Topher Field managed to fleece tens of thousands of dollars out of gullible and hopeful science deniers. Now he seems to be making the mistake of trying to defend his dumb video and the lies it contains. If he had any sense he'd take the money and run, not stick around to be shown up for so grossly misrepresenting climate science and climate economics.
Topher Field made a comment on HotWhopper about my initial response to his utterly nutty Australian election video about quadrillions of dollar coins looping around Neptune and the sun. He implies he thinks he got it right. Topher wrote in part:
It's incredibly kind of you to dedicate so much time to trying to 'take me down',
I replied, among other things:
I wrote the above article in a very short time. I don't care about you one way or another although I've formed an opinion about your political ideology, from this and other videos you've made, and your scientific and economic illiteracy. Your ideology explains your motivation for spreading disinformation, which speaks to your lack of ethics. But I'll grant you that you may merely be supremely ignorant. A veritable example of Dunning and Kruger. Or you could just be trying to make a crust and, like some people, are willing to sacrifice integrity in the process. Any or all of those could be the driving force or none of them. It doesn't matter. Therefore I'll skip the speculation as to what drove you to spend other people's money producing utter nuttery.
What I'll address in a future article is the content of your video and that of Monckton's ridiculous pdf file that I gather you've used as the basis for your nonsense claims.Topher doesn't want to know what's wrong with his video or Monckton's mathurbations, saying"
Anyway, that's all from me, I've learned long ago not to argue with those who prefer to believe their own reality rather than the one in front of them.What a plonker! Does he really think his silly cartoon bears any resemblance to reality? While Topher takes my advice and runs, but back into the arms of the marks he conned, there may be other stray readers who'll venture here from a google search for "topher" or for "monckton". This might get them started on thinking critically about science and/or the economics of climate change. Or at least make them pause before deciding wannabee cartoon producers and potty peers know more about climate science and economics than specialists who've spent their lives researching those subjects.
So let's get going.
Because this post is very long, I've put in a break. Click here to open to the full article if you're on the home page.
