Sunday, 7 August 2011

Wood mashes Mashey

In Chronicle of Higher Education, NAS president Peter Wood (picture) delivers a devastating critique of the warmistas in two articles: Bottling Up Global Warming Skepticism and Climate Thuggery. NAS, you may think, National Academy of Sciences, isn't that those people who white washed the hockey stick? Do not fear, this is a different NAS with far more credibility: National Association of Scholars.

In the first piece, NAS president Wood writes about the american showman P T Barnum, who got rich from freak shows and a museum with mermaids and other fake curiosities. That constitutes a truly devastating critique of the state of climate science; a merciless blow that the peddlers of climate apocalypse never will recover from. Once you get compared to P T Barnum (or Hitler) it is game over!

One alarmist who has much in common with P T Barnum is John Mashey. I wrote about Mashey's shameless attacks against Edward Wegman, the worlds best statistician, last autumn. In his piece, Woods writes:
But let’s put aside these vacant thoughts and turn to some serious news. Science reports that retired computer scientist Dr. John Mashey is attempting to patch the tattered reputation of “hide the decline” Michael Mann, the climate scientist whose famous “hockey stick” chart shows exponentially increasing global temperatures in the near term. Mashey has been, as he puts it, “trying to take the offense” against global warming skeptics by flyspecking their publications. “You hope they make a mistake,” he says, and when they do, he pounces with demands that journals retract whole articles. Some journals indeed have. As Science puts it, “His critics say Mashey is more interested in destroying his foes than in debating the issues.” Professor Mann is extolling his efforts at “exploring the underbelly of climate denial.”
Trying to find errors is your opponents' publication: what kind of low life would sink so low? Mashey has shown his true colors (green, red, brown), and the innocent Wegman is now under investigation for plagiarism. We skeptics would never do anything so mean. We are honorable people! Remember Climategate!

In the second piece, NAS president Wood documents how the warmists try to silence dissenting voices and cover up scientific facts that undermine their position:
Mann himself has deployed nuisance lawsuits in a similar fashion. He has sued Tim Ball—a Canadian global-warming skeptic, an environmentalist, and former professor of geography—for libel for writing that Mann “should be in the State Pen, not Penn State,” for his role in Climategate. Mann also threatened a lawsuit against Minnesotans for Global Warming for a satiric YouTube video titled “Hide the Decline.”
Indeed. Instead of engaging in a scientific debate with Ball and Minnesotans for Global Warming, Mann just goes ahead and sues them. But that is because he cannot counter their rock-solid arguments. By thus attacking his strongest critics, Mann tries to make everybody else afraid and thereby he prevents an open and informed scientific debate. "Makin' up data the old hard way. Fudgin' the numbers day by day. Hiding the snow and the cold and a downward line. Hide the decline (hide the decline)." That video was so funny! And scientific! "Oh Climategate I think you have sealed your fate. I hope you do a lot of time, cuz what you did was such a crime."


Mashey and co-thug Coleman try to retaliate in a piece of their own in CHI:
Although we see this elsewhere and ignore it, we were surprised to find articles and comments by Wood in CHE that could be considered libelous. We value the academy for open discussion and seeking truth. We both take academic misconduct seriously and have filed formal, detailed misconduct complaints. Wood’s use of phrases like “tattered reputation,” “statistical trickery and suppression of discrepant data,” “Barnum-esque hokum,” and “academic dishonesty” are not things that credible people publish without showing expertise and evidence. As Christopher Hitchens has so accurately stated: “That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.” Much of what Wood writes falls under the category of assertion without evidence, counter to the principles of scholarly discourse.
This is utterly ridiculous and without any merit what-so-ever! Why would NAS president Wood want to libel anybody? He is not taking sides in the climate debate. He describes his honorable intentions as follows:
Is anthropogenic global warming (AGW) a valid scientific theory? Is it well supported by the empirical data or is it mostly an artifact of computer modeling? I don’t have answers to these questions. I stand, rather, on the side of those who favor rigorous scientific inquiry, transparency, and openness. I am not a climate scientist, but neither do I cede the whole matter of answering such questions to the designated experts. Good science doesn’t limit itself to the views of narrow-cast specialists. Valid observations, corrective criticism, competing hypotheses, and rigorous testing can and often do arise from other sources.

22 comments:

  1. Credibility? Honorable? Seriously, get real. Wood has zero credibility as a scholar.

    ReplyDelete
  2. So why is it that anyone can join the National Association of Scholars for $42, when it takes a lifetime of outstanding scholarly activity to be considered for election to the NAS? Forty-two dollars for any moron stupid enough to think it was important, versus contributions to science that changes the discipline. Does the National Association of Scholars publish any journals, especially those that are reviewed by experts? Do you actually know any members of the National Academy of Sciences? I've worked with three over my career. You're a joke.

    ReplyDelete
  3. By the way, do you actually know who Coleman is? On what basis can you classify him as a thug? Besides expression of a carefully crafted opinion, what else leads you to this conclusion?

    Does anybody read this blog?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Endorphin Monkey7 August 2011 at 21:39

    What's so bad about being compared to Mr. P.T. Barnum? He was a hard-working successful businessman who gave people what they wanted. That creates its own respect. Ask the people who run the WWE and UFC about that. They'll agree. Barnum donated his time and money to improving the great city of Bridgeport, Conn. and Tufts University. He also supported the emancipation of the slaves. Of course he held his head high!

    As well, climatarian gullible-onians should be happy to be personally critiqued as human beings by us truth-loving patriots. This is not ad hominem libel. It is constructive criticism designed to morally improve them. It also confirms the fact that people are paying attention to them, and they should welcome the free publicity. Their claque of sycophantic boot-licking toadies won't be swayed by any inadvertently misinterpreted slur, so they need not worry about criticism damaging their reputations. They've been doing a perfectly good job of damaging their own reputations.

    Nothing wrong with friendly advice, eh?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Baron von Monckhofen8 August 2011 at 05:17

    Sam wrote:

    "So why is it that anyone can join the National Association of Scholars for $42, when it takes a lifetime of outstanding scholarly activity to be considered for election to the NAS?"

    I think that president Wood already has answered that objection:

    "I am not a climate scientist, but neither do I cede the whole matter of answering such questions to the designated experts. Good science doesn’t limit itself to the views of narrow-cast specialists. Valid observations, corrective criticism, competing hypotheses, and rigorous testing can and often do arise from other sources."

    Personally, I think that anybody has just as much right to a scientific opinion as has a Nobel prize winner. Even more, I would say, because "scientists" often have a financial stake in science, and hence cannot be objective.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I am not a climate scientist, but I play one at the pretend NAS.

    What's your "opinion" on the validity of the theory of dark matter?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Can you name one major advancement in any scientific field in modern times that was made by someone not trained specifically in that field. I can think of a couple, but since you think anyone can make observations or hypotheses as valid as a Nobel prize winner, just wondering what examples you had.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Cute.

    Exactly what I expected: a dishonest answer.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Baron von Monckhofen10 August 2011 at 02:00

    Sam,
    Exactly what I expected: ad hominem, personal attacks, persecution. Just like the Church treated Galileo. History repeats itself.

    A more recent example is the Lord Monckton, who has made ground-breaking contributions in the climate, medical and military sciences.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I love it! Your post is absolutely hilarious. I wish I could write stuff as funny and creative as that, but I don't have the talent.

    I think your post wins the Internets for today.

    By the way, proper English would read: ...climate scum such as Al Gore... And you don't really need the "the" before climate scum.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Thank you Sam. However, NAS president Wood should also be given credit. I'm basically just echoing his thoughts

    ReplyDelete
  12. Dear Baron von Monckhofen,

    I am sooooo obtuse. I get it now. You have completely changed my thinking on climate science. There needs to be a name for a website like yours. In honor of the well known Poe's Law on religious fundamentalism, I hereby propose Monckhofen's Law of climate science denialism.

    Congratulations on such a tremendous effort. Really and truly, it is a stupendous achievment. With your permission, I intend to popularize this new Law.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Baron von Monckhofen10 August 2011 at 10:24

    Sam: "What's your "opinion" on the validity of the theory of dark matter?"

    I believe that furniture and other matter still exist when one switches off the light.

    But I cannot prove it.

    ReplyDelete
  14. But Baron,

    I have unequivocally proven the existence of dark matter. Just last night. It was dark. My toe interacted with matter in the form of my bedframe. Energy was emitted from my mouth. I shall not repeat such vulgar language on your blog.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Endorphin Monkey10 August 2011 at 12:59

    When I see dark matter, I flush.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Hats off to Dr. Peter Wood for providing a salutary, inspiring story of our times!

    There was Professor Wood, an ageing, balding nobody. Forgotten by a passing world that didn't care. Mere dogshit on the soles of history. Pointless, febrile excrement about to be scrubbed off forever by the harsh doormat fibres of time. Insignificant yet unspeakable ordure clogging up the natural order.

    But wait! Merely by creating an entity and giving it a fancy name - such as the the National Association of Scholars, then declaring hisself President of the same, kicks the whole game onto a new league. Now, as President of a National Association, y'all, you can spit in the face of Michael Mann, Al Gore and the whole warmist establishment. It's only a matter of time before Newt and Rush are inviting you down for the weekend.

    Of course, the rubes don't have to know that such "organisations" have all the credibility of the "National Association of RecidivistPaedophiles" or the "National Association of Necrophiliac Roadkill Opportunists". As far as they're concerned, the aforementioned NARP, NANRO and Professor Wood's NAS all co-exist with equal authority in a 24/7/365/366 news environment.

    I truly dread to think what a drab, colourless world it would be, if reliable corporate financing wasn't available to turn such rags to riches dreams into reality.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Where do I sign up for NARP?

    ReplyDelete
  18. I'm not sure JS - the website appears to be down.
    Perhaps try Ollie @ currycranks.com

    ReplyDelete
  19. Dark matter is an evil substance, my friends. I'm not surprised "sceintists" want to study dark matter, because today's "sceince" is nothing but an athiestic religion.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Chek, how dare you malign the good name of the National Association of Recidivist Paedophiles!

    I'll have you know that, as a long time member it is a charitable and honest organization, doing many good deeds in orphanages and the catholic church.


    Professor Anthony Watts. University of Punditry. Honkatonkahwhynnym, Ohioioioioitsofftoworkwego US of A.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Insipid now looking at life fifa 14 coins, I always hope that when the President so as romantic love, then warm. Every time I go to his business trip to the capital of poetry, he made a number of text cheap fifa 14 coins messages, hoping to use text messages as in the past to convey love and always have to ignore the rationale for each gas in their own death. Since some of his daughter, he and cold weather to give her daughter fifa 14 coins more than the clothes to wear; daughter learning to walk, and she let fall a good; ... ...

    ReplyDelete

Welcome to comment on my blog, dear reader.