Comments on: Flaherty slays denier Delingpole, takes aim at me

By: Climate Conversation Group » Never the twain shall meet

Climate Conversation Group » Never the twain shall meet — Wed, 02 Feb 2011 07:50:38 +0000

[...] reader of the Climate Conversation, Matt Flaherty, has made some intelligent and generous comments after taking yours truly to task for issuing a partially misleading press release last [...]

By: Richard Treadgold

Richard Treadgold — Wed, 02 Feb 2011 04:54:26 +0000

Matt,

I accept your apology, since the press release ought to have pointed out that the source of NIWA’s ‘statement’ was in fact a graph. I shall be more prudent in future. We appreciate your support for our campaign against vague temperature records. It puts me in mind of Gordon Ramsey’s Campaign for Real Gravy!

So I shall launch the Campaign for True Temperatures!

By: Richard Treadgold

Richard Treadgold — Wed, 02 Feb 2011 03:47:34 +0000

I’m glad you think so and I hope you stick around; we might learn something!

By: Matt Flaherty

Matt Flaherty — Wed, 02 Feb 2011 00:46:29 +0000

I was wondering about the italics.
Thanks for the warmth. You guys are all right.

By: Andy

Andy — Tue, 01 Feb 2011 23:50:35 +0000

Matt,
I appreciate that you are a free speech supporter, and this is to be applauded. I thought you might be interested to know that Donna Laframboise, one of the bloggers you cited in an article you wrote, is very much of this ilk, and she blogs frequently on this topic at http://nofrakkingconsensus.wordpress.com

A couple of us who comment on this blog contributed to her “IPCC Citizen Audit” last year, where we painstakingly went through the IPCC references and counted up the number of peer-reviewed items.The total was bout 1/3 non-peer reviewed.

I’m sure Donna would welcome any feedback on free-speech issues.

By: Andy

Andy — Tue, 01 Feb 2011 23:41:15 +0000

Damn, I was trying to be clever and close the missing tag. It didn't work ...

— Ha ha ha. It was way upthread. Fixed. RT.

By: Andy

Andy — Tue, 01 Feb 2011 23:40:20 +0000

Maybe we can all stop using italics

By: Bob D

Bob D — Tue, 01 Feb 2011 23:39:49 +0000

Ben Pile had a good article on it. He concludes:

By making a caricature of Monckton, Delingpole, and climate scepticism, the BBC reveals itself as the same kind of beast it attempted to slay: given to dogma, unwilling to countenance either debate or dissent, and failing to reflect on its function as an impartial broadcaster. It could be all the things it mocks in Murray’s film. It could be Fox News. It could be the homophobic bigot. It could be the religious zealot.

http://www.climate-resistance.org/2011/02/mythologising-monckton.html

By: Bob D

Bob D — Tue, 01 Feb 2011 23:30:14 +0000

I see Anthony Watts saw them coming and told them to stuff off. Good on him. The problem for the BBC is that the readerership of WUWT is probably somewhat larger, and certainly more international, than the viewership of the BBC4 programme itself.

If you Google “BBC4 Meet the Sceptics” you will find only negative commentary in the top hits (apart from programming schedules).

So it is more likely to have damaged the BBC than the sceptics. Next time the BBC approach sceptical scientists like Lindzen, they are unlikely to get an interview.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/02/01/bbc4s-meet-the-skeptics/

By: Matt Flaherty

Matt Flaherty — Tue, 01 Feb 2011 23:08:47 +0000

Quite true and I support libel law as a concept. Unfortunately in England and Wales the law puts the burden on the defendant or respondant to prove that the speech act is truthful. This makes it very lobsided and corporations and individuals with lots of money are able to silence detractors just with the threat of libel action. I would imagine that Monkton could use the same tools to get his reply out there as Abraham did and this could be amplified by his supporters. I’ll have a look at the reply and see how that stacks up before I jump to any conclusions about it.