A portrait of a denier: Sheldon Walker trolls RealClimate

While we're trying to cope with this dastardly Australian heat wave, I'm avoiding hard work. Instead, here's some entertainment in the form of a self-portrait of a denier.

I don't know why deniers take offense at being called deniers. After all, all they boast about is how the science is wrong, the scientists are frauds, and they don't "believe in" science. They delight in their denial.

There's an entire post at the climate conspiracy blog WUWT today about how offensive it is for scientists to call science deniers "deniers". The WUWT article is from Sheldon Walker, who's been here in the past to get some tips. On another occasion I wrote about a pickle he got into. He's an odd chap :)

What Sheldon was complaining about (or more accurately, under) this time was a translation of an article in Le Monde, written by Eric Guilyardi and Valérie Masson-Delmotte. The authors of the Le Monde article were questioning the reasons some people focus on the moods of climate scientists rather than their research. It's worth a read (original and translation).

Ironically, the authors at one point speculate:

What if the focus on the moods of climate scientists was a way to disengage emotionally from the choices of risk or solutions to global warming? Since the experts are worrying about it for us (it’s their daily life, isn’t it?), let’s continue our lives in peace.

So what does Sheldon do? He tries to get everyone to focus on his emotions! Is that his way of disengaging emotionally?

Off-topic and onto Sheldon

Another odd thing is that nowhere in the realclimate article do the authors call anyone a "denier". The closest is the word "denial" which only appears in this pair of sentences:

Catastrophism often leads to denial, a well-known psychic mechanism for protecting oneself from anxiety. Managing risk is part of our daily lives and supposes that we are not in such denial (active or passive) as it prevents clear and responsible action. 

Perhaps Sheldon was wanting to allay his anxiety by his trolling for attention.

This is what Sheldon wrote at RealClimate.org:

22 Jan 2019 at 6:27 PM
I am willing to believe that most climate scientists are trying to do a good job.
However, it must be depressing to find that a large number of people don’t “trust” what climate scientists are saying.

This is because global warming is a “toxic” issue. There is a lack of trust on both sides, and a high level of nastiness.

Climate scientists need to continue doing a good job. But they need to work on building “trust”. Stopping calling people “deniers” is the first step.

So an important question is, CAN climate scientists stop calling people “deniers”. If they can’t, then perhaps we are all doomed.

Gavin Schmidt was very polite in his response:

[Response: Trust is based (or should be) on telling the truth. The existence of climate denial – the reflexive gain-saying of any scientific result that might indicate that we might need to do something about carbon emissions – is undeniable. By demanding that scientists ignore this, or refuse to name it, you are asking that they avoid the truth. I would suggest rather that if people don’t want to be rightly accused of climate denial, they don’t go around denying climate science. – gavin]

Now you'll probably notice a few things Sheldon did.

• First of all Sheldon's comment is way off topic. It has nothing to do with the article.
• Then there's the attempt at being condescending: "trying to do a good job".
• He tries on the meme of typical deniers with his allegations that there are "sides" and that "a lot of people" don't trust scientists. Sheldon offers nothing to back up those claims, perhaps because of articles like this one in Sciencemag.
• You'll also notice how he tries to shift the blame. According to Sheldon, the reason we're facing "doom" is because climate scientists call deniers what they are. He doesn't mention the disinformation campaigns, in which he's a willing  participant. (Sheldon has posted articles on denier blog WUWT on several occasions.) Nor does he talk about what the research scientists do, only referring to a word he's seen a scientist use now and then. He doesn't give any credit to scientists for their brilliant advances over the years that have brought such huge benefits. Typical denier!

Telltale signs of a denier (and attention-seeking troll)

Sheldon followed up his first comment with another, which was wisely relegated to the borehole at RealClimate.org. This is where his denial and trolling comes to the fore. It's too long to repost; however, I'll point out some of his tactics:

1. It's all about Sheldon. He goes to great lengths to say how clever he is. As well as wanting to bignote himself (to Dr Schmidt, who is a first class mathematician from Oxford, no less), he's probably wanting people to think that someone who is clever in some things cannot at the same time be a climate science denier.
2. His beef with Gavin Schmidt and, apparently, the authors of the article, neither of whom has probably ever called Sheldon Walker a denier, is that he has been called a denier. The only conclusion I can draw is that Sheldon identifies with deniers when the word is mentioned, particularly when it's mentioned by a climate scientist. This raises the question - if Sheldon doesn't believe he denies science, then why does he think scientists are talking about him when they talk about climate science deniers?
3. Another point I'll raise might be one you noticed straight off. While moaning and groaning about using the word "denier" to refer to deniers, Sheldon uses the derogatory word "alarmists" no less than five times. He says he hates them, alarmists that is. Although he labels people who do science and those who don't reject it as a matter of course, Sheldon doesn't say what euphemism he would suggest instead of using the straightforward word "deniers".
4. Finally, Sheldon leaves no doubt that, apart from his "poor little me" trolling, all he really wants is to get traffic to his website. He made a big point about it and provided a link.

Some tips for the aggrieved denier - don't whine, take action

If Sheldon or another aggrieved denier reads this, they might take up this suggestion. If you don't want to be thought of as a denier:

1. Stop referring to others as "alarmists" and "warmists". It's a dead giveaway.
2. Avoid writing articles for Anthony Watts' climate conspiracy blog, even if it means missing out on some hits on your website.
3. Read the paper by Dunning and Kruger, and ask yourself, which category to you fit into? If you don't like what you discover you've always got the option to change something about yourself.
4. Finally, don't take on the label. If someone talks about climate science deniers, there's no need to assume they are talking about you, is there? Or is there.

That's all folks. You'll have seen it all before, no doubt. Deniers are odd little characters, aren't they.