Monday, March 31, 2014

Denier weirdness: WGII has unbalanced Anthony Watts @wattsupwiththat

Sou | 5:51 AM Go to the first of 10 comments. Add a comment

Talking about the unbalanced. Anthony Watts is is on a roll.

Whenever he sees something he doesn't like his vocabulary takes a dive.  Today he has an article (archived here) full of lies, half-truths and disinformation.  It's peppered with the word - "hate", which he reverts to when he gets upset. In addition to the headline, he's used the word eight more times.  It's as if he loses any command of vocabulary when something displeases him.  He started his article like this:

HATE WEEK on the Climate Certainty Channel™
What a week this has been. In preparation for the release of the IPCC Working Group II report, hate speech against climate skeptics seems to have ramped up and turned into a week-long unreality show. 

Perhaps it's the realisation that WGII is not going to be what Matt Ridley said it would be.  Who knows.  Whatever it is, Anthony Watts lashes out at all and sundry.

First up he once again misconstrues what Professor Torcello wrote. By now we can only conclude it's quite deliberate.  Anthony notes that others have pointed out that he misrepresented Lawrence Torcello, yet he still claims that he wrote that deniers should be jailed.  What Lawrence Torcello actually wrote was that "an organised campaign funding misinformation ought to be considered criminally negligent".  Not "deniers" and not "jail". It's the people funding misinformation that he had a go at.

I reckon Anthony wants to rally his lynch mob to keep up the pressure.

Next Anthony has the effrontery to claim that And Then There's Physics blog "allows hate speech".  He even does this while linking to his own WUWT article where he shows that the comment in question was deleted shortly after it appeared! Showing the complete opposite.  And Then There's Physics bends over backwards in "trying to keep the discussion civil" - and does a great job too.

Anthony goes on to list all the other people who offended him, including a blogger, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, everyone who criticised Roger Pielke Jr, including Nate Silver for "caving in", and the Anti-Defamation League for not sticking up for climate science deniers.

He ends up by posting a old fudged chart of Roy Spencer's that was even worse than this one, writing:
As reality (measurements) diverge from models, becoming more uncertain,  the certainty of the IPCC gets stronger, and the hateful rhetoric ramps up to match the mean.

Anthony is feeling very put upon.  He's probably let down by the likelihood that WGII won't, after all, spell "game over for climate alarm".

From the WUWT comments (Warning)

This epitomises the comments and is probably the reaction that Anthony was hoping for. (Warning - it's ugly.) twg2a PitBull says:
March 30, 2014 at 11:00 am
I want those evil beasts to continue hating me, calling me filthy names and spitting in my face. Do you know why? Because every time they do, it makes me even more determined to fight them until we win, or until I die. When evil people hate me because I am trying to do what’s right, it gives me great strength. Sooooo, keep it up lefties. I thrive on your hatred. Thank You.. 


  1. "twg2a PitBull says ...Sooooo, keep it up lefties."

    That always makes me laugh. I'm a right winger. But unlike our canine friend I'm a genuine right winger: not a corporate tool pretending to be a right winger because that's where its easiest for corporate tools to hide.

    1. Some of our best environmental regulations were initiated by leaders of the conservative party here in Victoria.

      The most active climate hawks in Australia number among them a former leader of the conservative party. Another former leader is also aware of the risks of climate change and in the past has been very vocal. He is unfortunately keeping quiet at the moment, presumably for political reasons. He's still in politics.

      I do wish conservative political parties hadn't been taken over - it's happened here just like it did in the USA.

    2. I mean, what is the conservative position on conducting a radical experiment with the one atmosphere we possess?

      We're not arguing with conservatives: we're fighting the radical reactionaries and corporate anarchists who have hijacked the concept.

    3. I'm a conservative in the US, but I also have a PhD in physics so do not believe in ignoring real science. Besides some of the ways to combat climate change are also good for foreign policy. Some of the world's worst regimes are run by oil (Saudi Arabia, Iran, Venezuela,...) - why should we contribute by buying oil?

      Something like more than 80% of the electrical energy where I live is created without fossil fuels. I'm looking now for an electric car or plug-in hybrid. Then, when I drive by gas stations in the future, I'll think that's one less dollar I'm donating to despots. I'll also be helping innovative new companies developing the technologies, fueling further innovation and job growth. The great thing about electric transportation is that an entire area could have their transportation "decarbonized" when a power plant changes its means of energy production (assuming the local cars and trucks are all electric). Lastly, these cars have the potential for better performance. The Tesla S car is already faster than most sports cars, although it is quite expensive.

    4. It would be nice if you guys were louder, you are much more convincing to the climate deniers as a typical scientist. These people do not have their opinion because of scientific arguments and will not come to reason due to arguments, they may be willing, however, to listen to their peers.

  2. I'm a bit annoyed that Anthony Watts writes that AndThenTheresPhysics allows hate speech on this blog. He doesn't! This is completely false. The quote he links to got moderated. How is that allowing hate speech?

    1. Exactly, Rachel. It wasn't just ATTP either. Seems to me that Anthony was just lashing out at anyone and everyone not caring about the veracity of his claims. He was in prime "making up stuff to please the lynch mob" mode.

      The fact that And Then There's Physics is so civil whereas his mob are so uncivil is probably part of his motivation. There is no logic and no sense of fair play at WUWT.

      He did the same with his malicious "making up stuff" about Lawrence Torcello. Same with his slant on Dr Rowan Williams, who he implied used the word "denier" - which he didn't. Only the journo used that word, not Rowan Williams. (Although I personally would see nothing untoward if he had.)

      As for his using the fudged temperature chart - that was just the icing on the cake as far as his disinformation went.

      I don't know if there was a true statement in his entire article. Anthony was on a roll of disinformation. Probably priming himself to misrepresent WGII.

    2. Its worth noting that the so called 'warmist hate speech' is pretty mild compared with the hate speech to be found (and that is encouraged) on WUWT. It says that people putting the futures of billions of people in jeopardy ought to be in court. Whereas WUWT has demanded to see climate scientists on trial based on nothing more than the misrepresented contents of some emails.

  3. I've just left a comment on your most recent post about my honour of being mentioned on WUWT. I hadn't seen this post yet. Thanks.


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. Details here.

Click here to read the HotWhopper comment policy.