The Targeting of Willie Soon

The story about how the climate alarmist community targeted Dr Willie Soon and attacked his integrity as a scientist while doing good science. The attack on Dr Soon is detailed and the facts examined in this video.

This is also an attack on science with the intent to hurt an important skeptic of climate alarmism. There are broader implications on climate science and science in general. So lean in and check out this video.

Other suggested links of interest:

A review of who Dr Willie Soon is and the support he has received in this struggle: https://www.heartland.org/about-us/wh

For the science papers published by Willie Soon, visit here: https://www.cfa.harvard.edu/~wsoon/my

For more detailed discussion on censorship and intimidation in climate science, consider this talk by Willie Soon
https://youtu.be/aYAy871w9t8

Dr Soon presenting at Independent Institute in Jul 2019: “Global Warming: Fact or Fiction?” https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_co

A written and alternative description of Dr Soon’s experience: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/05/0

Climate Illuminated, a independent website that seeks to present a balanced view, with a emphasis on how the climate works from a unbiased scientific view. www.climateiluminated.com

45 thoughts on “The Targeting of Willie Soon

  1. We need to get the Retweet Number (R zero) above 2.0.

    I’m probably gonna stuff up this embedding but here goes…

    A Scientist Falsely Accused: how anti-scientists waged a vicious, coordinated campaign to smear Dr Wille Soon. This is *the* example of the 'Serengeti Strategy' used by Big Ve$ted Interest to silence inconvenient climate researchers. Spread the word!https://t.co/1ogA1nLtJQ— Climate Nuremberg (@BradPKeyes) May 9, 2020

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  2. I watched the video, and it certainly confirms my existing belief about the CAGW crowd needing bad conduct to eliminate any actual science, Climategate included. I have read and listened to presentations by Dr. Willie Soon, and totally regard him as a person of both Science and Courage. As the video reaches the end it starts to sound like calling out the alarmism versus science currently on display re Wuhan Virus. Day 51 of quarantine, afternoon walk with dogs coming up, wait for it. Stay sane and safe.

    • What insults one’s intelligence most about the assault on Dr Soon is how the assailants cloak themselves in the mantle of transparency, to mix a metaphor.

      These are the people who showed neither curiosity nor outrage when Mann broke the rules of science by refusing, for seven years, to explain the statistics behind the highest-impact paper in all of modern science. If anything they ran interference for him, piling on the vilification of anyone who presumed to want to audit Mann’s working—the working he should have shown LAST CENTURY.

      Then a couple of years later they suddenly pretend to be champions of open science, feigning indignation because Dr Soon wasn’t exhaustively divulgatory in his… wait for it… financial disclosure statements.

      Perverts perverting the course of science do not deserve access to antibiotics, let alone computers. David Roberts of Grist was right, but not in the way he thought, when he said we need some sort of climate Nuremberg.

      • “Then a couple of years later they suddenly pretend to be champions of open science, feigning indignation because Dr Soon wasn’t exhaustively divulgatory in his… wait for it… financial disclosure statements.”

        Actually he was diligent. His grant came from Harvard. It was Harvard that received money from organizations the alarmists didn’t like, not Dr. Soon.

        • I should have suspected even that part of their case against him was bullmilk.

          Believalists never do things by halves, do they? If they’re going to use a fallacious argument, they may as well start from a false premise.

  3. pox on their houses!
    dr Soons such a nice bloke
    pity they never query their own mob

    • Dr Soon is indeed a nice bloke! A top one, if I may go so far. One of the topmost, from my brief interactions with him. Used to get along like a house on fire with our own Bob Carter, not surprisingly.

      Before I knew he knew I existed, I wrote some stories about his Reverse Serengeti-ing by the unheard undead herd of un-men, including Anatomy of a Strategy:

      ‘…Instead of continually biting off more than we could chew—I wondered—why not attempt to discredit one den!er at a time, thus breaking the problem of skeptical climate scientists up into thousands of subproblems?

      ‘As proof of concept, we chose the serial skeptic Wei-Hock “Willie” Soon for a concerted campaign of isolation, exposure and attack.

      ‘But finding fault with the science in Soon’s papers was easier said than done.

      ‘(Like most contrarians, the Harvard-Smithshonian astrophysicist is careful not to put his flawed ideas in writing or express them out loud.)…’

      • “Like most contrarians, the Harvard-Smithshonian astrophysicist is careful not to put his flawed ideas in writing or express them out loud.”

        So he doesn’t put them in writing or express them out loud. If that’s the case, how does one even know that he has flawed ideas? ESP? Odd assertion.

        Note: I know it’s not you Brad, but others.

        • > If that’s the case, how does one even know that he has flawed ideas? ESP? Odd assertion.

          Scientists don’t need evidence, dude. Evidence is for little people.

          Did Michael Mann need evidence of the existence of McIntyre’s fossil fuel interests to write the following? No, being a scientist means you assume first, hire a PI next, and explore later! If ever!

          > I have been talking w/ folks in the states about finding an investigative journalist to investigate and expose McIntyre, and his thusfar unexplored connections with fossil fuel interests.Perhaps the same needs to be done w/ this Keenan guy.

  4. Alternative views are common in science. That climate science finds it worrisome is itself a worrisome thing about the claimed scientific credentials of climate science.

    • Too bad the video narrative didn’t mention the shame of the Royal Society in England, whose motto is nullius en verba (on no one’s word, or to paraphrase, do NOT accept the word of experts), and the similar shame of the American National Academy of Science, in becoming corrupted by CAGW spewing climate scientists, formerly august institutions of scientific credibility, now openly embracing values almost exactly contrary to “nullius en verba.” The Royal Society and the NAS now pimp “accept our experts who say CO2 is the only climate driver that matters (or else)” and “accept these fantasy based climate models averages as inerrant predictions of the future, or your career as a government funded scientist is over.”

      My response to those mottos as valid representative of good science is the same as Kevin Bacon’s to that giant mother humper underground monster in the movie Tremors, that killed itself colliding with the wall of the the empty concrete canal as it was pursuing him for dinner. (warning, some adult language)

  5. Your link to the climate illuminated site, at the end of the post, is short one “l”.

  6. In soccer they’d be shown a red card and sent off for a bad tackle. Play the ball, not the man.

  7. The really good guys really suffer.
    Jennifer Marohasey, late Bob Carter and Peter Ridd here in Australia to name a few.

    • I bet we’ll be the last country to extirpate the bubonic plague of climatism once and for all. We punch above our weight, per capita, for heroes like Daly and Carter—but also for lying inimici humani generis> like Glikson and Karoly.

      • And it’s clear that Malcolm Turnbull has not felt the least bit chastised by his humiliating defeat in the recent election which he insisted was about CLIMATE CHANGE.

    • The ONLY way to discredit the credible is an irrelevant ad hominem attack. And when you do, hope the audience you wish to manipulate doesn’t notice your attack says infinitely more about your own lack of ethics and paucity of facts than it does of your target.

      • Indeed, Richard. This is in full force when Mann calls anyone who criticizes one of his papers an “industry shill”, instead of defending what he’s done.

  8. Excellent video. If you’ve ever watched video of Dr. Soon answering his critics you know that he’s a person of remarkable courage. As for Greenpeace and Kirt Davies… Happy Mothers Day.

  9. This is way more than an attack on science or climate science. In general, it’s known a political correctness and it gets uglier with every passing day.

  10. This stuff sounds eerily similar to what is unfolding in Washington with Michael Flynn and the Russiagate scandal. Hide the information and denigrate all who disagree with you. Buy the left wing press to help destroy those you disagree with. Similar people are running similar scams.

    • Vice President Pence says he is open to bringing General Flynn back into the Trump administration.

      Wouldn’t you love it if they put him in charge of the FBI !

    • Yesterday Obama made a statement in which he declared that for some who has been charged to be left off without punishment, threatens the rule of law.

      Let that sink in for a minute.

      In this legal “scholar’s” mind, charging is equivalent to conviction.

      • Yeah, Obama is getting nervous now because the truth is starting to come out and the truth is not going to be kind to Mr. Obama.

        Let me say this for the record: Anyone who doesn’t think Obama orchestrated this attempted coup against Trump doesn’t understand how things work. Of course, Obama (and Hillary) orchestrated this illegal attack on the opposition party. Obama’s underlings are not going to do something like this without the permission of the boss, and we now have evidence (and have had for a while) that Obama knew all about what was going on.

        I get irritated at Republicans who still hedge about Obama’s involvment, talking about him like he is a innocent bystander. Nothing could be further from the truth.

        Obama and Biden were both involved in this criminal act as leaders. The attack on Trump would not have happened without Obama’s approval and I would submit, his insistance.

        We had a sitting president, Barack Obama, and vice president, Joe Biden, who actively conspired to use the power of the federal governmet to deny political power to the Republicans. They actively conspired to rig the 2016 election in Hillary’s favor, and when Trump won, they actively conspired to bring his presidency down. No doubt their aim was to enable the Democrats to rule in perpetuity. And they almost got their wish. We came very close to being dominated by an authoritarian political party willing to go to any length to secure political power for themselves. We can’t let down our guard because this is still their plan.

        It’s starting to get good now. The truth is coming out and even the Leftwing Media can’t hide it.

        Barack Obama was the worst president ever. His upbringing caused him to have no respect for the United States and its system of govenment, and so it was an easy step for him to say to hell with the system, I’m going to rig it to favor myself and my fellow political travelers. Barack has no love for the United States, and he showed his disdain with his attempt to overthrow the U.S. Constitution and the Rule of Law.

    • David
      My take is that we are up against zealots who absolutely believe they are right and the survival of mankind is at stake. Thus, they rationalize that any and all means are justified by the end. In an extreme example of the Kruger-Dunning effect, they are convinced that they are smarter than anyone who disagrees with them. This leads to a cabal of powerful people who are without honor or ethics, who have no humility, and are corrupted by their power. They have no understanding of the Scientific Method.

    • “Willie Soon is one great leaders in exposing the fraud behind the green new deal and global warming.”

      That’s why they attack him so often. They are afraid of him. They should be afraid of him.

  11. “Similar people are running similar scams.”

    These scams all need to be fully exposed before we can sort out how to go forward after this global crisis.

  12. The link to the Indepenent Youtube talk does not work.

    An “accident” by the wonderful people at Youtube, probably.

  13. I wonder how many people outside the skeptical corner will see this video and change their minds. I’m afraid the answer will be “not very many”

    • Smart Rock
      A couple of years ago I was at a technical symposium on mineralogy. I was sitting at the dinner table with the chairman, a young Canadian academic. Somehow, the banter touched on global warming. When I gently tried to raise questions about assumptions, I received a scowling look from the the academic and a curt response that made it obvious that questions were not welcome. I didn’t push it. It is difficult to change minds if they aren’t even open to discussion.

  14. Sadly, I think the video is not well done. The slow typing of sentences, as the narrator talks, is annoying and conflicted. The intro is unclear. I stopped watching, because of this.

    The narrator, off camera, sounds as if he is reading — good narration should not sound like this.

    Dr. Soon deserves a better production.

  15. A bright competent scientist. I went to a lecture he gave at USC. Excellent. What was shocking was that many of the Professors whom were in attendance would privately support his thoughts but because they were worried about their grants would not speak up publicly. I asked them in person and could see the worry about their grants from the government. Great courage on Dr. Soon’s part to speak publicly on camera.

  16. bullies abound unfortunately – it’s human nature and the mob mentality – they play the man and not the ball or they play the woman and not the ball – why? because they can’t play the ball when the ball is great science that disagrees with their unfalsifiable hypothesis – of if you like a hypothesis where this is only evidence to refute it – such as in the ice cores – the temperature increase first and then the carbon dioxide increases – once the resolution of these ice cores was evident – but even when scientists work in this area – they must word their work submission to sci journals very very conservatively – it’s hard to find them – see my last post at Charles rotters last contribution – if you wanta get it!!!
    keep on keeping on – great brave scientists like Willie and Judith Curry

Comments are closed.