women either trying to help him or criticising him. It is actually a normal part of life and most of the time is harmless but irritating.
It is out of place in a workplace (especially among academics and scientists who are supposed to be intelligent) since it makes it hard for women who have earned the right to be respected in their field. You either have to let it pass and put up with being treated as an inferior or make a fuss and get labelled as a humourless feminist.
I qualified as a veterinary surgeon in the 70s when it was still a male dominated profession, I understand the problems.
Hey, you are right! I get comments from ladies that are sexist by nature when my younger girl has her tantrums in the shop. Never though about it, I was just tolerating them as well meaning experienced mamás.
Pompous Git : ( obviously one with a self-effacing sense of humour ! )
EGALITARIAN………..Yes !
EGALITARIANISM……No ! ( the ….ISM makes it quite offensive !! )
Perhaps even room for some CHIVALROUS BEHAVIOUR !!??
Your’re right, it would NOT be a compliment to a YOUNG man coming from an OLDER man.
Are we, then, to deny all sexuality in our visceral responses to the biological realities surrounding us ?
An older man sees a younger woman. Maybe he has a slight attraction to her youthful femininity. He sees her at a conference of mostly older MEN. His possible slight attraction leads to a reflexive judgment that this YOUNG, somewhat attractive woman might be a student of some sort, because she does not fit the most common character of people at such events. He utters a question based on all this. He is a MAN. She is a WOMAN. Yes, it’s sexist. There are sexual differences. This is reality.
All she has to do is say, “I don’t have a supervisor. I am a participating expert”, enjoy his surprise, and move on. Score 1 for the young, female scientist, who states the facts and doesn’t whine about sexism in a very sexually charged world.
He should treat her as a colleague and her sex or attractiveness should not come into it.
Absolutely. And calling someone undergraduate in a situation like that is not a compliment. You’re seriously deluded if you think so.
” attractiveness should not come into it.” say’s Susan, hmmmmm, me thinks attractiveness will exist independent of anything including political correctness. In truth attractiveness is desirable and should be nurtured, very sad state when humanity regards attractiveness &/or sexuality as a bad thing.
If it was intended as a compliment it was a very cack-handed one and out of place in context.
The implied “I can’t believe anyone as good-looking / young as you could be …” is a social approach otherwise known a “making a pass”. Fine (?) over drinks or in the coffee break; not in meetings or seminars.
And what world do you live in?
Most men are pigs, some women are pigs.
Get over it.
“Most men are pigs, “…Umm…isn’t that a sexist comment, twice ? D’OH !
“Most men are pigs”……..”OBJECTION YOUR HONOR!!!!”
…..”Improper Character Evidence, Creation of a Material Fact, Lay Witness Opinion, Hearsay, Creation of a Material Facts”
…….”OVERRULED”!
The reference to pigs was only in a literary sense, nothing personal.
I got the hyperbole/joke, no need to side step.
“I am fond of pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals.”
– Winston Churchill
Pompous Git : ..besides which …PIGS are delicious in so many ways !
Pork cutlets , pork roasted on the spit , bacon , ham , pigs trotters ,
sausages , crackling……….but feminists tend to get stuck in one’s craw !
—-NOT Winston Churchill
The only reference to “pig-pen-pile-on” that I remember was by a female on the Howard Stern show…when it was on regular broadcast radio…
More like a portion of men are a bit over active when it comes to women. Maybe 50/50 as a guess.
“supervisor” is a Code word for, “who’s is paying your grants”, “how much” and “do they warrant you staying at the “Le Bristol Paris” when on travel. Otherwise they could not give a f*k if you are male or female. The old “tribal elders” are having a hard time dealing with a young whippersnapper, not sexism. Been happening for eons, move on.
Yeah, maybe it was about youth as much as about gender.
“Maybe people close to Pachauri didn’t value their female colleagues enough to put their own careers at risk, by publicly demanding Pachauri cease his alleged deviant behaviour.”
You could say the same for the current president of the United States.
…the other choice was a rapist
but please keep beating that drum
Yep, they both should be held to account. Comment?
Or Bill Clinton…he was getting BJ’s in the WhiteHouse with interns….on your tax dollar nonetheless. Cost per BJ?….more than you make in a year.
Yep, they both should be held to account. Comment?
Account of what?….having interactions with the opposite sex?
Sorry English second language for you. That means held responsible.
Trump was never a dirty sleaze bag forcing himself on some poor unsuspecting woman like Pachauri was known to do.
You have got to be kidding? He grabs woman when he feels like it and brags about it. What planet are you on?
Simon, the planet is called, ‘you have to include the entire quote’. “They let you grab them by the p—y”, is the quote. So your claim of “when he feels like it” is not accurate and suggests behavior which has never occurred!
Don’t be such a sheeple.
A planet where we ought to not take quotes grossly out of context in order to prop up our prejudices. You should stop by for a visit some time.
As always, Simon see’s what he is told to see and nothing will change his mind until he’s told to.
Re-read the quote, that’s not what he said.
OF course there is no evidence that Trump has done anything to be ashamed of, but that never stopped you.
There are numerous woman have said there is. Do o not believe them?
you
“There are numerous woman have said there is. Do you not believe them?”
Only one woman has charged that Trump sexually assaulted her. She claimed she and Trump were on an airplane together and that Trump fondled her breasts. Trump has a witness that says Trump never went near the woman.
The woman does not have a current lawsuit filed against Trump. If she had a case, any number of liberal lawyers would be more than happy to represent her. So, no I don’t believe her.
None of the other women claim sexual assault.
The Clinton Criminal Enterprise was involved in stirring all this up. Which means I am highly skeptical of any and all of these accusations, most of which don’t amount to much anyway.
They had to scrap the bottom of the barrel to come up with the frivilous accusations they made. One woman, a beauty contestant in one of Trump’s contests, complained Trump told her she needed to lose weight. Now *that’s* serious!
One woman said Trump triggered her by asking her for her telephone number (which she gave him). Real serious allegations, don’t you see.
This was the best the Clinton Criminal Enterprise could come up with to try to smear Trump. I guess they figured that a large number of complaints would compensate for lack of substance.
Trump is innocent until proven guilty. As far as I’m concerned, Trump is innocent.
One woman said he physically groped her in a lift. Called a family member straight after to tell her story.
So you believe the woman who accuse Clinton (as I do) but you don’t believe the woman who accuse Trump? Hypocrite.
“Trump has a witness that says Trump never went near the woman.”
Trump also never said he had an affair now there is a tape. Trump lies daily.
Numerous women in Salem once accused their neighbors of witchcraft. They were believed.
Nullius en verba
A small handful of far left activists, some of home can’t demonstrate that they were ever in Trump’s presence.
So you believe the woman who accuse Clinton (as I do) but you don’t believe the woman who accuse Trump? Hypocrite.
So…. You find r*pe and physical s*xual assault the equivalent of a consensual relationship. Fool.
The IPCC is a cesspool for so many reasons. A disgusting group in a disgusting organization….the U.N.
The correct answer to “Who is your supervisor?” is “That would be me.”
You’re looking at her!
It’s pretty easy once you come to the realization that all of them are brainless dupes, regardless of gender. Presto! Equality!
Cue a reading of “Harrison Bergeron”.
This opens up a whole new avenue of attack. People have been fighting the Climate Wars for decades now, with limited (at best) success. A new approach is needed.
Take the Go-To strategy of the radical Left and apply it right back onto them.
Every time a Global Warming alarmist or Climate Change hysteric shows up, charge them as racist, sexist, Nazi, literally Hitler, and all the rest. Make the whole CAGW or Climate Change movement out as Racist and Bigoted. The radical Left will not be able to respond. They will be confused, flummoxed, and silenced. Ultimately they will be shattered as one of their most important causes gets short-circuited.
For anybody who is a bit uneasy at the thought of using such tactics, I say:
“Let the enemy choose the tactics of the battle.”
They have it coming.
…I’m in
Best to do this under a ‘nym, so that you can get two or more factions of SJWs to go after each other. I just love it when they start devouring their own young.
“Climate Change hysteric”
I like it. It just has a certain ring to it. A ring of truth.
“’Climate Change hysteric’ I like it.”
Oh dear…
Yeah? What about hysteresis?
“hysterisis: a. Gr. ὑστέρησις a coming short, deficiency, f. ὑστερέειν to be behind, come late, etc., f. ὕστερ-ος late.”
Sorry Crispin… It’s the OED and no, I had no input.
I have been telling you that environmentalism is racism for years. Their real concern in the excessive number of brown babies.
and black and yellow and poor white.
The climatocracy is the imperialist movement of our age.
In order to make sure they don’t fall into the sexism quagmire they need to put it in the bylaws to invite Judith Curry to ALL conferences and events!
Oh for goodness sake. Isn’t this woman educated enough and intelligent enough to fight her own pathetic battles without broadcasting it as a slight to every woman on the planet?
Go and watch some mucky movies luv. Not all women are subjugated, some do it for money, and some do it for money and fun.
This old tart might be doing her job for both, but undoubtedly, she’s doing it for money as well which makes her, or any guy, no better than a hooker.
And everyone has a supervisor. Even if it’s shareholders.
The bi*ch needs to get over herself.
Tell us what you really think Scot, don’t hold back. I feel somehow dirty now, getting paid to go to work, even as an engineer, lol.
So asking who her supervisor is was a sexist remark. I guess the end game is for men to never talk to women, period. Whoops! I said period. Clearly sexist. Having achieved that, they can spend all their time at lesbian bars, and they will finally be happy(?)
Does no one see that it could well have been an age-ist remark….she seems to characterize herself as “a young female scientist” — thus likely to be a grad/post-grad.
DR FRIEDERIKE OTTO
Deputy Director of the ECI
PROFESSOR JIM HALL
Director of the ECI
Doesn’t Deputy director imply supervised by director ?
http://www.eci.ox.ac.uk/people/index.html?show=ac
> . In fact, she’s deputy director of Oxford University’s Environmental Change Institute.
Her supervisor is the director of Oxford University’s Environmental Change Institute.
You have it back to front: “The kind of people who have no qualms about bullying their colleagues over scientific issues are also likely to think it is funny to bully women for being female“
multi layered hand wringing and political correctness , I love it.
after Pauchauri, I would have thought this was small beans really
Unless you are the CEO, you have a supervisor.
Even the CEO reports to the Board of Directors, n’est-ce pas?
And even then, there’s usually a Board of Directors overseeing you- so technically a CEO has more supervisors.