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

Mediating Concerns

[In response to the Auditor’s “What’s your point?”]

Steve,

My first point is that mediation (the topic of this blog post) should seek to prevent the phenomenon of having posts which start in the middle of the conversation, which arguably is the nature of more than your blog.

My second point is that I’ve heard your Ammann story more than 20 times, at the very least. This habit of yours (not only yours, I concede) might render the first point less definitive than one might think. If your conversations were as easy to recollect as Ammann’s “bad for his career” line, which I surmise is the whole point of recollecting this particular story over and over again, then I guess most of your posts would not start in their middle.

Read More

(Source: judithcurry.com)

Mr McIntyre’s entire appeal was built upon an assertion that the disputed information was withheld without intention to publish and should be disclosed under the EIR because it would ‘show a long-standing academic fraud by the Climatic Research Unit’.

What About Now?

[Neal J. King discovers that conflict and stress are tied up around the Auditor’s quest.]

I spent an hour last December talking with Steve McIntyre at the AGU meeting in SF; quite civil. But his main topic was his struggles to get data out of Michael Mann about the hockeystick – the main events of which took place years ago. I stopped him, and asked:

Steve, I’m really not that interested in this – this was years ago. I’m more interested in knowing, What does Stephen McIntyre want his life to be about now?

I did not get an answer to that. Steve declared that he had to catch someone at another talk, and we parted on pleasant terms.

(Source: rankexploits.com)

Preemptive Audit

[Richard finally provides references for survey design he deems proper.]

Thanks. Finally!

I think the keystrokes were introduced for perceptual studies, to inspect record rates that are in ms or less. This could be useful here to discriminate raters that would have followed the Auditor’s advice:

Note that I suggested that readers spend equivalent time to those who responded to Lew’s survey. If, for example, you don’t care about the quality of your answer or you are answering the question the same way – as some Lew respondents did -, it takes scarcely any time to fill out the survey. **Indeed, if one were so inclined, one could submit multiple responses very quickly.** If one were so inclined, HideMyAss.com enables IP address changes in the blink of an eye as well.

http://climateaudit.org/2013/05/05/cooks-survey/#comment-417816

Our emphasis.

Perhaps that suggestion belongs to the doctrine of preemptive audit.

(Source: wottsupwiththatblog.wordpress.com)

Climate Bullies

> Willard is a bully. Just like Mac. Just like me.

Perhaps, but not long ago Moshpit was distinguishing good and bad bullies. Where has the special pleading gone?

Bullying qualifies anyone who resorts to violent means to intimidate in communication. Nicknaming is only one of them. Labeling is another one. Among its practitioners, we must include Judge Judy, who just used a trick to qualify Indefinite Others as wingnuts, and recently called Less Indefinite Others dittoheads.

Read More

A Small but Significant Discrepancy

[John Hunter shows how to introduce background information without having to cry “oil shill!”]

I find it interesting that Michael Mann, in his letter to the House Committee, describes Steve McIntyre as a “mining industry executive” and McIntyre’s own biography (www.uoguelph.ca/~rmckitri/research/stevebio.doc) describes him as working “in the mineral business”. Both descriptions are pretty euphemistic. Around the time of the writing of McIntyre and McKitrick (2003; the Energy & Environment paper) and of the above biography (dated in October 2003), McIntyre was actually a “Strategic Adviser” to CGX Energy Inc. who describe their “principal business activity” as “petroleum and natural gas exploration” (cgxenergy.ca/investors/CGX_AR03_part2.pdf). CGX Energy Inc. occupy the same Canadian address given for McIntyre in McIntyre and McKitrick (2003), an address which is also occupied by Northwest Exploration Company, another business which apparently engages in oil and gas exploration (or at least a company with the same name does). McIntyre was also President of Northwest Exploration Company.

Read More

(Source: realclimate.org)

I hope I’m not the only one who appreciates your juxtaposition of a note asking where you attacked someone, with a note in which you make broadscale condemnation of people.

Robert Grumbine, not being the only one who appreciates the Auditor’s irony.

[I]f we de-McI-fy the argument for a minute […]

toto, finding an interesting question by doing so.
Older posts RSS