Books Click images for more details
A few sites I've stumbled across recently....
Links to this story just about everywhere this week.
Cartoons by Josh
View Printer Friendly Version
Nice one, Josh. Are Michael Mann and Richard Black related? They kind of look similar to me.
how to look like climate scientist
Good one Josh
Why are any of these guys paid journalists? Serious question.
"how to look like climate scientist"
Great one, anoneumouse, but you forgot the sandals.
Bernie, they do look similar don't they. Maybe it is a standard issue climate change look: round, beard, alarmingly warm.
A scenario just made for you and you have hit the nail on the head.
Now take out your largest hammer and hit, hit, hit some more.
As just written at WUWT...I can never tell Black from Mann from Schmidt. In real life.
Maurizio Morabito : .I can never tell Black from Mann from Schmidt. In real life.
The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.(George Orwell Animal Farm)
Good one Josh. You hit the nail on the head.Heartland exposed for1. Helping Anthony Watts who
proposes to create a new Web site devoted to accessing the new temperature data from NOAA’s web site and converting them into easy-to-understand graphs that can be easily found and understood by weathermen and the general interested public.
2. The biggest monthly funding by far is to Craig D Idso, whose fronts the co2science dot org website. Lots of summaries of (a) proxy studies of the MWP; (b) ocean acidification studies; (c) CO2 effects on plant growth; (b) global temperature studies.
The Heartland Institute is a dangerous threat to tens of thousands of jobs in the CAGW industry. With the truth exposed, some people in the PR industry might have to learn how to say nice things about people.
Black gets pwned on his own blog.
Just after Climategate in 2009 Black insisted
Update 2309: Because comments were posted quoting excerpts apparently from the hacked Climate Research Unit e-mails, and because there are potential legal issues connected with publishing this material, we have temporarily removed all comments until we can ensure that watertight oversight is in place.Update 2 - 0930 GMT Monday 23 November: We have now re-opened comments on this post. However, legal considerations mean that we will not publish comments quoting from e-mails purporting to be those stolen from the University of East Anglia, nor comments linking to other sites quoting from that material.Update 3 - 2116 GMT Monday 23 November: As lots of material apparently from the stolen batch of CRU e-mails is now in the public domain, we will not from now on be removing comments simply because they quote from these e-mails.However, an important couple of caveats: a) the authenticity of most of the material has not to our knowledge been confirmed, and b) it would be easy when posting quotes to break inadvertently some of the House Rules - such as the one barring posting of contact details - which are still in operation and which will see comments being blocked.
Update 2 - 0930 GMT Monday 23 November: We have now re-opened comments on this post. However, legal considerations mean that we will not publish comments quoting from e-mails purporting to be those stolen from the University of East Anglia, nor comments linking to other sites quoting from that material.
Update 3 - 2116 GMT Monday 23 November: As lots of material apparently from the stolen batch of CRU e-mails is now in the public domain, we will not from now on be removing comments simply because they quote from these e-mails.
However, an important couple of caveats: a) the authenticity of most of the material has not to our knowledge been confirmed, and b) it would be easy when posting quotes to break inadvertently some of the House Rules - such as the one barring posting of contact details - which are still in operation and which will see comments being blocked.
Meanwhile over at the blog about blogs about blogs...
Keith Kloor is pushing the "fake but accurate" line.
Surprisingly BBD-less lately. Is it banned again? Hope I did not hurt its feelings or anything.
Of course Black would score an own goal (love that phrase, first personal use I think) and get pwned, he operates on ideology, not principle. Ideology is contradictory, applying differently in every situation. Principle, however, is consistent. The latter is a difficult standard for humans, irrational by nature, to uphold. Some do better than others.
No BBD and no Zippedydoodah either.
ZDB is not nearly as bad... more like a drive by shooter.
DeSmogBlog seem quite happy to keep the quote from the allegedly fake document up on their website without a retraction or correction.
(bottom 2 paragraphs)
Jack,There is an interesting story behind Keith Kloor and SoggyGlob. Kloor once published an effusive blog post on Edward Maibach and Heidi Cullen, who is a boss at Climatecentral (for whom Kloor used to write). Maibach was claiming that climate activists ought not to use 'extreme events' to elicit fear as a mechanism to arouse interest in climate. I pointed out that Maibach was part of a John Lefebvre-organized group discussion that came to the opposite conclusion. Lefebvre of course, the founder of Desmogblog. This was in their 'report' about the discussion (written by Brendan DeMelle and James Hoggan):
“As long as you’re not trying to spread panic, or exaggerating the worst-case scenario, it’s fine to use some scary language to motivate people.”
That was it - I was banned from Kloor's blog.
The guy knows the kind of work Hoggan's and his climate friends do.
What with 'journalists' like Bob ward, Richard Black, Roger Harrabin and Keith Kloor the 'sceptic side' couldn't hope for anything better.
Went to the blog you suggested. Hilariously, I appear to have been 'blackballed' by the BBC; unable to sign in. Tried retrieving password and...nothing.
They really are despicable, aren't they? Talk about 'keeping them out of the debate'...
This is the worst reporting yet, and it's been written with the knowledge the authenticity of one is highly suspect.
"The Heartland Institute, the free market thinktank behind efforts to discredit climate change and the teaching of science in schools, "
"The documents included some details of where the institute gets its money as well as the people and projects it is funding.", and then quotes from the fake document ("dissuading teachers").
I sent a complaint to both firstname.lastname@example.org and email@example.com. That first quote is defamatory.
I suggest it's rather more than "highly suspect". As I've said elsewhere, I believe this article by Megan McArdle, senior editor of The Atlantic establishes that. Her detailed and forensic analysis of the “2012 Heartland Climate Strategy” document is especially convincing as she makes it clear that she disagrees “pretty strenuously with Heartland’s position on global warming”.
The Guardian seems determined to play a dangerous game.
Yeah "discredit ... the teaching of science" from Goldenberg. Retarded really isn't it? Aren't they just showing what asses they are?
I mean, even at my worst interprtation of the memo I though they had obviously left out an article or adjective in the "teaching science" quote. But no, to the great minds on the Graun enviro desk they've seen enough they want to stop teaching science, why stop there? After the Megan McArdle analysis of the memo I think even the uninitiated may start to realise that modern day enviro jounalism lives at the level of special needs reporting.
Ah yes but the fake documents are backed up by the real documents so it doesn't matter if it's a fake it's still got real things in it although there fake.
Great Cartoon Josh and I'll add to the 'They make cliamte scientist from the same g(r)ene pool.' comments above.
I was shocked by that too - to put that out after it's become clear there's a problem with that document is really reckless.
I don't understand why they'd do that - do they really care so little for trust and accuracy?
The previous reporting whas shoddy, this is deliberate.
There's no question about it, the Heartland institute have got to take legal action.
And I don't mean start legal action and then accept an apology, they need to take legal action and win the case against the Guardian and BBC and prove that they were wrong to publish junk without any attempt to verify it with those affected.
Bernie, they do look similar don't they. Maybe it is a standard issue climate change look: round, beard, alarmingly warm.Feb 16, 2012 at 9:30 PM Josh
Gavin has also been to the same identikit shop.
We seem to have our first suspect in the FakeGate fiasco - Brendan DeMelle, Executive Director and Managing Editor of DeSmogBlog.com. It is being alleged that he knows the source of these documents, including the fake one.
Mosh has homed in on a more likely suspect, some unknown called Peter Gleick. All details at Lucia's.
Anyway...I'm planning to start donating a few dollars to Hearland, after striking my best "JR" pose of course.
That way nobody will ever accuse me again of being _on the pay of_ Big Oil. Rather, I _will be_ Big Oil.
I'm large. I contain multitudes.
I think you need an updated cartoon, Josh. One in which they shoot themselves in the foot with a smoking scanner.
Love your cartoons!
Perhaps you can consider some riff on Peter Gleick's "mini-Gleick" (hypothetical of course):
Notify me of follow-up comments via email.