CanadaFreePress Apologizes to Dr. Andrew Weaver

Fri, 2011-01-21 11:32Richard Littlemore
Richard Littlemore's picture

CanadaFreePress Apologizes to Dr. Andrew Weaver

Website retracts Tim Ball’s BS

The website Canada Free Press has issued a retraction and apology (full text below) to University of Victoria climate modeller Dr. Andrew Weaver for the content of an article written by Dr. Tim Ball.

Ball, whose own unspectacular academic tenure ended with a fizzle in 1996, has found a second career pretending to be a world-renowned climatologist (he once wrote to then-Prime Minister Paul Martin that he was “one of the first climatology PhDs in the world” - a statement that is purest fiction). In addition to signing on as a “science advisor” to energy industry front groups such as the Friends of Science or the Natural Resources Stewardship Project, Ball has written and spoken extensively, seldom passing up the opportunity to libel real scientists. (Though, when the going gets tough, the dishonest get going.)

One of Ball’s favourite targets has been Weaver, the Canada Research Chair in Climate Modelling and Analysis at the University of Victoria in Ball’s B.C. hometown. On occasion, Ball has even had the nerve to show his face at UVic, only to run into an audience who was capable of fact-checking his claptrap on their laptops. Most recently, he gave a lecture in which he made the outrageous claim that climate models don’t include water vapour or Milankovic cycles, only to have a student in the audience politely tell him he was wrong.

Now, clearly, Ball has staggered beyond the pale, saying a bunch of things that are so obviously, demonstrably and categorically false that Canada Free Press has done the right thing. As the CFP correction says:

“Contrary to what was stated in Dr. Ball’s article, Dr. Weaver: (1) never announced he will not participate in the next IPCC; (2) never said that the IPCC chairman should resign; (3) never called for the IPCC’s approach to science to be overhauled; and (4) did not begin withdrawing from the IPCC in January 2010. 

“As a result of a nomination process that began in January, 2010, Dr. Weaver became a Lead Author for Chapter 12: “Long-term Climate Change: Projections, Commitments and Irreversibility” of the Working Group I contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the IPCC.”  That work began in May, 2010.  Dr. Ball’s article failed to mention these facts although they are publicly-available.”

The line that may be most important for Weaver, however, is this:

CFP also wishes to dissociate itself from any suggestion that Dr. Weaver ‘knows very little about climate science.’ We entirely accept that he has a well-deserved international reputation as a climate scientist and that Dr. Ball’s attack on his credentials is unjustified.”

In fact, Weaver has a Nobel Peace Prize plaque hanging on his wall, in honour of his previous work on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

But Ball is still on the lecture circuit, still saying that climate science is a fiction. You have to hope, though, that before paying $50 a plate, his audience has an opportunity to ponder who, in this discussion, has a record of accuracy and integrity, and who has been caught out, time and again, lying about everything from the extent of his own credentials to the elements of other people’s Nobel quality work.

Since posting the apology last week, Canada Free Press has stripped it from their website along with Ball’s biography and virtually everything he ever wrote for the site. The full text of the retraction is as follows:

On January 10, 2011, Canada Free Press began publishing on this website an article by Dr. Tim Ball entitled “Corruption of Climate Change Has Created 30 Lost Years” which contained untrue and disparaging statements about Dr. Andrew Weaver, who is a professor in the School of Earth and Ocean Sciences at the University of Victoria, British Columbia.

Contrary to what was stated in Dr. Ball’s article, Dr. Weaver: (1) never announced he will not participate in the next IPCC; (2) never said that the IPCC chairman should resign; (3) never called for the IPCC’s approach to science to be overhauled; and (4) did not begin withdrawing from the IPCC in January 2010. 

As a result of a nomination process that began in January, 2010, Dr. Weaver became a Lead Author for Chapter 12: “Long-term Climate Change: Projections, Commitments and Irreversibility” of the Working Group I contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the IPCC.”  That work began in May, 2010.  Dr. Ball’s article failed to mention these facts although they are publicly-available.

Dr. Tim Ball also wrongly suggested that Dr. Weaver tried to interfere with his presentation at the University of Victoria by having his students deter people from attending and heckling him during the talk.  CFP accepts without reservation there is no basis for such allegations. 

CFP also wishes to dissociate itself from any suggestion that Dr. Weaver “knows very little about climate science.”  We entirely accept that he has a well-deserved international reputation as a climate scientist and that Dr. Ball’s attack on his credentials is unjustified.

CFP sincerely apologizes to Dr. Weaver and expresses regret for the embarrassment and distress caused by the unfounded allegations in the article by Dr. Ball.

Comments

Yahoo! Chalk up one for the good guys!

I read an article in the CFP by John O'Sullivan that trashed Dr. Mann. The CFP should also apologize for that article.

That website just makes stuff up.

...cached copy here: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:PfgfGm_N8KQJ:www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/31141+tim+ball+velikovsky&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a

Excerpts:

Scientific Reaction To Velikovsky Symptomatic Of Climate Science Debacle
By Dr. Tim Ball Thursday, December 16, 2010

Many years ago a colleague approached the President of the University with our plan to hold a conference on the ideas of Immnauel Velikovsky. He angrily rejected the plan saying he would not allow anything on campus associated with that charlatan. The President was a physicist and Velikovsky had challenged prevailing scientific views. In some ways it doesn’t matter whether Velikovsky was right or wrong. The problem was the reprehensible actions of the scientific community. His treatment holds many lessons for today’s debate over climate change.
....

Velikovsky’s major ideas built on the claim that Earth has experienced natural global disasters throughout its history. The major cause of natural catastrophes was brushes with other objects in the solar system and beyond. It’s probably thanks to Velikovsky that Walter and Luis Alvarez were able to propose the claim that a collision with an asteroid 65 million years ago led to the extinction of dinosaurs. The father/son connection serendipitously allowed cross-discipline discussion between physics and geology. The intellectual isolation of specialization has undermined the ability to understand.

Science Is The Ability To Predict

In the end Velikovsky succeeded because he passed the ultimate test of science; the ability to predict. More important, they were in contradiction to prevailing views. He made many and apparently none are incorrect to date. The interesting one was the temperature of Venus, which was almost double what the textbooks said. The same textbooks that incorrectly use Venus as an example of runaway CO2 induced Greenhouse Effect.

Failure of the University President to approve a conference on Velikovsky was symptomatic of the dogmatic, closed minds that pervade modern science. The few scientists involved with the AGW debacle deliberately exploited and practiced that condition. Their actions indicate they saw this as a battle, but it was against the truth and as Aeschylus said, “In war, truth is the first casualty.”

Poor Dr Ball, eh? The CFP was just about the only place he could get himself into print anymore.

There's another positive aspect to this story, too. When the CFP says so clearly that it takes Dr Weaver's credentials and professionalism seriously and distances itself from Tim's blethering, its readers are going to take note -- and these are those trusting folks who want to believe that the science is wrong, the ones who flock to Ball's speaking engagements, are reassured to hear that the world is carrying on as usual and their retirement savings are secure. I know how they feel. I wish it was all a big mistake, too. More than that, the CFP has stated pretty clearly that the great Dr Tim Ball, one of the world's first climatology PhD's, has lied and libelled a respectable person. I suspect that the best thing about this story is that Dr Ball has been publicly and firmly disowned by a very influential news source, and that is going to have a considerable impact upon its readership.

. . . of a new trend? May be the first of many to come. About time.

Hi Richard, I see that on 11th you ran an article about Kent Clizbe (http://www.desmogblog.com/cia-vet-stalking-hockey-stick-author-mike-mann) and now you’re onto the back of Tim Ball. Along with that we have your fellow disciple of the CACC doctrne Snapple renewing his attacks on John O’Sullivan, just as he was on that other disciple, Joe Romm’s Climate Progress (http://climateprogress.org/2011/01/11/cia-vet-kent-clizbe-stalking-hockey-stick-author-mike-mann/) on 16th.

Romm was a bit nasty, suggesting that “ .. Clizbe is either an ex-CIA contractor – a mercenary who finds that anti-Islamic “counter-terrorism” is no longer paying the bills, forcing him to take money from people who want to make trouble for legitimate climate scientists. Or he’s a kook”.(Maybe he’s simply a “spook”).

“Snapple”, also make nasty comments involving associates of mine with his “ .. A propagandist named John O’Sullivan .. a fossil-fuel mouthpiece called The Canada Free Press. .. One of the editors of the CFP is the infamous Canadian denialist Tim Ball. .. ”. Well, at least John and Tim and Kent do have the courage of their convictions by publishing their names, background and contact details.

I visited “Snapple”’s blog (http://legendofpineridge.blogspot.com/) and took a look at his “complete profile” and what are we told there? Only that his blog is “Legend of Pine Ridge”, just where we started. What convictions does “Snapple” have?. It would seem that he is not proud of those he hold about climate change, otherwise he’d be happy to let all of us know who he is (as I have said on another of your threads, I have low regard for those who hide behind false names).

On that page “Snapple” has an article “Kooky Kent Clizbe Does Not Speak for the CIA” which makes mention of “ .. Kooky Kent's promoter, blogger John O'Sullivan . ” and “ .. the malignant denialist Tim Ball .. ”. Well, I can see why he’s scared to let people know who he is, but he shouldn’t think that he can hide on the Internet. I’m sure Kent could easily use his CIA contacts to track him down, then watch the libel action. After all, John is not only “ .. the world's most popular Internet writer on the greenhouse gas theory .. ” but is also a “Science writer and legal analyst specializing in anti-corruption .. ” who has been “ .. successfully litigating for over a decade in the New York State courts and U.S. federal 2nd circuit. .. ” (http://www.suite101.com/profile.cfm/johnosullivan). Watch out Snapple, he may come to get you.

Convictions proudly held are to be respected, which does not mean accepted so let’s get back to someone with the courage of his convictions, John O’Sullivan. I don’t see eye-to-eye with John on everything but I do have respect for his courage. His opinions on climate change are not only in the Canada Free Press but, like mine, are plastered all over the Blogosphere.

Not only that but John has assembled “the Slayers” (http://www.slayingtheskydragon.com/), a powerful team of climate science critics to publish books that expose the flaws in the IPCC’s interpretation of science. First off the press QUOTE: In a world’s first ‘Slaying the Dragon: Death of the Greenhouse Gas Theory’ brings together some of the planet’s most powerful critics to expose the fraud that you always instinctively knew existed UNQUOTE” with another due out in the Spring. The promoters of that first book “ .. proudly present the world’s first full volume debunk of the greenhouse gas theory-that junk science construct that props up the discredited international religion that blames you for harming the planet.”

Having managed to “ .. debunk of the greenhouse gas theory .. ” in the upcoming “best-seller” book, available for only £4.76 on Kindle and only £11 in paperback (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Slaying-Sky-Dragon-Greenhouse-Theory/dp/1901546373), the next major objective appears to be the formation of Principia Scientific International an International. PSI is planned to be a not-for-profit association of scientists and other interested parties aiming to spread scientific truth globally. Anyone interested in helping it pursue its noble cause by a charitable donation to this fledgling global association of honest scientists and their supporters should visit http://funds.gofundme.com/1v39s.

You can find out all that you need to know at the PSI Web-site (http://principia-scientific.org/pso/about-us/why-psi-is-a-cic) which advises that “Our PROPOSED Board of Directors is: Dr. Martin Hertzberg; Dr. Claes Johnson; Joseph A. Olson; Alan Siddons; Dr. Charles Anderson; Rev. Philip Foster; John O’Sullivan; Hans Schreuder ”.

On the GlobalWarmingSuperheroes “O’Sullivan’s Selective Myopia” thread (http://globalwarmingsuperheroes.com/osullivans-seletive-myopia/#comment-1657) one Jeff Daley claimed that “I was told John Osullivan is going to announce in Janaury the setting up a new science association called Principia Scientific International to sue all your criminal warmist buddies for fraud”. That is nonsense dreamed up by someone with a very vivid imagination. As I said on that thread “Taking a look at PSI’s Articles of Association (Note 4) I could find no mention of any intention “ .. to sue all your criminal warmist buddies for fraud”, so please Jeff, let us all know who told you that fairy tale – or were you just telling porkies? .. NOTES: .. 4) see http://principia-scientific.org/pso/about-us/articles-of-association)”.

Best regards, Pete Ridley

Why Aren't Kent Clizbe and Ken Cuccinelli Out Looking for the Fugitive from Justice "Bobby Thompson"?

Pete Ridley, who is angry that I defend climate scientists, criticizes me for using a nom de plume on my little blog. He threatens that some "ex-CIA operative" named Kent Clizbe is going to unmask me (with the help of his CIA friends) and haul me into court for criticizing people who persecute our climate scientists.

In fact, real CIA officials give climate scientists security clearances so that they can study global warming, which the CIA views as a threat to our national security.

"Ex-CIA operative" Kent Clizbe, who evidently aspires to be the Secret Sam sidekick for the Tea Party's Ken Doll (AKA Virginia's Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli), reportedly spams college professors and offers them a multi-million-dollar financial bounty if they will denounce the climate scientist Dr. Michael Mann for fraud. So far, no professors have denounced Dr. Mann, who is also constantly hounded and maligned by Virginia's fossil-fueled, global warming denialist Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli.

Perhaps if intrepid Kent were a real CIA operative, he would locate the Florida fugitive who goes by the fake name "Bobby Thompson" and recover the millions "Thompson" stole from people who thought they were giving to Navy veterans.

The fugitive known as "Bobby Thompson" gave Virginia's Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli 55,000 dollars. Soon after, Virginia voted that military charities should not have to disclose information about themselves to the government. This new law benefits frauds like Thompson, who disguised his criminal theft and money-laundering operation as the "Navy Veterans' Charity."

Perhaps if intrepid Ken were a real Attorney General, he would locate the Florida fugitive who goes by the name "Bobby Thompson" and recover the millions "Thompson" stole from Americans who thought they were giving to Navy veterans.

For more information about the criminal with the fake name "Bobby Thompson," read "Lawyer [Helen Mac Murray] Flips on Fugitive GOP Donor Who Allegedly Scammed Millions" (The Blotter, 12-23-10). See also my earlier post about Thompson's lawyer Helen Mac Murray for some context. Read all the stories about Bobby Thompson at the excellent St. Petersburg Times series "Under the Radar."

http://legendofpineridge.blogspot.com/2011/01/why-arent-kent-clizbe-and-ken.html

Disciples and followers of the doctrine that our continuing use of fossil fuels is leading to catastrophic changes in those different global climates better start looking for another cause. CACC will soon be consigned to the dustbin of history. The famous legend of St. George and the Dragon brought back from the East by the Crusaders is being re-enacted by John O’Sullivan and his crusading team of dragon-Slayers (Tim Ball, Hans Schreuder, Rev. Philip Foster and about 33 others -Notes 1 & 2) to bring scientific truth back to the world.

John has assembled “the Slayers” in order to publish best-selling exposés of the flaws in the IPCC’s flawed interpretation of science. Once that task is complete who knows what the future holds in store for the crusading authors - perhaps publication of climate change papers in their very own respected science journal, but first off the press are their books. QUOTE: In a world’s first ‘Slaying the Dragon: Death of the Greenhouse Gas Theory’ brings together some of the planet’s most powerful critics to expose the fraud that you always instinctively knew existed UNQUOTE” with another due out in the Spring. The promoters of that first book “ .. proudly present the world’s first full volume debunk of the greenhouse gas theory-that junk science construct that props up the discredited international religion that blames you for harming the planet.”

Having managed to “ .. debunk of the greenhouse gas theory .. ” (Note 3), the next major objective appears to be the formation of Principia Scientific International. PSI is planned to be a not-for-profit association of scientists and other interested parties aiming to spread scientific truth globally, starting with climate science. Anyone interested in helping to set PSI up can make a charitable donation to this fledgling global scientific association at the Go Fund Me site (Note 4). “If you contribute £60 (Sixty British Pounds) or more (approx. US$100) we will ensure you receive a copy of ‘Slaying the Sky Dragon: Death of the Greenhouse Gas Theory’ plus a bonus book (two volume pack RRP: $38.98)” an even better deal than is offered elsewhere (£75 on Livejournal today – Note 1).

You can find out all that you need to know at the PSI Web-site (Note 5) which advises that the “ .. PROPOSED Board of Directors is: Dr. Martin Hertzberg; Dr. Claes Johnson; Joseph A. Olson; Alan Siddons; Dr. Charles Anderson; Rev. Philip Foster; John O’Sullivan; Hans Schreuder ”.

On the GlobalWarmingSuperheroes “O’Sullivan’s Selective Myopia” thread (Note 6) one Jeff Daley claimed that “I was told John Osullivan is going to announce in Janaury the setting up a new science association called Principia Scientific International to sue all your criminal warmist buddies for fraud”. Jeff managed to get the first bit right but that “ .. sue .. for fraud” is more CACC disciple nonsense dreamed up by someone with a very vivid imagination to try to discredit PSI. Looking through PSI’s Articles of Association (Note 7) I could find no mention of any intention to sue anyone for fraud. I asked Jeff to let us all know who told him that fairy tale but I’m still waiting.

BTW, I submitted a similar comment to Realclimate yesterday and - surprise surprise - it hasn’t yet appeared. I wonder if it will get past the “hockey team” without being “snipped”. Never mind, it’s on Wattsupwiththat (Note 8) and a few others. I wonder what reaction there’ll be from supporter of the CACC doctrine to this threat to their religion.

Notes to follow

NOTES: NB. http:// removed from all excepting Notes 2) & 3) which have http:www removed.

1) see johnosullivan.livejournal.com/28963.html
2) see .slayingtheskydragon.com/
3) see .amazon.co.uk/Slaying-Sky-Dragon-Greenhouse-Theory/dp/1901546373
4) see funds.gofundme.com/1v39s
5) see principia-scientific.org/pso/about-us/why-psi-is-a-cic
6) see globalwarmingsuperheroes.com/osullivans-seletive-myopia/#comment-1657
7) see principia-scientific.org/pso/about-us/articles-of-association
8) see wattsupwiththat.com/2011/01/18/daleo-on-noaa-and-nasa/#comment-581176

Best regards, Pete Ridley

How strange that Mr. Ridley complains that I don't use my real name on the Internet when the criminal who gives the denialist Attorney General Cuccinelli stolen money doesn't use his real name.

I used my real name when I emailed John O'Sullivan. I also use my real name every time I email Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli's deputy Mr. W. Russell to ask about the Attorney General's funding.

Why would denialists require the services of the apocryphal "ex-CIA case officer" Kent Clizbe when the ridiculous ringleaders of malignant denialism already know who I am?

Attorney General Cuccinelli accepted 55,000 dollars from “Bobby Thompson,” a criminal who used a fake name, a fake military rank, and about 80 fake officers for his fake Navy Veterans’ charity. His ex-lawyer told the media that Thompson may be hiding in E. Europe or the Middle East.

About the time that Mr. Cuccinelli got all that money from "Bobby Thompson," they made a law in Virginia that military charities don't have to disclose information about themselves to the government. Now, all the criminals and political money-laundering operations can call their organizations "military charities."

If Kent Clizbe is a good investigator, he can prove it by capturing “Bobby Thompson” and recovering his stolen millions.

He can use his spy skills to expose politicians who are accepting money from foreign corporations and governments.

That's probably what real CIA officers do. They probably don't go around acting like "Secret Sam."

O'Sullivan is very dishonest to brag about how his ex-CIA operative is investigating climate scientists because everyone who knows anything about climate change knows that the real CIA consults climate scientists. Probably our country protects people who help the CIA.

You could check the Bore Hole at Realclimate for your post, perhaps.

I looked briefly at that Slaying the Dragon website and it claimed that Tim Ball had been a professor of climatology. In what parallel universe did this happen?

Everyone please refer to our comment policy. There have been some violations by commenters on this post whose abusive comments will not be published as a result. Any continued disrespect for the policy will result in your account being deleted. If you want to argue based on the merit of facts, great. But personal attacks and intimidation will not be tolerated.

Again, here is DeSmogBlog’s comment policy:

DeSmogBlog does not censor comments based on political or ideological points of view. However, we will delete comments that are abusive, off-topic or use offensive language.

When speaking to the state of climate change science, we encourage commenters to include links to supporting information as this helps enrich the conversation. Users who make unsubstantiated claims can expect their posts to be deleted and, if they persist, their account to be deactivated.

Petty name-calling and/or a pattern of disrespect towards other DeSmogBlog users will also result in account deactivation.

I think I know where "ex-CIA operative" Kent Clizbe may get his information about global warming. Recently I drove out to Haymarket,Virginia to see this science institute I had read about on the Internet; but they must do a lot of really secret work, because I had a lot of trouble finding the Institute even with my GPS.

I didn't give up, and I eventually located the science institute. It is run by "Bob," a mighty wizard who somehow manages to operate reconnaissance satellites and other classified sensors from his "primary" address (mailbox #209 in a Haymarket, Virginia parcel post store).

It finally occurred to me that Bob's technology must be highly-miniaturized and invisible to the naked eye.

http://legendofpineridge.blogspot.com/2011/01/russia-views-climate-change-as-threat.html

I do believe we have an example of the "echo chamber" technique beloved of deniers. Let's keep in mind that echoes require only an empty space and a big noise. They don't require anything of actual substance.

Richard, although we are poles apart regarding the CACC doctrine I respect your preparedness to allow exchanges of opinions that are opposite to your own. Not all blog moderators are prepared to do that, e.g. RealClimate, SkepticalScience, GreenFyre, Wotsupwiththat, etc. etc. etc.

Hi “Snapple”, it’s all very well using you real name in E-mails to Russell and John O’Sullivan but do those people know that you also hide behind the false name Snapple when it suits you? I doubt it, because I’ve just E-mailed John for your real name and he doesn’t know any Snapple, Sniffles or Snuffles. It as been suggested on Anthony Watts’ blog that you are a Washington secondary school mistress but John suggested that you might be a male pest not a female one, called Steve.

Let’s at least have a first name so that we can exchange opinions on a friendly first-name basis, otherwise I might just start calling you Steve and no-one else will know who I’m addressing. When you comment about me I’m perfectly happy for you to refer to me by my full name or even just a friendly “Pete” rather than calling me a “blogger-moron” (once again tears filled my eyes). By the way, you expressed a totally incorrect opinion with your “ .. A blogger-moron who is angry that I defend climate scientists criticizes me for using a nom de plume on my little blog .. ” (Note 1). I’m not angry with you, just sorry that you appear to have swallowed hook, line and sinker the propaganda dispensed by the UN’s IPCC. I didn’t criticise you for using a nom-de-plume, I criticised your hiding behind a false name, giving the strong impression that you are a gullible coward who does not have the courage of your convictions, unlike Kent Clizbe, John O’Sullivan and his crusading team of dragon-Slayers.

You harp on about global warming being taught to your students but do you also teach them about the enormous uncertainties that exist among scientists about the causes of all that global warming and cooling that goes on. Ecologist Professor Barry Brook of Adelaide University put that point beautifully back in April 2009 when he said “ .. There are a lot of uncertainties in science, and it is indeed likely that the current consensus on some points of climate science is wrong, or at least sufficiently uncertain that we don’t know anything much useful about processes or drivers .. ” (Note 2 - but please read the whole paragraph because Barry gets very upset when I only quote what I see as being the most significant piece – and note that implication of his that we know 95%, a figure pulled out of the air without justification).

Brook made that admission in his article criticising fellow Adelaide Professor, geologist Ian Plimer’s excellent book “Heaven and Earth”, claimed in promotional bulletins to QUOTE: .. Professor Plimer said his book would "knock out every single argument we hear about climate change", to prove that global warming is a cycle of the Earth. "It's got nothing to do with the atmosphere, it's about what happens in the galaxy. "You've got to look at the whole solar system and, most importantly, we look back in time. "There's a lot of talk out there that there isn't any science that supports my view, but I have 2111 scientific references in this book."
Professor Plimer has been awarded two Eureka prizes, for science promotion and best science book, and a Centenary Medal for his geological contribution to Australian society UNQUOTE (Note 3).

What impact did that book have on global climate-change policy-making? I suggest NONE. Nearly two years later we have another book “Slaying the Sky Dragon .. ” with its publicists making no less extravagant claims (see the links in my previous comment). It will be interesting to see what criticism this one and its authors attract from the disciples and followers of the CACC doctrine.

Not satisfied with one book which it is unconvincingly claimed “ .. expertly debunks the established theory of man-made global warming- the so-called ‘greenhouse gas effect.’ Prepare to be astounded .. ” (Note 4), the Slayers have plans to take their crusade world-wide. Of course that could depend upon raising enough money from charitable donors (Note 5). If the first 9 days are anything to go by it could take a while for them to achieve their objective, but maybe there are things going on behind the scenes that will move the launch along. Then again, maybe potential donors are waiting for something more convincing than QUOTE: .. the world's first full volume refutation of the greenhouse gas theory that was "the talk of the Cancun Climate Conference" (Viscount Christopher Monckton) UNQUOTE even if it might be a “best-seller” (Note 6).

Perhaps we will see followers of the CACC doctrine taking a closer look at the claims made for and in that book and at the level of relevant expertise of its authors. VJ briefly hinted at this with his mention of claims about Tim Ball’s previous position at the University of Winnipeg. The Canada Free Press 2007 article “Global Warming: The Cold, Hard Facts?” (claimed to be by Tim) says “ .. I have a Ph.D, (Doctor of Science) from the University of London, England and was a climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg .. ” (Note 7). There have been suggestions that Tim was Professor of Geology and had lied about his position but I think that this has been an unfounded accusation. My understanding is that Tim was Professor of Geology and also taught climatology in the Geology Department but has been deliberately misquoted out of context. Desmogblog ran a short article on Tim which included comments like QUOTE: .. Ball and the organizations he is affiliated with have repeatedly made the claim that he is the "first Canadian PhD in climatology." Ball once claimed he was "one of the first climatology PhD's in the world." Many have pointed out that there have been numerous PhD's in the field prior to Ball. His degree was in historical geography and not climatology .. UNQUOTE (Note 8). Maybe Tim will make the time to clarify this point.

In late December I was invited into the expanding group of sceptics that has been debating the future for “the Slayers” and its fledgling scientific organisation Principia Scientific International (PSI). Shortly afterwards I did some “due diligence” research into PSI so if anyone is interested we could have a discussion around that.

You may recall that in my last comment I mentioned trying unsuccessfully to get a similar comment to the first one that I submitted here posted on the “hockey team’s” RealClimate blog. Another believer in the doctrine that our continuing use of fossil fuels is leading to catastrophic changes in those different global climates (Note 9) is dear old IT-man Ben Lawson of Wotsupwiththat (Note 10). Ben makes a feeble attempt to challenge the real thing (Note 11) but, despite his “ .. interest in endurance sports sports such as triathlons and marathons .. ” (Note 12) runs shy (like Snapple) of revealing his true identity. Ben seems equally shy of facing the wrath of “the Slayers”. He has kept my comment about them “awaiting moderation” since 23rd. What’s wrong with you DAGWers?

BTW, Snapple, “ .. It might be good to look at some of the business interests that own/control publishers/magazines .. ” including the owners of Stairway Press and E-book Partnership. You might find that “ .. They probably become gatekeepers .. ”, because, as you say “..the major media is often owned by fossil-fuel interests .. ” (Note 13). Then again, maybe you are just a conspiracy theorist in disguise.

On another matter altogether (nowt to do with those poorly understood causes of climate change) did those donations a year ago to the Haiti fund make any significant difference to their miserable existence? (Note 14). According to the latest reports they are still barely existing while we grow fat and enjoy all of the benefits of a modern lifestyle. The word “hypocrite” springs to mind, or do you chose to deny yourself of those benefits? If so then I sincerely apologise.

NOTES:

I will be posting these subsequently.

Best regards, Pete Ridley

NOTES from previous comment:
1) see http://legendofpineridge.blogspot.com/
2) see http://bravenewclimate.com/2009/04/23/ian-plimer-heaven-and-earth/
3) see http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/humans-are-not-hurting-the-climate/story-e6frea83-1225735967168
4) see https://www.stairwaypress.com/
5) see http://funds.gofundme.com/1v39s
6) see http://www.ebookpartnership.com/slaying-the-sky-dragon/comment-page-1/#comment-98
7) see http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:OEkGaxUS4NkJ:www.canadafreepress.com/2007/global-warming020507.htm+%22Tim+Ball%22+University+of+Winnipeg%22&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk&client=firefox-a&source=www.google.co.uk
8) see http://www.desmogblog.com/node/1272
9) see http://geography.about.com/library/weekly/aa011700b.htm
10) see http://wottsupwiththat.com/2011/01/11/the-met-office-bullhockey/
11) see http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/01/18/daleo-on-noaa-and-nasa/#comment-581176
12) see http://www.myspace.com/nobleswan
13) see http://www.realclimate.org/?comments_popup=5984
14) see http://www.climategate.com/danny-glover-blames-haiti-earthquake-on-climate-change

PS:

Brendan, if my most recent submission breached the blog’s comment policy then please would you get back by E-mail about where the violation was so that I can remove it and re-post. In my opinion the work and publications of John O’Sullvan’s “Slayers” team is worthy of debate, considering that they boldly claim to have disproved the greenhouse theory, which even I, as a confirmed sceptic, consider to be nonsense.

A couple of hours after I submitted that last comment I was told by John O’Sullivan that “Slaying the Sky Dragon” is to be debated on Judith Currie’s blog. John provided a link to his article “Top Scientists in Heated Debate over ‘Slaying’ of Greenhouse Gas Theory” (http://www.slayingtheskydragon.com/news/100-top-scientists-in-heated-debate-over-slaying-of-greenhouse-gas-theory).

As I have just posted on John’s thread “Well John, this is going to be interesting, seeing "the Slayers" prove that putting a douvet on the bed does not keep us warm because it doesn't generate heat. Forgive my simplistic explanation of a complicated scientific principle but, like you John, I'm not a scientist”.

Best regards, Pete Ridley

The blogger Pete Ridley boasts, "I’m sure [ex-CIA operative] Kent [Clizbe] could easily use his CIA contacts to track [Snapple] down, then watch the libel action."

I doubt that Kent Clizbe has CIA contacts that will help him track me down.

The CIA does not track down people who have blogs that explain the CIA position on global warming. The head of the CIA climate change unit is named Larry Kobayashi, and he doesn't sound anything like the supposed ex-CIA case officer Kent Clizbe. For one thing, Larry Kobayashi sounds like an educated person who is trying to help our country solve difficult problems, and Clizbe sounds to me like a real phony in his self-promoting Internet articles.

CIA employees don't take orders from the likes of Kent Clizbe about whom to hunt down. Kent Clizbe is probably an embarrassment to the CIA, if he was ever in the CIA in the first place. After all, he disparages both the FBI and the CIA analysts in his articles on the Internet. He harrasses climate scientists while the CIA gives them security clearances.

The CIA is probably embarrassed that an EX-employee is emailing professors and claiming that they will get millions of federal dollars if they denounce Dr. Mann. The only people who are trying to discredit Dr. Mann are subversives who are on the take from the fossil fuel companies, not real scientists.

Clizbe seems to be undermining the CIA, not supporting their mission of addressing the national security threat of climate change.

It is funny to see Pete Ridley so worked up about who I really am because the denialists constantly hide behind front organizations. The denialist Cuccinelli even took money from "Bobby Thompson," a criminal whose real name is unknown to law enforcement.

Pete Ridley writes in his comments, "I have low regard for those who hide behind false names."

Actually, the not-very-sincere Pete Ridley celebrates the misdeeds of cyber-criminals who hacked into the CRU, stole the scientists' emails, and posted them on the Internet.

Those criminals did not give their names, and they hypocritically called themselves "honest men."

Why doesn't Pete Ridley ask the thieves to identify themselves if they are really "honest men"?