Friday
Jan072011
by 
Bishop Hill
Bishop Hill A smear piece
Jan 7, 2011 Climate: Sceptics The main target of Adrian Kelleher's article in Ireland's Village magazine appears to be Richard Tol, with Ian Plimer referred to as a "fraud" for good measure.
Reader Comments (27)
Note that Mr Kelleher dropped the word "not" from one, crucial quote. We learned about bank fraud from the newspapers.
Before you click on the link to the article (bilge!) be warned that the first comment will have you reaching for a bottle!
Reminds me of Dellingpoles question the other day along the lines of "Why do they all have whiney voices"!
Alongside accusing Plimer of reversing scientific conclusions to suit his own agenda, Kelleher also writes:
"Lomborg operates the Copenhagen Consensus Center (CCC) which, in spite of its title, has served solely as a vehicle for the political views of its leader. The Copenhagen Consensus projects involve Lomborg hand-picking researchers, with Tol a favourite, to engage in rigged research projects which Lomborg further distorts beyond the point of fraud to oppose any reduction in fossil fuel use."
Which is kind of odd, given that anybody who actually bothers to read Lomborg will know that this is a reversal of his actual stance to suit Kelleher's (somewhat frothing) agenda.
And given the use of the 'f' word, probably actionable too.
@PeteH - Try living here in Ireland - Irish lefties are the most sanctimonious whiney buggers you will ever come across. They manage to combine NIMBYism, BANANAism, Marxism, Eco-fascism and 800 years of begrudgery into one miserable ideology. And they are bloody everywhere in the national media.
I find it hard to believe that any country could even come close to Canada in sanctimony per politician The CBC is the national public broadcaster. It has its own stable of whiny sanctimonious politicians. Perhaps some new Olympic competitions could be set up - such as Whining for accuracy and Whining for distance
The summary at the top: "Patchy and boosterist forecasting, unquestioning neo-liberalism, an unempirical attitude to science and systemic ambivalence to environmentalism taint the performance of this apparently domestically-unassailable Irish institution" is worthy of Pseuds' Corner, as is the rest of it. He never uses one syllable where four will do, does he..?
"Boosterist forecasting"
I presume by this the author means Tol's 'positivist' outlook on others' negativist predictions on global warming caused outcomes. Even that is not allowed - Tol has strayed from the straight line and he will answer!
I remember sometime back (I forget where), ... there was a thread where Tol and RPJr handed it out left and right to a bunch of the usual 'whiners'.
The linked article is a disgrace. The repeated accusations of scientific fraud by Lomborg and Tol are libellous. Both parties should take legal action.
Kelleher is merely elucidating the lamentably hegemonic ascendency of the boosteristically motivated with systemic environmentally-ambivalent tendencies, what could be clearer than that?
@Alex, lovin' it.
Nice answers on the Huff-Po yesterday as well :-)
Alan
Try living here in Ireland - Irish lefties are the most sanctimonious whiney buggers you will ever come across.
Well, there are few in California as well, and it is interesting that both Ireland and California are bankrupt.
But, yes, Alan, you are right -- err -- correct.
[snip - language]
Don Pablo hits the nail squarely:
[snip - language]
Did the ding-dong start in the lively comments here?
http://www.irisheconomy.ie/index.php/2010/10/28/mcdonald-and-cuffe-on-metro-north/
@Jack Hughes, thanks - the HuffPo crowd actually don't seem as belligerent as the warmists on Guardian CiF, but early days...
The HuffPo "fans" ranking system is just begging logical fallacy and groupthink.
I want to know what medication this guy is taking.
I will then know what not to take !!!!
Well it's interesting you attack people like Hansen who have actually published stuff and done some good scientific work but then defend Plimer who frankly talks utter BS on this subject and when people read his stuff they end up misled.
He claims volcanoes emit more CO2 than humans, which is a bald faced schoolboy error.
But skeptic blogs are only interested in smearing climate scientists. Not smearing people who genuinely do not know what they are talking about.
@Breath of fresh air
You may be interested in Mr Kelleher's view on the Vietnam war and Thomas C Schelling: http://www.irisheconomy.ie/index.php/2010/10/11/paddy-morris-on-the-economics-of-climate-change/
Schelling — not previously noted for his interest in nutritional supplements or African girls’ educations
Where does he get this stuff from, a very vivid imagination or some very strange substances, I can't read any further !!!!
Whats that got to do with Global warming.
@Breath of fresh air
Mr Kelleher argues that Tom Schelling has never been involved with public policy -- apart from 'Nam -- so that he should stay out of climate policy too.
That holds true for the majority of the Climate policy bods too, in fact isn't that the problem with Greenpeace and the WWF getting their 'papers' cited in IPCC 4.
Cthulhu
Who's attacking Hansen? If you are going to troll, at least bother to pick the right thread.
You will find comments on Hansen's 1988 temperature predictions elsewhere on this blog.
Oh, and for the record, I have been very rude about Plimer in comments on this blog. Comments you are clearly too lazy to bother to read.
Do your homework or go away.
Richard Tol
I was serious at [Jan 7, 2011 at 1:40 PM] above.
I was appalled at the statements made in Kellerher's article. You should consider a libel action.
Dominic
Dominic: We're considering our options.
Richard Tol
Good. I do not believe you should allow yourself to be traduced in this fashion without response. And I'm sorry it's come to this.