Scroll To Top

Sunday, May 24, 2015

WUWT's "sheeple" conspiracy nuttery - and forecasting God

Sou | 6:33 PM Go to the first of 8 comments. Add a comment

You might have noticed a comment by Matt Manos the other day. He was about the only person who understood what President Obama was saying, when Eric "eugenics" Worrall wrote his silly article. Matt spoiled it by swerving off into an utter nutter conspiracy.



Matt Manos' "sheeple" conspiracy theory


Well, today Matt's expanded his conspiracy theory (archived here). He's using the "sheeple" argument that's a favourite of crank conspiracy theorists the world over.

The "sheeple" argument goes like this. People don't "believe [insert conspiracy theory of the day here] because they are "sheeple" who are:
  • incapable of thinking for themselves
  • brainwashed by some unseen, unknown higher power
  • in thrall or in fear of authority (variously experts, government officials, common sense)

Matt's article has all the hallmarks of the classic conspiracy theory.


Mythical "facts"


First Matt seems to think that there are some un-named, unreported "facts" that "warmists" won't accept. Matt doesn't say what those facts are, which is not surprising. A conspiracy theory risks falling to pieces once it starts producing "facts", mainly because they are one or all of non-existent, unsupported by evidence, or contradictory.

As a true blue conspiracy theorist, Matt wouldn't be silly enough to discuss all the facts that WUWT-ers won't accept. (Including Anthony Watts, with all his "claim" headlines.)


The "sheeple"


Next Matt introduces his "sheeple" argument, so favoured by conspiracy nutters everywhere. He wrote:
Obama and the Pope are examples of bellwethers; the sheep with the bell that the other sheep follow. 
What he won't say, because it would spoil his conspiracy theory, is that President Obama and Pope Francis are merely communicating what virtually all the scientific evidence points to. That human activities like burning fossil fuel and chopping down trees are what's causing global warming.


Appeal to authority


Matt argues that a person shouldn't look to experts, specialists or evidence. He decides that doing so is just an appeal to authority. And what high RWA denier would appeal to any authority (other than a clown like Christopher Monckton, or a disinformer like Anthony Watts). Matt wrote:
Penetrating rational ignorance is tough because the position warmists have taken isn’t based on logic. Their position is actually based on an appeal to authority. 
It's tough to argue against 97% plus of published science, but Matt dismisses it all in one fell swoop as an "appeal to authority".  

Now Matt doesn't point to any evidence that contradicts mainstream climate science. (The closest he comes is talking "models"). By implication, I'd guess that he regards WUWT as an acceptable "authority" to appeal to. You know, the website that promotes ideas like:

Forecasting God


Perhaps this other bit of nuttery tops Matt's conspiracy nuttery. It came via a tweet from Leo Hickman. This is from an article by someone who boasts very similar qualifications to those claimed by Anthony Watts. Karl Spring wrote that:
I spent 25 years as an on-air TV meteorologist and have earned both the American Meteorological Society and National Weather Association Seals of Approval.
It seems Karl Spring doesn't forecast physical phenomenon. He doesn't forecast weather. No. What he's doing, according to him, is forecasting God. He wrote:
Finally, if God made our planet in seven days, do you really think he can’t raise or lower the temperature a degree or two if he wants? I’ve never heard a “scientist” bring that up. But I will.


8 comments :

  1. But what if God's busy? Word has it that God's half brother Adrian is hitting the piss again, but do you think Karl gives any consideration to these family complexities? Of course he doesn't. Arrogance in the extreme Karl.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Karl is just trying to look busy because he knows that Jesus is coming! Hallelujah! And pass the thermometer!

      Delete
    2. I had a drink with Adrian the other day, no wonder he likes a few...he's worried about God's omnipotence complex, started when their mum passed.

      Delete
    3. God could end world hunger and disease if he wants. Considering they're both around in abundance I'm sure He would understand if we took it upon ourselves to try to limit the warming.

      Delete
  2. Hang on, I thought we were all Marxist fanatics who hate their Freem, as President Bush (the lesser) used to say?

    This individual really has produced some priceless unintentional comedy:

    What the warmist hears is how stupid deniers are because that’s what John Stewart told him he should think.

    I'm sure he means Jon Stewart! Who's the new Al Gore, it would seem! Who knew?!

    Rational ignorance is a belief that the cost/benefit to researching every issue is slow low as to be a net negative in time utilization.

    Some folks sure are a bit slow. And a bit low too, come to think of it...

    Strike out the recurring gibberish use of 'rational' in this sentence and you have a pretty succinct own-goal summation of Watts' blog: '[p]eople who are rationally ignorant about global warming look to bellwethers that support their gut stance'. With deniers it's always projection.

    The 'discussion' that follows is the usual mix of misanthropy and overwrought pontifical self-congratulation that characterizes delusional cliques who see themselves as besieged everywhere.

    This Willard Anthony thinks is worth publishing? Sheesh...

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hi Sou,

    As luck would have it I too have been blogging about this very topic. Here are my very own words of wisdom, mostly copied verbatim from WUWT!

    http://GreatWhiteCon.info/2015/05/why-its-so-hard-to-convince-pseudo-skeptics/

    Note however that with very I little effort I have managed to attach a salient YouTube video at the end.

    They showed one single digusting image and measuring the brain activity and how the person responded to that was sufficient to allow you to identify if somebody was conservative or liberal. With a single brain image. With 95% accuracy


    ReplyDelete

Instead of commenting as "Anonymous", please comment using "Name/URL" and your name, initials or pseudonym or whatever. You can leave the "URL" box blank. This isn't mandatory. You can also sign in using your Google ID, Wordpress ID etc as indicated. NOTE: Some Wordpress users are having trouble signing in. If that's you, try signing in using Name/URL or OpenID. Details here.

Click here to read the HotWhopper comment policy.