Seen elsewhere

 

Buy

Books
Click images for more details

Support

 

Twitter
Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing
Links

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace
« Behind the lines | Main | Booker on biofuels »
Wednesday
Feb222012

Naked Churnalism - Josh 151

Some journalists seem keen to get their kit off for a bit of exposure.

 

Cartoons by Josh

 

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

Reader Comments (38)

"No one said anything to me about the full monty!" - Horse, The Full Monty

Feb 22, 2012 at 11:30 AM | Unregistered CommenterMac

LOL!

Feb 22, 2012 at 11:53 AM | Unregistered Commentermat

Very revealing Josh, and really great.

However, all that this cartoon is doing is to "hide the decline".

Feb 22, 2012 at 11:53 AM | Unregistered CommenterPeter Walsh

Now this one I find entertaining compared with the last 2 poor efforts! One of the better ones.

Feb 22, 2012 at 11:56 AM | Unregistered Commenterclivere

Please tell me they're not going to produce one of 'those' calendars?

Feb 22, 2012 at 12:19 PM | Unregistered Commentermeltemian

Meltemian, what a great idea! A Naked Climate Calendar.

Feb 22, 2012 at 12:42 PM | Unregistered CommenterJosh

This one will "hurt" :-) great effort, my favourite form the past few weeks...

Feb 22, 2012 at 12:44 PM | Unregistered CommenterJiminy Cricket

Press headlines

Spot the odd one out.

LA Times/Chicago Tribune:
Scientist Peter Gleick admits he lied to get climate documents

SF Chronicle:
Gleick hurt by ethics lapse over climate papers

National Post (Canada):
Climate scientist admits he lied to get think-tank documents he later
leaked to the web

Washington Post:
Climate scientist admits duping skeptic group to obtain documents

New York Times:
Activist Says He Lied to Obtain Climate Papers

FT:
Climate expert admits to tricking institute

PBS Newshour:
Climate Expert Assumed False Identity to Obtain Documents

Scientific American:
Scientist Says He Lied to Obtain Documents from Climate Skeptic Group

Fox:
Climate scientist admits stealing docs from conservative think tank

The Atlantic:
Peter Gleick Confesses to Obtaining Heartland Documents Under False Pretenses
(Another superb article from Megan McArdle)

Guardian:
Gleick apology over Heartland leak stirs ethics debate among climate
scientists

Telegraph (Delingpole):
Peter Gleick - the Johann Hari of climate 'science'

BBC:
No comment.
On Black's latest thread, the top rated comment is from Anteros
"I'm amazed, although perhaps I shouldn't be. No mention of Peter Gleick?"
followed by several others saying much the same thing.
Black's Heartland thread has been closed.

Feb 22, 2012 at 12:58 PM | Unregistered CommenterPaul Matthews

A Naked Climate Calendar?

Do you think that climate alarmists and churnalists will need bigger buns?

Feb 22, 2012 at 1:07 PM | Unregistered CommenterMac

@Mac

buns or bungs?

Feb 22, 2012 at 1:12 PM | Unregistered CommenterMangoChutney

"Considerably bigger" both I should think!

Feb 22, 2012 at 1:38 PM | Unregistered Commentermeltemian

If it was the leaf of the fig they were clutching, it would be that of the genus 'ficus insipida' !!

Feb 22, 2012 at 1:49 PM | Unregistered CommenterAnoneumouse

Richard Black is doing requests!

"Confessions of a climate gate-opener"

"I've a lot of messages via emails, blog comments and Twitter asking for a follow-up post on the Heartland Institute, and am happy to oblige."

You have just got to love this bit:-

"Many thanks for all your messages - nice to know one's thoughts are in such demand!"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-17126699

Feb 22, 2012 at 2:15 PM | Unregistered CommenterGreen Sand

Black is admitting that he has become the story...and a laughing stock.

Feb 22, 2012 at 2:43 PM | Unregistered CommenterZT

Black loves being the story. The thing about activists is they have a deep need to feel important. There's a hero-complex thing going on there. And no shame about being the only major news outlet in the world not to report on the Gleick admission. Surely someone can alert BBC bosses that public interest news is actively being suppressed?

Feb 22, 2012 at 2:50 PM | Unregistered CommenterTheBigYinJames

Paul Matthews

Thank you for the list. I think it underscores the real impact of FakeGate -- they are now seen as liars and cheaters. We do not need to throw PG into jail. Nor do we need to take all his money in a civil suit.

What really happened is a PR disaster for the warmistas. I don't think many have realized that yet, but your list does show that is is happening.

Josh Working over time, are you? Keep it up. You are getting better and better, particularly with the facial features. But then again, you are getting a lot of practice :)

Feb 22, 2012 at 2:53 PM | Unregistered CommenterDon Pablo de la Sierra

We know that Roger Harrabin was funded by the CRU, and yet saw fit to report on the CRU without mentioning his funding source. I wonder if it possible that Richard Black and Peter Gleick have an unreported relationship and communications? (This might explain the strange disparity between newspaper journalism and BBC 'journalism').

Feb 22, 2012 at 3:08 PM | Unregistered CommenterZT

the strange disparity between newspaper journalism and BBC 'journalism'

May I rewrite this to " the strange disparity between real journalism and BBC creative writing'

Feb 22, 2012 at 4:03 PM | Unregistered Commenterstephen richards

I'm taking the liberty of reposting a reply to DPS on the dying embers of a previous thread - and adding a note of a recent development:-


Poor Soros must be pulling out his grey hairs, but that's what he gets for associating with idiots.
Feb 22, 2012 at 3:43 AM Don Pablo de la Sierra

I'm sure you know more about US politics than I, DPS, but aren't you worried that with Soros' resources and these practitioners of the left's black arts - the bad guys are going to win?

I can see Hansen & the usual green activists, plus opportunists like Occupy Everything/Code Pink/Cindy Sheehan etc etc and all the crazies from Gleick's alma mater Berkeley - all besieging the courtroom - while the Lamestream Meeja howl about "last chance to save the planet" and "big oil".

Remember "Bonfire of the Vanities" ?

Feb 22, 2012 at 8:58 AM Foxgoose

And today,a quote from Gleick's new pit-bull lawyer showing exactly which way things are heading:-

“Dr. Gleick looks forward to using discovery to understand more about the veracity of the documents, lay bare the implications of Heartland’s propaganda plans and, in particular, determine once and for all who is truly behind Heartland and why,”

It's going to get very political - and very dirty.

Feb 22, 2012 at 4:15 PM | Unregistered CommenterFoxgoose

Where is Hengist when you need him?
Or for that matter Zed?

Silence speaks volumes.

Feb 22, 2012 at 5:11 PM | Unregistered CommenterDon Keiller

Are Monbiot and Hickman really joined at the hip?

Feb 22, 2012 at 5:24 PM | Unregistered CommenterJonas N

It's going to get very political - and very dirty

It already was. It's just that it isn't going to be quite so one-sided from now on. Climate science is fighting back.

Feb 22, 2012 at 5:25 PM | Unregistered CommenterScots Renewables

Foxgoose quoted Gleick's lawyer growling

and, in particular, determine once and for all who is truly behind Heartland and why

Please let it be Al Gore or George Soros or Maurice Strong - someone like that with obvious motives for supporting AGW and a plain interest in keeping the phantom of Big Oil alive.

A stab in the dark: Gleick's behaviour could have been a ploy to achieve the access his lawyer is now talking about.

Feb 22, 2012 at 5:32 PM | Unregistered CommenterGareth

Sadly I've been busy with other stuff in the past couple of days. Could anybody please remind me when and how did Peter Gleick acquire the status of "climate scientist" rather than "water expert"?

Feb 22, 2012 at 6:00 PM | Unregistered CommenterMaurizio Morabito

Foxgoose

Because I cite a couple URLs in my reply, it is waiting the Bishop's approval.

Scots Renewables

Climate science is fighting back.
Puerile. Surely you can do better, what with that classic education you have. Or did you cut the rhetoric course as well as the physics?

Feb 22, 2012 at 6:04 PM | Unregistered CommenterDon Pablo de la Sierra

It already was. It's just that it isn't going to be quite so one-sided from now on. Climate science is fighting back.
Feb 22, 2012 at 5:25 PM Scots Renewables

Yeah - with the guy who used to help Clinton out with his zipper problems.

Quote:- “I’m a guy who would not be at all surprised to find worms under the rock — but I’d make sure to put bigger, slimier, nastier worms under the other guy’s rock”.

Sounds like those "out of context" emails got it about right on the ethics of "climatology".

Feb 22, 2012 at 9:14 PM | Unregistered CommenterFoxgoose

Peter Gleick acquire the status of "climate scientist" rather than "water expert"?
Feb 22, 2012 at 6:00 PM Maurizio Morabito

Shhhhh ..... Maurizio....... Gleick was never a "climate scientist".........not ever........nor even once......

He was always once of those rather inferior, low grade "water guys"........ I know it's true because an eminent climate scientist and (ex) Wikipedia editor told me ...... and he wouldn't lie..........would he???

Feb 22, 2012 at 9:20 PM | Unregistered CommenterFoxgoose

Monty? Surely you mean the full Indy :

"DENIERGATE: GRIJALVA CALLS FOR INVESTIGATION OF DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR SCIENTIST ON HEARTLAND PAYROLL

Congress has begun investigating the Heartland Institute after details of its strategy of climate denial were revealed in leaked documents.

In a letter to the chair and ranking member of the House Natural Resources Committee, Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ) has called for an investigation into the “conduct of Indur Goklany, the Assistant Director of Programs, Science and Technology Policy at the Department of the Interior.” As a budget document leaked by the Heartland Institute appears to reveal, the group intended to pay Goklany $1000 a month to write for Heartland..."

That's on top of the $100K to his colleague for generating Heartland's kindergarten-12 climate curriculum.

Feb 22, 2012 at 9:32 PM | Unregistered CommenterRussell

Congress has begun investigating the Heartland Institute after details of its strategy of climate denial were revealed in leaked documents.
Feb 22, 2012 at 9:32 PM | Russell

I think you mean Greenpeace has persuaded one of its stooges to write a letter.

Feb 22, 2012 at 9:40 PM | Unregistered CommenterFoxgoose

Paul Matthews (Feb 22, 2012 at 12:58 PM)

"Black's Heartland thread has been closed."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-17126699

Still open now, with an onslaught of scathing comments. How can Black survive this? Does the BBC have a credibility death wish?

Feb 22, 2012 at 9:52 PM | Unregistered Commenteredward getty

@Maurizio Morabito

Sadly I've been busy with other stuff in the past couple of days. Could anybody please remind me when and how did Peter Gleick acquire the status of "climate scientist" rather than "water expert"?

Maurizio, perhaps Gleick has attended the Mike Hulme school of credentialling:

During these 12 years in the Climatic Research Unit I came to see myself no longer as a geographer, but as a climate scientist. ((For example, on my passport I now stated my occupation as ‘climate scientist[...]

http://mikehulme.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Hulme-Research-narrative.pdf

Gleick on Gleick:

internationally recognized climate and water expert [...who works on issues ...] related to the integrity of science

Oh, my ... looks like we're going to have to redefine "integrity"

Feb 22, 2012 at 9:56 PM | Unregistered CommenterHilary Ostrov

Foxgoose

Just did a search and "hydroclimatologist" seems to be the word the Ministry of Truth will need to adjust. Seems to be the most popular term in use right now and appeared in this beautiful recent pre-Fakegate article.

"The 2011 “Climate B.S. of the Year Award” goes to the entire field of candidates currently stumping in New Hampshire for the Republican Party presidential nomination, the Pacific Institute announced Thursday.

The awards, in their second year, are intended to distinguish the most active among so-called climate change deniers.

In this case, “B.S.” stands for bad science, according to hydroclimatologist Peter Gleick, president of the Pacific Institute and a member of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences."

http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jan/05/local/la-me-gs-2011-bad-climate-science-awards-20120105

So... likely just a "hydrologist" in the revised future? How dare a hydrologist mess with the process of IPCC Climatology? Is he trying to make Consensus Climatologists look bad?.

Feb 22, 2012 at 10:16 PM | Unregistered Commenteredward getty

Scots Renewables

Climate Science is fighting back.

Yes. With deception, theft and fraud. Well done.

Feb 22, 2012 at 11:29 PM | Unregistered CommenterGixxerboy

Meltemian, a calender is a great idea, and with CAGW they would have no excuses on the shrinkage front.

Feb 22, 2012 at 11:35 PM | Unregistered Commenterold44

was it noted here that GWPF do not need to provide their bank statements to the fake charity run by the green activist with lottery funding?

Feb 22, 2012 at 11:49 PM | Unregistered Commenterdiogenes

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14120244

Blaggers is what The Sweeney used to call bank robbers in the 1970s

Feb 23, 2012 at 7:21 AM | Unregistered Commenterjamspid

PS "Subterfuge" is just a right posh poncey word

Still means the same conning people

Feb 23, 2012 at 7:29 AM | Unregistered Commenterjamspid

Welcome to one single theme - pornography. Even if you belong to millions of people worldwide who love and this is a bit of looking to some porn on the internet, so you are right.
porno

Apr 22, 2012 at 11:45 PM | Unregistered Commenterporno

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>