Roger Pielke Jr., On SkepSci’s Academic Blacklisting

Guest post by David Middleton

From Forbes

Feb 9, 2020,9:44 am
How Academic ‘Blacklists’ Impede Serious Work On Climate Science
Roger Pielke Contributor
I research and write about science and technology in policy, politics and in sport

A climate advocacy group called Skeptical Science hosts a list of academics that it has labeled “climate misinformers.” The list includes 17 academics and is intended as a blacklist. We know of this intent because one of the principals of Skeptical Science, a blogger named Dana Nuccitelli, said so last Friday, writing of one academic on their list, “if you look at the statements we cataloged and debunked on her [Skeptical Science] page, it should make her unhirable in academia.”

That so-called “unhirable” academic is Professor Judy Curry, formerly the chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at Georgia Tech, and a Fellow of both the American Geophysical Union and American Meteorological Society. By any conventional academic metric, Curry has compiled an impressive record over many decades. The idea that she would be unhirable would seem laughable.

But there is nothing funny about Skeptical Science



There’s also nothing skeptical or scientific about the Skeptical Science.

Dr. Pielke’s article is infuriating and well-worth reading.

It’s long-past time to respond to such defamation.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
February 13, 2020 6:05 pm

“It’s long-past time to respond to such defamation.” Yes, who’s going to make it happen?

Reply to  markl
February 13, 2020 8:08 pm

That might be me. I’m thinking it’s time to launch a class action lawsuit against these thugs. Especially Mann, Cook, Nuccitelli, Honeycutt, and Lewandowski.

Reply to  Anthony Watts
February 13, 2020 11:55 pm

I think you’ll have plenty of support, Anthony.

However, the only way to stop this farce is to constantly counter the misinformation coming from the so-called “climate scientists” and assorted hangers-on. Obviously, WUWT is doing a sterling job of that, but without a fully independent MSM we will lose.

Without meaning to be moribund, most true believers inside and outside of academia tend to be young and impressionable. The watermelons are playing the long game as that is their ideology. They begin with the indoctrination of children and the changes they want in society are taken bit by bit until the final goal is achieved.

To win they just have to wait.

It’ll be an uphill struggle. Hell, it will be an up mountain struggle, but one that real science must win.

I fear time is running out.

Gerry, England
Reply to  Redge
February 14, 2020 5:52 am

I think the only way the legacy media will catch up is when it starts getting much colder. Or it could be as the lunacy comes ever closer, the true cost becomes clear.

Bill Powers
Reply to  Gerry, England
February 15, 2020 5:46 am

Unfortunately Gerry, the Ministry of Propaganda, who/whom you are referring to as legacy media, was once peddling the coming Ice Age. Once the trend in GST starts downward, they will point to it as evidence of the evils of man burning fossil fuel. After all, they covered their back sides about a number of years back by, practically mid-sentence, switching from Global warming to Climate Change without skipping a bit.

They also dropped the meme, you can’t conflate weather with climate so that they could begin to sensationalize weather events. Snowmageddon And Snowpocalypse? The average public school graduate wasn’t buying the “Global Warming means more severe winters so suddenly weather was conflatable with climate. Who coulda guessed?

John Nicol
Reply to  Redge
February 14, 2020 10:27 pm

I think we need someone like your self, Peter Ridd, Richard Lindzen, David Evans, and others who are on the SKS list who have some public profile already, to give us a lead – not that I want to put the responsibility ont others.

There are several individual groups who are in constant internet and email contact such as Bob Carter’s “ClimateScience” which ncludes John McLean who is also an SKS target. Viv Forbes quaintly styled Saltbush Club which includes a wide range of people from industry and many others who woulod be just itching to mount a full scale assaulot on Cook and his cronies as well as on the climate change rubbish itself. It is a matter perhaps as to where to start.

More conservative and older people like ourselves – well me anyway – may have to swallow our pride and become activists in the streets. This action could start by calling out some troops made up of ourselves and primed to go, to oppose the Greta Thunburg type rallys. Just a thought!!

Reply to  Anthony Watts
February 14, 2020 2:37 am

Anthony – I would plonk a large sum into a go-fund-me.
I think many others would do too…


Bob boder
Reply to  ralfellis
February 14, 2020 3:58 am

I don’t know about large sum, but definitely some sum from this skeptic.

Dan Sudlik
Reply to  ralfellis
February 14, 2020 6:08 am

Me too

Phillip Bratby
Reply to  ralfellis
February 14, 2020 7:04 am

I agree

Reply to  ralfellis
February 14, 2020 7:41 am

I would support too. Not a large sum ‘cause I’m not super rich. But something. This behavior has to be checked somehow. What happened to Dr. Pielke Sr. & Jr. and Dr. Curry just makes me sick to my stomach.

John Dawson
Reply to  ralfellis
February 14, 2020 10:42 am

Not a large amount but I would definitely contribute too.

Dale Mullen
Reply to  ralfellis
February 14, 2020 12:15 pm

Anthony et al.
I definitely will contribute to a well-planned attack on these lowlife and will contribute even a bit more if there is a successful outcome, the amount depending on how deeply these detriments to society are buried.
P.S. Let me know when you got the biggest “kick-ass” boots on you can find.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  ralfellis
February 14, 2020 6:52 pm

Now I am working, I would too, AU$50 would be my max at this stage.

Reply to  Anthony Watts
February 14, 2020 3:21 am

Rest assured if you do we are all behind you, support and funding as well.

Reply to  Anthony Watts
February 14, 2020 8:28 am

Lawsuits may be the way to go. In 2018, The New England Ratepayers association filed a preemption request with FERC over a New Hampshire law that was passed to force a utility to pay above market costs for power from several biomass plants. FERC agreed that the law violated the Federal Power Act, and preempted the state statute, making it unenforceable. Maybe courts can be the friend of climate realists.

Eric Vieira
Reply to  MichaelV
February 14, 2020 10:41 pm

Lawsuits may work in the US. In Europe (or even Canada) probably not. The justice system has already been more or less “hijacked” by the left. Chancellor Angela Merkel has been the object of many legal actions concerning crystal clear violations of the German “basic law” (equivalent to the German constitution). Nothing has ever come out of it.

Reply to  Anthony Watts
February 14, 2020 8:29 am

I admire that, Anth*ny, but their pockets are unlimited and the current legal system is easily bought-off (as Mark Styen has found out).

Reply to  Anthony Watts
February 14, 2020 12:15 pm

How can we donate to a legal fund?

Robert Doyle
Reply to  Anthony Watts
February 14, 2020 3:43 pm


Two items:

First, are Cook and Nuccitelli two of the culprits behind the 97% fraud?

Second, I was blessed to have worked with software engineers [I was in marketing] who designed the first search engine named AltaVista. Our vision included the financing of the “long tale” potential of the web. That vision had zero advertising! Instead, that lever of the “long tale” of billions of readers would self finance out of an E-wallet. The APP wan named “Millicent” or one Mill of one cent. Imagine, if a 100 million people read WUWT each day paying a Mill each. Imagine the newspapers which wouldn’t have died or be in a zombie state now.

Imagine the unemployment line at the AdWare line.

So, I submit the idea of a new kind of crowd sourcing:

I item 1. is true, there is value added in taking them down instead of the innocent scientists.
A campaign, if you will.

I’ll throw money.

WUWT is the meeting coffee shop of my environmental moring.


Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Robert Doyle
February 16, 2020 11:19 am

They are only continuing the 97% fraud. They didn’t originate it, not by a longshot.

From the article: “A climate advocacy group called Skeptical Science”

They aren’t “climate advocates”, they’re simply liars.

Reply to  Anthony Watts
February 14, 2020 6:16 pm

R.I.C.O. Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations, that, by the way, includes their ‘host’ academic institutions.

1. The benefit is federal grants to support their salaries and labs
2. the crime is a conspiracy to suppress countervailing information, data, and
3. the racketeers are the ‘academics’ that ‘shaped’ the data to support the ‘conclusions’ that would maintain their funding. etc.

George Lawson
Reply to  Anthony Watts
February 15, 2020 2:39 am

Why not start a fund raising programme straight away even though you do not take out a lawsuit immediately. Let us all help to build a large enough fund between us to take on these idiots without the worry of the financial cost. Mr Watts, you could have a permanent invitation on your site to which we could all contribute. Maybe you could also persuade industry and other sceptic bodies to contribute large sums to the fund. Who knows where it would all lead to, but we all know it would do nothing but good. Please go ahead and start the fund as soon as possible before you decide on how to approach the attack. This could turn out to be the best means of getting our voice heard if our approach is powerful enough. Do others agree?

James McCown
Reply to  Anthony Watts
February 16, 2020 5:35 pm

Anthony I recommend adding Professor Hayhoe to the list. She recently accused me of threatening her on twitter, even though all I did was ask a question and she had blocked me long ago.

She egged a number of people into complaining to twitter about me. Twitter told me of the complaints but decided to take no action.

Johann Wundersamer
Reply to  Anthony Watts
February 25, 2020 11:27 pm

Anthony Watts February

“Federal Judge Jon Tigar’s Tuesday ruling allows Resolute’s suit against Greenpeace to proceed without the racketeering charges and some defamation claims.

“From day one, it was clear Resolute intended to bully legitimate advocacy organizations and forest defenders by abusing laws designed to curtail the mafia,” Greenpeace USA General Counsel Tom Wetterer said in an emailed statement.

“The judge made it clear this would not be tolerated,” Wetterer said.”


Think you could look into

– showing suit against Greenpeace with racketeering charges and some defamation claims:

The protest organized by Greenpeace closed part of the Houston Ship Channel on Thursday. The Harris County District Attorney’s office said its charges were the first under a new law that makes it a felony to disrupt energy pipelines and ports.

“This action cost our community many, many millions of dollars in lost commerce,” said Sean Teare, a Harris County prosecutor, citing day-long shipping disruptions.

Those charged include 31 people who dangled on ropes off a bridge or who provided logistical support, said Teare. Most of the protesters were expected to appear Friday before a magistrate for a probable cause hearing, he said.

All 31 face up to a $10,000 fine and two years in prison if convicted. The district attorney’s office plans to convene a grand jury to consider other criminal charges, he said.

Federal prosecutors separately charged 22 members of the same group with misdemeanor obstruction of navigable waters, according to a filing on Friday. They could face up to a year in prison on the federal charges.

Caligula Jones
Reply to  markl
February 14, 2020 6:08 am

Unfortunately, as Mark Steyn has found, such cases will probably become time-sinks of epic proportions, worthy as they are.

I can imagine that discovery, however, would be as they say, proctological. I’d start with combing through Climategate for anything related to keeping skeptics out of the established process…

Dale Mullen
Reply to  Caligula Jones
February 14, 2020 3:03 pm

Caligula: Check out the paper by John Costella entitled, “The Climategate Emails”. He’s covered the field quite well.

February 13, 2020 6:05 pm

When a climate activist site tries to blacklist a scientist who wants the US to rejoin the Paris climate accord (Dr. Roger Pielke Jr.), they’ve really gone off the rails.

Reply to  Donald L. Klipstein
February 13, 2020 7:23 pm

Shades of Joe McCarthy from the early-mid 50s.

Reply to  donb
February 14, 2020 8:37 am

History written by the marxist-media. Communists had indeed infiltrated Hollywood & a significant percentage of academia & the media. As a result of dismissing the situation back then, we see the tragic end-result today — marxists-termites swarming out of the societal-woodwork that’s been riddled w/holes.

Reply to  donb
February 14, 2020 6:21 pm

Joe McCarthy was a jerk. But he was right. There were, and continue to be, commies under the bed. deal with it.

Paul Penrose
Reply to  Donald L. Klipstein
February 14, 2020 9:11 am

And of course, proof that this is not really about the climate.

February 13, 2020 6:06 pm

Skepsci is disgusting filthy trash.

Although, I do wish I was cool enough to be blacklisted.

Len Werner
Reply to  Zoe Phin
February 13, 2020 8:05 pm

Nice. ‘See Mr. Eschenbach, not all science is settled’. Subjecting me to a ‘laugh test’ might have been a bit premature.

But we need not fight each other; we’re of the same mind.

Reply to  Zoe Phin
February 14, 2020 2:21 am

Is this geoheating only in effect in the oceans?
It seems to me it is very weak on land, eg. in the arctic and antarctic.

Reply to  Björn
February 14, 2020 9:00 am

Earth’s geotherm (the internal “sun”) is even more obltate.

February 13, 2020 6:09 pm

It only took 3 visits to their site back when I first started following the agw story for me to see the site for what is was, a propaganda site. That was about 11 years ago. I never visited the site after that.

February 13, 2020 6:13 pm

Chris Turney of stuck in Antarctica fame shows up again…

February 13, 2020 6:19 pm

To elevate our mood, I bring you this: a poll shows that Swedes think Climate Policy was the worst waste of taxpayers’ money in 2019. link

Reply to  commieBob
February 14, 2020 12:16 am

They thought it a waste of taxpayers’ money not because they are against effective “Climate Policy” but because it wasn’t effective enough: “The government has more than doubled the appropriations for climate policy, but despite this, emissions no longer decrease. In 2018, emissions even increased. That is why climate policy has been voted the worst waste of the year”, explained Johan Gustafsson, Waste Ombudsman at the Taxpayers’ Association.”

Bengt Abelsson
Reply to  Loydo
February 14, 2020 12:39 am

Well, the result was right, for wrong reasons.

Reply to  Bengt Abelsson
February 14, 2020 2:31 am

“The government has more than doubled the appropriations for climate policy, but despite this, emissions no longer decrease. In 2018, emissions even increased. That is why climate policy has been voted the worst waste of the year.”

Just shows that throwing taxpayers’ money at an issue without thought does not work. Sit down, discuss the issue with all sides, and then decide. No knee-jerk.

Johann Wundersamer
Reply to  Bengt Abelsson
February 26, 2020 1:22 am

beng135 February 14, 2020 at 8:44 am

Loydoo sez:

not because they are against effective “Climate Policy” but because it wasn’t effective enough

The old mantra of communists — communism might have failed spectacularly, but it just wasn’t implemented correctly/enough. We know how to do it right….

Yahh, be safe “Loydoo sez” when talking ’bout “Sputnik News”.

Reply to  Loydo
February 14, 2020 4:31 am

Listen to what you’re confessing to.

So far, the only anti-CO2 ‘thing’ that has worked is substituting natural gas for coal. All the other crap doesn’t work.

Reply to  Loydo
February 14, 2020 7:00 am

The only mental skill trolls have, is projection and spin.

Reply to  Loydo
February 14, 2020 8:44 am

Loydoo sez:
not because they are against effective “Climate Policy” but because it wasn’t effective enough

The old mantra of communists — communism might have failed spectacularly, but it just wasn’t implemented correctly/enough. We know how to do it right….

Paul Penrose
Reply to  Loydo
February 14, 2020 9:18 am

Man tells Loydo that he has a mild headache. Loydo suggests the man bang his head against the wall. Man follows Loydo’s advice, but not only does that not cure the headache, it actually makes it worse. Loydo’s advice: You didn’t hit it hard enough – try again. Hopefully the man is not foolish enough to follow Loydo’s advice again. /obvious sarcasm

Caligula Jones
Reply to  Paul Penrose
February 14, 2020 9:27 am

“You didn’t hit it hard enough – try again”

Well, that’s the method for ALL “inter-sectional” SJW crap.

“Give us a million dollars for [social housing/environmentally friendly bird baths/trans-eye gunk research]”!

Million dollars provided. No change to anything.

“Its your fault for not giving us what we didn’t ask for. We need MOHR!”

I think, thought, people are catching on.

Here in Canada, the Usual Suspects have basically shut down all rail traffic in Eastern Canada to protest a gas pipeline that has been approved by the Indigenous Nation it will run through.

Our Prime Minstrel Socks Zoolander is busy trying to buy a UN Security Council seat in Africa by bribing THEIR Usual Suspects…and even the moderates are asking: where’s Justin?

Michael Jankowski
Reply to  Loydo
February 14, 2020 10:22 am

What planet do you live on, Loydo?

Reply to  Michael Jankowski
February 14, 2020 5:17 pm

It hasn’t been named yet.

February 13, 2020 6:23 pm

‘Skeptical Science’ is the sort of Climate Joke Site that you only ever make the mistake of visiting once. Over there you risk running into tragic Jokes like Professor Turkey of Antarctic Expedition Fame. It is just a propaganda centre and science-free zone.

High Treason
February 13, 2020 6:28 pm

Putting someone on ANY blacklist because of their opinion because they don’t agree with blacklist compilers and expecting others to abide by it is very FASCIST behavior. Trying to deprive someone of a livelihood because you don’t agree with their opinion (what is the definition of a bigot???) should be raising eyebrows. It is violating human rights. Perhaps those compiling the blacklist are the ones that need to be blacklisted.

Alas, I am nowhere near landing on their blacklist, but I have landed on another leftist blacklist which has unfortunately now been put behind a paywall. I was rather proud of landing on the patriot “hall of shame” – the slander and feeble attempts at ridicule were breathtaking in their stupidity. The idiots eventually realized that what they regarded as the hall of shame we regarded as a hall of fame -an honour to be included. Interestingly, this web page branch of Antifa was being aided by the GREENS party with taxpayer resources.

February 13, 2020 6:40 pm

“if you look at the statements we cataloged and debunked…”

So those are her statements not SS’s. Her statements. Does sue herself?

Reply to  David Middleton
February 13, 2020 7:11 pm

These guys actually think that yelling you’re wrong, counts as debunking.

Reply to  David Middleton
February 13, 2020 7:27 pm

Nevertheless, the statements are not SS’s but Curry’s. And Curry’s statements have no factual basis, which SS documents with published science. So SS is merely the light. Good luck suing a light.

Reply to  David Middleton
February 14, 2020 2:03 pm

It is pretty clear that the original intent of the list was to identify prominent deniers and debunk their statements, not to make them unhirable. Many are too old to be in the market anymore; some are dead.

It is ironic that Curry, who rails against the 97%, applies for jobs at places where those irritating 97% must be lurking.

Reply to  David Middleton
February 14, 2020 5:18 pm

Despite what they say, you know what they were actually thinking.

Chris Hanley
Reply to  trafamadore
February 13, 2020 7:44 pm

It is one thing to disagree with someone’s professional opinions, it’s quite another to publish statements claiming they are “unhirable” thereby damaging their professional reputation.
If someone can demonstrate on the balance of probabilities they suffered loss of income and/or reputation as a result of those statements they would have cause of action.

Reply to  trafamadore
February 13, 2020 9:17 pm

which SS documents with published science.

…and when someone tries to engage at “skeptical” science, they delete any and all comments and links to data that exposes their narrative for what it is. It is very easy to win an argument when you get to simply delete anything that shows you are wrong.

I know from direct experience, as SkS was one of the first sites I came across when I started researching climate for myself. They, more than any other site, made it plain to me that I was dealing with propagandists who were ill equipped to have an actual discussion about the science, and so simply disappeared any facts or arguments they had no answer for.

YOU get to come here and say whatever you want. But those of us who have merely asked obvious questions over at SkS know them for what they are. An echo chamber where inconvenient information, including published science and data, is simply disappeared.

Julian Flood
Reply to  davidmhoffer
February 14, 2020 4:18 am

I went to SS as a first port of call when the hockey Stick came to my attention. I thought I’d find reasoned discussion and a cool scientific assessment of the arguments. It took no time at all before I realised that it was merely a propaganda echo chamber.

What a shame that they chose that route — had they made the right choice they could have become the most visited climate site on the internet.


Reply to  trafamadore
February 13, 2020 9:27 pm

Can you post a link to the debunking. I just looked at the site and couldn’t find much. I didn’t want to investigate too much through various links because my bile was rising.

Reply to  trafamadore
February 14, 2020 7:02 am

It really does fascinate me how trolls think that anything they disagree with has automatically been debunked.
Dr. Curry has more factual data for what she says than anything on SkS.

Reply to  trafamadore
February 14, 2020 9:04 am

ROFLMAO. Well, actually kinda sad seeing someone defending the vile SS people — I have to wonder what kind of mental condition they’d have to be in.

Caligula Jones
Reply to  beng135
February 14, 2020 9:20 am

This has nothing to do with mental capabilities at all, this is about emotionalism, i.e., Gaia worship, i.e., a cult, i.e., putting forward an allegedly autistic child as the newest secular saint (because, apparently, baby fur seals aren’t cute enough).

The SS Nerdwaffen are appropriately named, as Churchill put it, as they are truly the “bodyguards of lies”.

Paul Penrose
Reply to  trafamadore
February 14, 2020 9:30 am

I can take anybody’s detailed explanation of something, cherry pick a few quotes out of context, build a strawman argument around them, and then proceed to tear that argument apart. This is what SkS have done with Curry’s work. So what? That just makes them contemptible, not right. Then when they try to use that to impair her ability to make a living, that’s just downright vile. Shame on you for supporting them in this effort. Go away imbecile troll.

Reply to  Paul Penrose
February 14, 2020 7:07 pm

There is no problem with context, Curry’s meaning is completely clear.
There is no straw man, only what she said. SS just uses a link to published arguments to debunk not a straw man but her statement.

You do know you haf to click on the link to the right, right?

And people that think this blog’s intent is to make people unemployable are reaching. Aside, I sure that if you get on the list you could certainly be employed by Heartland.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Paul Penrose
February 16, 2020 11:34 am

“And people that think this blog’s [SKS] intent is to make people unemployable are reaching.”

Apparently you have selective reading dysphoria.

“if you look at the statements we cataloged and debunked on her [Skeptical Science] page, it should make her unhirable in academia.”

Which part of the above statement by Nucitelli is unclear to you?

Reply to  trafamadore
February 14, 2020 3:28 pm

How unfortunate for them that they chose the initials “SS”. And how appropriate.

February 13, 2020 6:41 pm

Anyone else hear that thwacking noise?

comment image?w=676&h=515

February 13, 2020 6:45 pm

Any fair minded person should be outraged by the antics described in Dr. Pielke’s article. The fact that the left, as well as the right, does not condemn this crap shows us that the left has become morally bankrupt.

We know the left can go too far. The Soviets taught us that. The Maoists and the Khmer Rouge taught us that. The North Koreans, and the Cubans, and the Venezuelans continue to teach us in the same manner. Jordan Peterson

February 13, 2020 6:58 pm

Personally I cant see why anyone pays any attention to SS. A read of the background and qualifications of the contributors to SS reveals they are mostly a bunch of computer programmers, environmentalists with a couple of Chemists and I think a couple of Physicists, none of which have expertise in Atmospheric sciences, Meteorology or oceanography.

Reply to  Terry
February 13, 2020 7:51 pm

Interesting that you call them SS, given the penchant for Nazi imagery.

Reply to  Perfecto
February 14, 2020 8:53 am

Because they follow Joseph Goebbels´s quide book for propaganda, word by word, SS is very proper abbreviation to depict what they really are, and what is their final goal.

Reply to  Terry
February 13, 2020 9:32 pm

And with absolutely no knowledge or expertise in the criteria used to establish cause-and-effect relationships between two variables in complex, chaotic systems (Hint – there’s a lot more than statistics and spreadsheets involved).

Izaak Walton
February 13, 2020 7:04 pm

“Dr. Pielke’s article is infuriating and well-worth reading.”

So good in fact that it was posted 4 days ago.

Reply to  Izaak Walton
February 14, 2020 12:02 am

I agree.

Dr. Pielke Jr.’s article is well worth repeating.

Reply to  Izaak Walton
February 14, 2020 7:05 am

Warmists just hate it when their misbehavior is highlighted.

Dr Deanster
February 13, 2020 7:21 pm

What would be cool, is for WUWT to take each article on Skeptical Science and show it is a load of crap. Point out to the world the their positions that are pure opinion and document the science for each. Address their so called “science” and discuss their references.

This would be particularly relevant to their so called “myths” section, where they take skeptical positions and claim they are myths.

Reply to  David Middleton
February 14, 2020 5:42 am

But we could label the time it took the skeptosciocene

Barnes Moore
Reply to  Dr Deanster
February 14, 2020 1:06 am

I have not taken the time to look at all the links contained on the link I am posting here, but have looked through the Popular Technology article, which has a number of other links as well. SS is a prolific bunch.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Barnes Moore
February 14, 2020 8:33 am

Would someone from Skeptical Science post a link to their best evidence for humans causing the Earth’s climate to change?

Being a prolific bunch, I’m hoping they can help, since there doesn’t appear to be any evidence that I can see that would tie humans to the behavior of the Earth’s climate.

Thanks in advance.

Roger Knights
Reply to  Dr Deanster
February 14, 2020 9:39 am

“What would be cool, is for WUWT to take each article on Skeptical Science and show it is a load of crap. … This would be particularly relevant to their so called “myths” section, where they take skeptical positions and claim they are myths.”

This is something I’ve often thought about, and even suggested here a few years ago. It would be worth getting funding to do. I get the impression from the certainty with which various media figures proclaim “the science is settled” with such certainty that they have read SkS’s Myths section and accepted it as conclusive. SkS is probably the most influential warmist inculcater around, and its arguments need to be addressed.

However, it should not be done with a point-scoring attitude, which sets one up for a counterpunch, but in a moderate tone (like that of SEPP) and with a modest aim—to weaken rather than refute (in most cases).

The format should be multi-level. Initially, a list of points of disagreements. Then a fleshing-out of that list. And then a further fleshing out.

February 13, 2020 7:25 pm

Perhaps we should put the shoe on the other foot perhaps we start a listing of Climate Scientists that should be considered “unhirable”. If they want to play McCarthyism then lets play.

Reply to  LdB
February 13, 2020 7:34 pm

Need to be a bit careful there I think. I can hear the cash registers from the Lawyers offices ringing……

Reply to  LdB
February 14, 2020 12:04 am

Play the ball not the man

Mark Smith
February 13, 2020 7:47 pm

The real story is how corrupt are universities. Very corrupt when activists decide their hiring of anyone.

Abolition Man
February 13, 2020 8:02 pm

David, thank you for continuing the conversation in spite of the lack of facts, science and reason coming from the alarmists. They really are the ones who deserve the title “denier” since their beliefs are more religious than scientific. I am a mere student of things geologic and a proud skeptic of anyone and anything without independent corroboration.
Incidentally, what is this horst schist you speak of? Should there not also be graben schist located in close association? Or would that be like my favorite college pastime: graben @$$! At least I was smart enough to get names and phone numbers; can’t imagine how miserable life is for students now in the Brave New Progressive religious seminarys that have subverted our institutions of education! Rock on!!

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Abolition Man
February 13, 2020 9:21 pm

There is a joke about graben schist and horst schist, which supposedly was a trick played on students on a Death Valley field trip by one of the De Anza College professors, who shall go nameless. I believe that David got the joke from me.

Bob boder
Reply to  David Middleton
February 14, 2020 4:01 am

You were to busy accumulating the ridiculous amount of knowledge you have in that warp head of yours!

Kevin kilty
Reply to  David Middleton
February 14, 2020 5:10 am

You can graben all you want, but make sure it is not inappropriate graben!

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Kevin kilty
February 14, 2020 2:16 pm

Are you referring to the behavior of Creepy Joe?

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  David Middleton
February 14, 2020 2:14 pm

I seem to remember mentioning “graben schist” to you in a past post before you started using “horst” a lot. Be that as it may, Newton and Leibnitz might have had similar conflicting recollections. 🙂

Reply to  Clyde Spencer
February 14, 2020 8:45 pm

What warmists do when they claim they are collecting data?

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
February 16, 2020 9:27 am

OK, as Paul Harvey used to say, “The rest of the story!”

Back in the 1960s, one of the first geology instructors at Foothill College (Los Altos Hills, CA) started a number of popular field trips. One of them was to Death Valley. As told to me second-hand in the ’70s by his protege, he was lecturing in the field about the Basin and Range Province. He talked about grabens and horsts. He pointed out an exposure of schist in the graben, and with a straight face, told the students that it was a “graben schist.” He then continued and asked what would this schist be called higher up the mountain on the horst block. As anticipated, a young student, eager to demonstrate that he had been paying attention, blurted out, “Horst schist!” When everyone started laughing, he realized that he had been led down the garden path.

So, to answer your question, “graben schist” is a precursor and circular reference to “horst schist.”

Johann Wundersamer
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
February 26, 2020 12:39 am

Schaufel graben / shovel dig:

Graben + Landschaft / trench + landscape

begraben + Friedhof / bury + cemetery

6 feet under:


February 13, 2020 8:21 pm

It is a good step when “Forbes” publishes straight up stuff on climate.
Previously, in reading only a few pieces published on climate theit articles seemed to support the climate promotion.
We should be thankful with this piece and hope there will be more of a critical nature.
And for a while I read the SS site and it is unbelievable with what can be called “circular citations”.
Posters there in an instant could come up with an amazing number of citations to promote the warming stuff.
Or, ironically, to dump on any post showing true skepticism.
Eventually I identified myself as the “old geophysicist” and they blocked my account.
In looking at he list of “blacklisted” names, sadly mine is not included.

Roger Knights
Reply to  Bob Hoye
February 14, 2020 9:44 am

“It is a good step when “Forbes” publishes straight up stuff on climate.”

I suspect that it hasn’t been published in the magazine, but rather in its associated online site, the a few regular contributors and occasional guests with op-eds POST articles.

February 13, 2020 11:07 pm

Dana Nuccitelli hasn’t got his own page on Wikipedia yet – just totally lacking in credentials for that – as opposed to Judith Curry – her glowing credentials as a climate scientist are there for all to see – my bet is Dumb Dana will never make it – accept with a collective of those who will eventually go down in history as part of yet another consensus in the history of science that was found to be incorrect
The question is not IF IT WILL HAPPEN – IT’S WHEN? and lately I’m getting a strong sense that tide has turned for the doomsdayers – the mob numbers appear to shifting towards the sceptical side – BUT TIME WILL TELL

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  katie
February 16, 2020 11:43 am

” I’m getting a strong sense that tide has turned for the doomsdayers”

Everyone’s been saying that for decades. Hasn’t made a difference.

Caligula Jones
Reply to  Jeff Alberts
February 18, 2020 6:28 am

Well, it has forced them to come up with every cuter and cuter mascots. Start with polar bears, move over to fur seal pups, then autistic Swedish moppets.

February 13, 2020 11:53 pm

“climate misinformers.”
Doesn’t this accurately describe the entire climate alarmist camp?

Matthew Sykes
February 14, 2020 1:13 am

DO we fight back, or do we give them enough rope they hang themselves, as ER have done. As Greta has done, as Attenborough has done?

I say leave their lies in plain sight. Fighting back gives them credit, takes them seriously.

Let every scientist in the world see them insult Curry, Lindzen, and others. Let them see the foulness, the lies, and the hate that is the climate change movement. One day they will rebel. we always do in the end.

Reply to  Matthew Sykes
February 14, 2020 1:36 am

Won’t work. They are winning the propaganda war.

The watermelons have already corrupted education. Give me a child until he is seven etc.. Young people simply won’t believe the truth as they lack the ability to think for themselves.

Kevin kilty
February 14, 2020 5:25 am

It is nearly impossible to fight a extraordinarily popular delusion with any sort of rational effort. I have been trying with “global warming” since 1979 — first with my professional acquaintances and then with “letters to the editor” and the occasional lecture, and attempts to publish which were soon squished. This effort sways no one. People who agree with me do so because they arrived at a similar stance through independent means, and the people who disagree with me don’t listen, can’t calculate, are driven by emotion and self interest.

As Herb Stein was fond of saying, “Things will continue until they can’t.” In this case it may be more like “Things will become worse until they can’t.” But until the delusion costs people serious personal trouble and they recognize the source of the trouble, and the manipulators of delusion have trouble making money, this will go on.

Sweet Old Bob
Reply to  Kevin kilty
February 14, 2020 7:58 am

“It is nearly impossible to fight a extraordinarily popular delusion with any sort of rational effort.”
True …. that is what sarcasm is made for ! And ridicule !

February 14, 2020 5:31 am

I’m very surprised a Realists class action hasn’t been launched for defamation or similar against alarmist attack dogs like SkS.

Look at how a certain Dr Mann dragged out *his own* cases v Steyn and Dr Tim Ball. It’s not a coincidence he refused to go to court in his own case! It would’ve led to his Hockey Stick being given the closest scrutiny ever, with a legal verdict on the end of it. The horror!

February 14, 2020 3:20 pm

Here’s an alternate link to the full story:

… if, like me, you value your ad blocker, and curse Forbes every time its website begs you to turn off your blocker to access the info, and, like me, you always forget, and then click out instantaneously to search for an alternate website that doesn’t beg you to turn off your ad blocker.

February 14, 2020 3:23 pm

Now to comment about the content:

SkepSci thugs need a wake up call, and maybe a lawsuit would be a first step.

I hope they are reading.

February 14, 2020 4:28 pm

I don’t have much but willing to chip in

February 15, 2020 10:07 am

Totalitarianism is going to be enforced one lightbulb at a time. The disagreement of Drs. Curry and Pielke, Jr. with climate orthodoxy is mild. Totalitarianism, however, does not allow for even a single comma of dissent. God help us all.

Johann Wundersamer
February 26, 2020 12:54 am

Messed up links straddle computer windows.

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights