Anthony Watts sinks to another vile low: Jim Jones' suicide cult and climate science

With only a couple of days to go until the Paris COP21 talks begin, science deniers are falling apart. Yesterday I wrote how Judith Curry stooped to tabloid writer David Rose as a pulpit for her brand of "no mitigation" advocacy and disinformation. (She is so anxious that her message is falling on deaf ears that she put out a plea to "Be sure to link to the article" and commented "I hope that as a result of this article, i will get a few more twitter followers and followers of Climate Etc.".)

Today Anthony Watts did a Heartland Institute. He posted an article at his blog, WUWT, likening people who accept climate science to Jim Jones and his suicide cult. His latest article proclaims (archived here):

Similarities to Jim Jones and the Cult of Climate Change

"...The apocalypse of an alleged climate change shares many of Jones’ cult-like qualities."

[Update: See the update below relating to plagiarism in the WUWT article.]

Phil Plait said of the Heartland Institute comparison to terrorists and mass murderers:

The Heartland Institute, a far-right climate change denying "thinktank" has put up a series of billboards so disgusting, so vile, that I find it difficult to find words to tell you just how disgusting and vile they are.

So instead, I’ll show you one:

At the time, Anthony Watts claimed (after the fact) that he would not have approved of the posters if he'd been asked. He wrote:

if I had been given that courtesy my answer would have been a resounding NO. Instead, I believe we all got the notice after the fact.

Perhaps it's a case of desperate times, because since then, Anthony has posted articles quoting Hitler and Osama bin Laden to denounce climate scientists. And today his article likens people who accept climate science with Jim Jones and his suicide cult.

Anthony billed his article as a "Guest opinion by Arkady Bukh, Esq". (The only Arkady Bukh Esq I could find via Google and LinkedIn was this one. Given the audience at WUWT, it would be ironic if they were one and the same.) Arkady's headline and opening was:

Similarities to Jim Jones and the Cult of Climate Change
The apocalypse of an alleged climate change shares many of Jones’ cult-like qualities.

Jim Jones, the People’s Temple leader, led over 900 persons to commit suicide 32 years ago. Jones was charismatic and knowledgeable of both Scriptures and human behavior.

After the mass murder/suicide and the murder of U.S. Congressman, Leo Ryan, Jones and his followers were on the news every day for weeks. Jones, who built his cult around a “doomsday” scenario — convinced his followers that the world was past due for an apocalyptic ending very soon.

The apocalypse of an alleged climate change shares many of Jones’ cult-like qualities.

The article went on to list four reasons untruths/logical fallacies for why the author thinks climate change is like Jones' cult:

1. Climate doomsayers believe they possess truths about the past, present and future and their truths cannot be disputed by anyone.
2. Doomsayers refuse to debate their belief. They call their dogma “settled science” and attack any critics that dare to whisper in the dark.
3. Just like a cult, doomsayers has a formal doctrine-setting body — not unlike the Jones’ circle of advisors. The reports by the “ruling” body are thought to be the main source of authority and the texts of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change are quoted as unholy scripture.
4. Staying with the Jonestown analogy, the climate change alarmists have created mythologies intentionally built on lies and half-truths. The fallacy can be ascribed as an appeal to everyday experiences, giving the listener some sense of truth-based teaching to mix with the soup of confusion.

Now I don't know anything much about Jim Jones' cult other than the members killed themselves and nearly 300 children. Arkady Bukh, Esq is claiming that the above points apply to it. Whether they do or not, here is why they are untruths/logical fallacies when applied to climate:

1. This first point shows that neither Anthony Watts or the author knows anything of science. No-one is claiming to "possess truths". Rather climate science is about evidence and scientific theory. Rather than "cannot be disputed", one way science progresses is by dispute. 
2. The second point is the same as the first, I don't know why it was listed as a separate point. Sure, WUWT is "in the dark", but who is attacking whom? Scientific knowledge progresses through disputes and debates. 
3. The IPCC doesn't lay out any "formal doctrine". It is not a "ruling body". It analyses and reports the current science. That's all. 
4. Further down Anthony Watts and Arkady Bukh, Esq list what they think are "mythologies" and "lies and half-truths". The evidence in their article suggests they both are wallowing in a "soup of confusion".

WUWT and Arkady Bukh, Esq claim climate science is a hoax

Here is some of what WUWT and Arkady Bukh, Esq thinks is a hoax. The first one is a strawman fallacy and a misrepresentation:

By now it’s been all over the news that 2015 was the hottest year ever. If, in fact, 2015 was the hottest year of all time, there should be enough calamities happening to inspire a dozen movies. Instead, the opposite is occurring.

That's wrong. 2015 is going to be the hottest year on record, that is, in the instrumental era since 1850. It could even be the hottest year since civilisation began, but it would be difficult to ascertain whether there was a hotter year during the Holocene climatic optimum between 5,000 to 8,000 years ago. No reputable person is claiming that it was the hottest year ever in the past 4.5 billion years. There is ample evidence from paleo-climate studies that the planet was hotter than it is now in past epochs.

Then Arkady Bukh, Esq says that climate science is a hoax because last year, in 2014, in winter, Antarctic sea ice extent was greater than it had ever been since the late 1970s. And last year, not this year, a ship got stuck in the ice. He wrote:

There was record sea ice in Antartica. In truth, a global warming expeditionary ship got stuck in the ice. Artic sea has been making a nice comeback, and the Great Lakes had record ice with only three ice-free months. If it were the hottest year, the ice should be melting.

Notice how he jumps from "all time" in his first point to "the late 1970s" in his second point? Oh, he doesn't mention that the maximum sea ice extent was for winter sea ice (the September extent). Nor does he mention that the record is only since the late 1970s. And he pretends that it was this year not last year. It's only people who know about such things, or people who click his link that would find that out. By the way, his reference to the Great Lakes was also to 2014, though he didn't bother to provide any link for that. The lakes were warmer this year. And as for global warming hinging only on the extent of Antarctic sea ice or the Great Lakes in North America - it doesn't. There are thousands of thermometer readings taken from all over the land and oceans that show that the global mean surface temperature is rising. And the sea ice in Antarctica in winter time or summer time, is not a good indicator even of surface temperature in Antarctica, let alone the rest of the world.

I won't go through every silly point made by Arkady Bukh, Esq, suffice to say that he calls on the fake Oregon Petition, moose populations, polar bears, snow and even makes an "Al Gore is fat" type of comment.

With only a couple of days to go to the start of the Paris COP21 conference, the best that Anthony Watts has to show is an utter nutter saying the majority of the world's population who don't agree that climate science is a hoax are like Jim Jones and his suicide cult.

Update - plagiarism from WUWT

In the comments, Thomas Hanke pointed out that the article contained plagiarism. He found a blog article from January this year that listed the points under "hoaxed". Curious, I did some more searching and found more plagiarism:

• a section on the stolen emails was plagiarised from an article at New American, written in November 2009, which explains why it talks about - six years on - that "Reliable researchers are still compiling the information for a publication that could shake the nation’s foundation on climate change." 
• the last section of the WUWT article is a copy and paste of the top paras from an article published this September at Hot Air. the WUWT article isn't formatted properly, which is probably why some commenters were confused.

Sou 8:36 pm 28 November 2015

From the WUWT comments

If you thought that readers of WUWT would object to Anthony Watts' disgusting article, you'd be wrong. He's no only left with the dregs of humanity, about the level of those left at Judith Curry's place. This latest article brings all the utter nutter conspiracy theorists out of the WUWT woodwork. They drowned out the reasonable comments.

There were only two comments that I found that objected to the comparison with Jim Jones' cult. Both were from climate science deniers:

Blue Sky is the only person who states that he finds the article disgusting, despite being a climate science denier:

November 27, 2015 at 1:07 pm
Great website. I am a skeptic.
Comparing those who disagree with skepticism… with Jim Jones is disgusting. Was this site hacked? 

dp is another climate science denier, and objects:

November 27, 2015 at 3:19 pm
I stopped reading at “Jim Jones” and went straight to the comments. Associations such as this belong in the Godwin’s Law realm. Probably my loss but I don’t care. 

The rest were mostly from conspiracy theorists and other climate science deniers:

Dawtgtomis is proud that he has resisted "mind control" of science:

November 27, 2015 at 9:15 am
Easy, Bruce, he’s one of us.
Chaam, you’d think that religions around the world would be denouncing the “model fellowship of Mann” as a false, self-aggrandizing, pseudo-prophetic cult, after so recently witnessing the Jones tragedy of mass mind control.
The one difference that stands out, is that the “church of the omnipotent greenhouse in carbon” uses computers to “read” the future and leaves it up to man to save the planet from an “out of control human infestation”. Somehow religious leaders are sucked in by the technology and believe that they can use this ideology of moral culpability to their advantage, in righting the world’s wrongdoings.

Bruce Cobb doesn't like how human knowledge, industry and commerce has been tainted by science.

November 27, 2015 at 5:37 am
It’s cult-like, but oh so much worse. Warmist ideology, thinly disguised as “science” has permeated and tainted all branches of human knowledge, industry, and politics. The description of meme-plex seems to cover it best. Humanity has never seen anything like it before, and hopefully, when finally stamped out, never will again.

John Robertson thinks that, well it's hard to figure out what (or if) he thinks. Something about eugenics and phrenology:

November 27, 2015 at 9:50 am
“Humanity has never seen anything like it before, and hopefully, when finally stamped out, never will again.”
Sorry that is bollocks Bruce.
History shows many outbreaks of Mass Hysteria.
The scheme is as old as language, the con promises to convince the storm gods to spare you, as long as you pony up.
This latest outbreak is Eugenics packaged, just as Phrenology was “science”.
The difference here is that CAGW seems to have been created, orchestrated and is still being protected from investigation. By our state bureaucracies.
When following the money our governments figure prominently.
Kleptocracy ; a word the Greeks bequeathed us, corrupt and out of control bureaucrats seem to be a feature in every country where the Global Warming Scheme is dominant.
So the Cult of Calamitous Climate is far worst than cult like, it is run by committee.

Bruce Cobb thinks he's figured out what John Robertson was trying to say, but doesn't completely go along with whatever it is. He points out that the rest of the world accepts science (unlike him and the rest of the conspiracy theorists at WUWT):

November 27, 2015 at 11:20 am
Sorry, no sale. Eugenics is certainly a good example, but nowhere near the worldwide scale of the Climate Campaign. There was no “Intergovermental Panel for the Prevention of Racial Impurity”, for example. 

knutesea says he's a "knuckle dragging man", and his comment supports that self-assessment:

November 27, 2015 at 10:09 am
JR
“So the Cult of Calamitous Climate is far worst than cult like, it is run by committee.”
IMO, one of the early important victories of CAGW was based on a strategy that originators such as Maurice Strong may have stumbled upon.
After WWII the people fell in love with scientists. So much so that if a scientist said so, it must be true.
During the 70s stagflation many professionals suffered. Originators such as Mr Strong resurrected the careers of insignificant scientists such as Hansen and then many followed.
Hoffer describes the above group (forgotten professionals) as one of the vulnerable groups to a mass movement. Because I’m a knuckle dragging man, I equate it to what happens when a formerly good looking woman loses her looks and seeks attention.
CAGW will never be the last hoax. It is currently in the top 5 and perhaps worse, it is teaching future mimicers how to apply its successes to future ruses.

PaulH points out that no-one has yet popped up to say "fooled you":

November 27, 2015 at 5:55 am
I’m not sure I like the term “hoax” in this context (although I admit I’ve used the term myself). In a hoax, doesn’t the perpetrator usually/eventually jump up and say, “Ha ha, fooled you!”?

J. Philip Peterson trots out the "communist" meme so beloved of science deniers and climate conspiracy theorists:

November 27, 2015 at 6:21 am (part only)
One of the traits not mentioned here was his propensity towards Marxism/Communism:
Before forming a church, Jim Jones had become enamored by communism and frustrated by the harassment communists received in the U.S.[2] This, among other things, provided a seminal inspiration for Jones; as he himself described in a biographical recording,[2][3]
“I decided, how can I demonstrate my Marxism? The thought was, infiltrate the church. So I consciously made a decision to look into that prospect.”
I read one of the many books about Jonestown (about 5 years ago) and did find many similarities with the CAGW doctrine. They also wanted money from Russia to back the church. 

sergeiMK was one of only two people (by my count) who voiced an objection on factual grounds:

November 27, 2015 at 6:23 am
What on earth is this!!!!!
Where are the references for
1. They are scientists no scientist know the TRUTH about the past or future and I challenge you to find a published document that says differently
2. settled science – no science is settled. GHG actions are understood to a very high level of confidence but settled science is generally used by climate change contrarians.
3. The knowledgeable body is made up from climate scientists. The sky dragons would find it difficult to publish (as would flat earthers) in the same way as iron sun/sky dragon/zero point perpetual motion would find publishing on WUWT difficult.
4. just speechless! where is the evidence for the claims? 

Samuel C. Cogar

November 27, 2015 at 9:26 am
Great truthful commentary, Arkady Bukh, Esq, ….. I loved it.

marlene talks about devil worship:

November 27, 2015 at 9:28 am
Satan knows the scripture too and he’s the leader of ALL cults. 

Terry Hembry has a saline solution to global warming:

November 27, 2015 at 9:30 am
The problem does not lie in, Green house gases! Global warming started after the end of the last Ice Age! When the ice deposited the salt from the World’s oceans. You have the Great Salt Lake in the US. The Himalayan mountains, Africa, and as far south as El Salvador they are taking the salt out to make fresh water! Put the Salt back and the Oceans temperature will go back to the original temperature and you won’t have to worry about the Hurricane season or Wildlife’s or dust storms anymore! I have done the math and the research! I can Help the problem!!

MrX steadfastly doesn't "believe" in the evidence. He refuses to "believe" there is any evidence of global warming:

November 27, 2015 at 12:36 pm
Religion is faith without absolute proof. CAGW is a belief despite proof to the contrary. So it’s not on par with religion. It’s something else all together.