.

Thursday, August 1, 2013

How SkepticalScience didn't demand the impeachment of the President of the USA and the complete shut down of Twitter

Sou | 6:27 AM Go to the first of 5 comments. Add a comment

Brandon Schollenberger is up in arms.  What is it about this time?  Well, apparently two and a half months ago, the good folk at SkepticalScience.com didn't storm the White House  and demand that a tweet from the President of the United States of America be retracted.

It's a travesty.  If every contributor to SkepticalScience.com isn't hanging their collective heads in shame then the world is in a very sorry state.

This is the appallingly offensive tweet:
What is wrong with the tweet?  Well, the tweet wasn't peer reviewed for one thing.  Unless you call 35 million or so followers 'peers'.  But then are they peers of the President of the United States of America?

Peer review is important.  For example it was only by diligent peer blog review that it was discovered with shock and horror that the above tweet wasn't sent by the President's own thumbs on the President's personal Blackberry.  It didn't have the Presidential "-bo".

What is the world coming to!  Not only did SkepticalScience.com not demand the immediate impeachment of the President of the United States of America for not getting his tweet peer reviewed before tweeting it.  It turns out the President of the United States of America didn't even tweet the non-peer reviewed tweet.  If that's not a case for impeachment then what is, I ask you.

Brandon Shollenberger is rallying his peers at WUWT to storm the White House and demand they shut down SkepticalScience.com for not storming the White House and demanding that the White House retract a tweet that wasn't peer reviewed before being not tweeted by the President of the United States of America.

Let the President and SkepticalScience get away with not tweeting a tweet that was tweeted without said tweet being peer reviewed by the peers at WUWT and next thing you'll find is that bloggers will be claiming that there's an ice age coming with no peer review whatsoever and alarming people all over the world.

(Have you heard that Anthony Watts and Brandon Shollenberger are planning a survey of the scientific literature to determine if anyone was ever put in danger by drought, wildfire, flood, storm surges.  Silly duffers - as if anything but total annihilation of all life on the planet could be dangerous.  Well, excepting for ice ages - they are dangerous.  Oh and shifting to clean energy is dangerous.  It'll kill all the birds, don't you know.)

5 comments:

EliRabett said...

Eli never realized how anti-Second Amendment rights Willard Tony and Brandon are. Hunters kill a lot more of the Bunny;s feathered friends than windmills.

bill said...

Not to mention the vehicles on the highways that run right past the wind farms. And feral cats. And windows.

In Australia turbine infrasound now apparently leads to both herpes and arthritis. Satirists have thrown in the towel and are resigning in droves...

Rattus Norvegicus said...

And of course skyscrapers. Birds love to fly into skyscrapers.

Cugel said...

The thinking behind the John Cook et al paper is being fully vindicated by the massive amounts of denier energy it's sucking in. The D-team has lost sight of the fact that this is only a tactical issue which should be let go; simply not mentioning the consensus, even to deny it, is a better option. After all, they'll always have the 3%. Instead the whole team is on the case while everything goes to crap around them.

It was the same with Lewandowsky. One paper and the whole team comes scurrying across the field. No wonder they seem so listless these days.

Glenn Tamblyn said...

Cugel

Seems they have no understanding of what chum is...