.

Tuesday, March 19, 2013

Congrats to WUWT and Poptech

MobyT | 5:50 PM Go to the first of 3 comments. Add a comment

I've been poking fun at all the pseudo-science, conspiracy nuttery and fake scepticism that goes on at WUWT.  Now I'll give some credit where credit is due:



Congratulations!


Congratulations to WUWT for garnering 1 million 'I don't understand it but it's brilliant ... that proves we are heading for an ice age ... climate science is a hoax' comments from the tin foil hat brigade.

And special congrats to Poptech, who arch-denier and moderator DB Stealey (aka Smokey aka D Boehm aka dbs) selected as posting the one millionth comment.

The dubious honour couldn't have gone to a more suitable person.  Poptech typifies what WUWT is all about.

Poptech's winning comment didn't include the word 'scam' or 'hoax'.  However it was  in the conspiracy ideation ballpark (linking 'fiat money' and government 'threat' and 'coercion') and it was one of the 800+ comments on the "someone stole some emails therefore climate science is a hoax" thread, so close enough.


Update: 20/6/13 Poptech in the comments has kindly provided a link to a link to another take down of his list at the Carbon Brief - Part 1, Part 2 and Part 3 and a link to his rebuttal of the rebuttals in the comments.

3 comments:

Andrew said...

Sorry, I did not locate this sooner. Here is my detailed rebuttal to the nonsense you linked to. It is good to see you do not fact check what you carelessly link to,

http://z4.invisionfree.com/Popular_Technology/index.php?showtopic=4328

"An alarmist spammer who comments at Jo Nova's site by the screen name "Blimey" and around the Internet as "itsnotnova" continues doubling down on his insanity. After having his original blog post completely refuted he decided to add new lies, misinformation and strawman arguments to it. He is so incompetent that he did not even read the list correctly (Lie #4) or understands that "Letters" is a term used to describe a type of peer-reviewed scientific document format in certain scholarly journals such as Nature (Lie #13)."

That has to be embarrassing for you as I am sure you strive for much higher standards.

Andrew said...

I understand your confusion never studying economics but what I stated had nothing to do with any conspiracy theory. The discussion was actually involving the worthlessness of bitcoins.

While my other comment is being moderated, you can find a complete rebuttal to your ridiculous link here,

Rebuttal to "Poptech's list of Confusion"

Sou said...

Hello again Andrew. I'm not clear as to what your lack of economics studies has to do with anything, but others might see the relevance. Perhaps its related to your fears about the "threat of government force" that you mentioned in your winning comment.

As for your links, I expect many readers will have the same response to them as I had. Thanks also for the extra links to rebuttals of your "list". I've added them to the above article. Readers will note there is also a list of the 78 denier papers published over the last twenty years, out of the 12,000 odd papers assessed in the Cook13 study.


Sorry about the delay. I only just came across your comments. Older comments are subject to moderation to repel spammers.