The tendency of Anthony Watts to conspiracy theories of the wacky kind increases week by week and year by year. What is harder to figure is whether he believes his nuttery or whether he just likes to sit back and watch his readers fall head over heels for his latest bit of paranoid thinking.
This week we saw Anthony Watts imply that John Kerry didn't condemn the barbaric group of thugs from ISIS, for murders and other atrocities, when he did. And in much stronger terms than Anthony Watts ever could (Anthony doesn't have the linguistic capability).
Anthony distorted a speech to get his audience fired up. To get the lynch mob going. Is it laziness, incompetence or deliberate deception on the part of Anthony that leads him to twist facts to suit his agenda?
Today he's done the same (archived here). He's published a couple of paragraphs written by one of his latest adopted strays, Eric Worrall. Eric is about as straight as a corkscrew, but he doesn't much like it when he's caught out. Not that there's much chance of that happening at WUWT.
Any notion more complex than "it's all a hoax" addles the brain of the average WUWT-er. Tell them black is white and they'll agree. Tell them up is down and they'll come back for more. Tell them hot is cold and an ice age cometh, and you'll have the denier hordes clamouring and swearing eternal allegiance to their heros.
Ask them to think about something as complex as the nature of democracy and they fall in a heap.
So when you combine a philosophical discussion about the nature of democracy with a misrepresentation of an article, you've won the dismal deniers for another day (or whatever brief span of time a WUWT reader can give their attention.)
Here is a summary of what Eric managed in his very short guest blog. It's probably approaching a record for the most things wrong and/or weird in the fewest words.
- He misrepresented the ABC itself
- He misrepresented the nature of The Drum on the ABC website
- He misrepresented an article in the Drum on the ABC website
- He is against any public discussion about democracy
- He is against any action to protect the environment
- He misrepresented the position held by the author of the article
- He misrepresented the argument of the author of the article.
