Mansplaining, Dogwhistling, and Gaslighting

[After the scorched earth tactic, @ShubClimate rediscovers moderation. UPDATE - Shub says “pussyfooting” triggered moderation.]

Thank you for your comment, Steve, which I just saw.

You say:

Nor is it true that I never use the word “fraud”. I’ve written from time to time at Climate Audit about major frauds e.g. Bre-X and Enron.

Perhaps I should have been clearer. You never use the F word regarding Mike, and you frown upon anyone who does at your blog.

Read More

Radio, television, film, and the other products of media culture provide materials out of which we forge our very identities; our sense of selfhood; our notion of what it means to be male or female; our sense of class, of ethnicity and race, of nationality, of sexuality; and of “us” and “them.” Media images help shape our view of the world and our deepest values: what we consider good or bad, positive or negative, moral or evil. Media stories provide the symbols, myths, and resources through which we constitute a common culture and through the appropriation of which we insert ourselves into this culture. Media spectacles demonstrate who has power and who is powerless, who is allowed to exercise force and violence, and who is not. They dramatize and legitimate the power of the forces that be and show the powerless that they must stay in their places or be oppressed.

Rounds of Pussyfooting


Thank you for your comment.  To answer your question about why I am doing this, I could reply that I like to solve puzzles, that I earned enough money and could indulge in an excentric hobby, or find another line already used by the Auditor. I could also epilogue about philosophical scepticism.  Instead, I’ll simply return to the first sentence I quoted from Judy:

Read More

Betting on end of the world doesn’t make much sense.

crandles, showing how the Chewbaccattack can still remain constructive.

INTEGRITY ™ — We Rely on Evidence

From Is to Ought

Had Broker said:

  1. Climate changes because of CO2.
  2. There are risks coming from (1).
  3. Reducing CO2 emissions would reduces risks caused by (1).

he would be immune to Judy’s criticism. They all are factual claims. Yet it’s quite clear that we can hear what to infer from these factual claims.

Why is that? Because we listen to a broker B with some action A in mind. This action has some relevance R to the topic T under discussion.

The formula is therefore B x A x R x T.



INTEGRITY ™ — It’s about Thought Leadership.

[A comment that failed Judy’s moderation. I wonder why.]

> The subject of [who shall not be named] is not relevant to the climate change debate.

I disagree, Judy. Most of what may be called “the climate change debate” is a libertarian creation. Since you seem to have some kind of libertarian affinities, I believe you should agree that debates about proxies are proxy debates.

Read More


The 29 Stages Of A Twitterstorm

Lots of steps in less than 141 characters.

Do you mean that after almost a decade you are finally going to get around to answering this question [When you remove the bristlecones and the Briffa chronologies, is there still a HS reconstruction?]?

Boris, noticing it’s been awhile.
Older posts RSS   Newer posts