I posted yesterday on the conspiracy hysteria floating around the climate denial blogosphere, as well known climate denier Anthony Watts went into a tirade about hints of a new initiative from John Cook’s Science affirming Skepticalscience blog – who he referred to as “.. creepy playtime Nazi cross dressers.”
Have not known John to show up in drag anywhere, so not getting the reference, unless Watts is following Cook et al a lot more closely than I do. It’s a revealing comment in any case – the degree of sheer hatred and paranoia displayed by Watts and his commenters is remarkable.
My guess? John Cook has likely put his failed cartooning talents back to work again. Given the juvenile fascination former cartoonist turned amateur psychologist and numbers bookie for the 97% John Cook has with smearing climate skeptics, this will reveal itself as some sort of interactive “name and shame” application for the top 100 climate skeptics worldwide.
I hope it does, because if so, and if it turns out to be as libelous as I think it will be, it will give a whole bunch of people a reason to sue the pants off that whole team of creepy playtime Nazi cross dressers. Bring it.
97 Hours of Consensus communicates the fact that 97% of climate scientists have concluded that humans are causing global warming. The research, conducted by scientists at The University of Queensland’s Global Change Institute, University of Reading, Michigan Technological University and Memorial University of Newfoundland found that 97% of relevant climate papers endorsed human-caused global warming. The paper was published in the academic journal Environmental Research Letters in May 2013.
In contrast, less than 10% of Americans are aware of the 97% consensus on climate change. This ‘consensus gap’ matters. When the public aren’t aware of the overwhelming scientific agreement on global warming, they’re less likely to support action to mitigateclimate change. 97 Hours of Consensus seeks to close the consensus gap.
The campaign begins on 9/7 (the date itself reinforcing the 97% consensus). An interactive webpage featuring the quotes and caricatures is available at http://sks.to/97
How You Can Help
- Retweet our tweets, sent out via @skepticscience every hour for the next 97 hours. Tweet excerpts from your favourite quotes, using the #97Hours hashtag, or retweet your favourite caricatures (Raymond Pierrehumbert is a personal fave)
- Share our Facebook posts, also published on the hour every hour.
- Share our images posted on skepticalscience.imgur.com.
- Blog about #97Hours and embed our quotes/caricatures (which are all creative commons licenced and free to be republished)
Acknowledgements
97 Hours of Consensus began as a whim when I thought it might be cool to caricature 97climate scientists. I fast learnt what a big task I was taking on. This project was made possible by a dedicated collaborative effort by the Skeptical Science team. Tracking down short, pithy, stand-alone quotes from climate scientists is not as easy as it sounds and required digging through interviews, articles and long YouTube talks. Many thanks to Dana, Things Break, Rob Painting, Bob Lacatena, Sarah, John Hartz, Baerbel and Kevin C for helping track down the quotes. The task of posting a new cartoon every hour for 97 consecutive hours was made substantially more manageable by Doug Bostrom who automated much of the process. The amazing interactive webpage at http://sks.to/97 was coded by Bob Lacatena. And this whole project wouldn’t have been possible without the tireless collection and organizing of information by Baerbel.
Only: “.. creepy playtime Nazi cross dressers.” He must have had a mellow day.
Three day earlier Anthony Watts again dropped any pretense of conservative or Christian family values: “SkS Reichfurher [Reichsfuehrer] John Cook”.
And in the comments DayHay wrote: “If I am a climate denier, then Cook is a climate Nazi, pretty simple.”
To which Watts replied: “I’d say the if the uniform fits, the name fits too.–Anthony”
Interesting, even the German climate “sceptic” blog EIKE republished this WUWT post. They should really know their history better. Naively pretending not to know whether the word “Reichführer” was intended won’t do.
You do realize the operative word for the research is relevant. Just like the IPCC, the researchers ignored all information which did not meet their criteria for yes on AGW. Thousands of papers and all say man is warming the planet is an opinion even if you believe this junk science. The IPCC has 97 percent confidence in their model, yet the model does not predict the current hiatus in warming just like it does not predict the hiatus from 1940 to 1980 nor the cool down from 1880 to 1912. I would point out that court trials have all kinds of experts, you can buy their opinions and grafts provided you have money to say anything on anything. NASA junk science said the shuttle was safe to fly and look what happened to the shuttles. The claim of AGW relies on the CO2 emitted by man to be warming things up. The Mauna Loa study since 1959 shows zero correlation between CO2 levels and climate which is the same thing the ice core studies show over hundreds of thousands of years. Throw in the medieval warm period and the little ice age both occurred without any input from CO2 level changes and something else is doing the climate change.
mbe11 says some very extra ordinary things but with out any extra ordinary evidence.