Alarmist plagiarises comments from sceptic

A couple of days ago, a headline appeared over at Climate Depot, illustrated with a bunch of hypodermic syringes: Don’t call them Climate Deniers, Label them ‘Pushers’ of a Drug called ‘Doubt’. I could see where that was going, so I shot over there to have a look.

He said

It is Carbon Dave’s Diary, which I’ve not seen before. Dave Hampton’s an engineer and social change advocate (whatever that means). The article that Marc Morano had picked up on was a polemic against climate realists who doubt humanity’s responsibility for global warming. Oddly, there’s a spelling error in the very headline, which is also in the html link. Morano was observant enough to correct it when he posted it, but at this moment it’s still there on Carbon Dave’s site.

His article is funny enough, creatively picturing doubt as a drug to be fed to the gullible. But you can read it for yourself; I have an odd complaint to make about Carbon Dave’s honesty. You see, he’s used my comments as though he wrote them himself — he’s plagiarised them. Maybe I ought to be flattered, but it’s annoyed me.

I said

My first response to his article is posted up at Carbon Dave’s site and is, I think, unremarkable. I mention honest enquiry in an attempt to draw him into discussing some climatic facts, which had been notably absent in his post.

He said

Carbon Dave responded, saying my points had been debunked “a million times over”. It’s very frustrating when people claim debunking has occurred without actually performing any debunking themselves, so I penned a second comment.

He liked what I said

But you won’t see that one on Carbon Dave’s blog, even though he claims to have posted “all comments”. After checking overnight, I thought he’d binned it. Then I noticed that his latest post mentioned “doubt pushers” and Climate Depot so I read it. Halfway down, he says: “Thanks for the laughs. I’ve posted all comments up because I know you can’t challenge the truth I expose.” I thought that’s not right, he hasn’t posted my comment.

He said what I said

Suddenly my jaw dropped when I read my own comment — right there in Carbon Dave’s own post. He’s used my comment as though he wrote it himself! The nerve of the man! He has no self-respect and he doesn’t tell the truth.

First, here’s what Carbon Dave says:

I represent many ordinary people who ask these questions. You’re speaking to an entire movement when you reply to me here. That’s not to make you all bashful, heaven forbid! Neither is it to threaten you, although some of you would be more comfortable with the situation if i did. But it’s just to show how important it is that your comment is the very best it can be, for it will be assessed by all kinds of honest enquirers here.

You’ll see he’s made changes, but it’s basically my writing. Then:

It’s funny, although a bit sad.

You can compare that with my entire comment, shown next, which he didn’t publish, just stole from. He should be thanking me for telling him about Climate Depot, as he obviously didn’t know about it.

Dave, you say to me “All of your ‘arguments’ have been thoroughly debunked, a million times over.”

I’m waiting; debunk away.

It will be especially good to see how you paper over the satellite temperature record; it shows no undue warming since 1979, a kind of plateau since 2001 and even a little cooling since 2005. Surely you cannot claim dangerous warming from that?

Please don’t imagine you’re “indulging” me by responding to my criticism. I don’t care what you think. But I represent many ordinary people who ask these questions and make the very assertions I have made. You’re speaking to quite an audience when you reply to me. That’s not to make you bashful, heaven forbid! No, it’s just to show how important it is that your reply is the very best it can be, for it will be assessed by all kinds of honest enquirers.

By the way, your increased traffic was because this silly piece about “a drug called doubt” was held up for ridicule at Climate Depot. I saw it there and came here, with everyone else, to laugh at such thinking. It’s funny, although a bit sad.

If you want to try some reasoning, debunk away.

Cheers.

Distasteful—a new low, even—and the topic goes untended

Carbon Dave makes empty accusations, without evidence, that I am dishonest. In return, I confront him with this actual evidence of his own dishonesty. How odd that he treats his own credibility with the same contempt he brings to those who disagree with him.

I hope this engineer and “social change” advocate, who brazenly plagiarises comments he likes, takes care to design a society with more advanced ethical standards than he holds himself to.

Of course, I’m still waiting for some proper, reasoned, scientific debunking of the actual topic (the dangerous climate, remember?). But I’m not holding my breath. There’s not been an ounce of data from him so far. Strange — is he really an engineer?

Hits: 340

3 Thoughts on “Alarmist plagiarises comments from sceptic

  1. Bob D on 27/10/2009 at 12:11 pm said:

    Wow, straight plagiarism, no shame at all. Copy-and-paste because he couldn’t think of those words himself. Did he really think you wouldn’t notice?

    He also claims to have posted all the comments. Yours was obviously censored then stolen, mine just disappeared into the ether when I challenged ‘Steve’ on his totally out-dated claims.

    It’s an interesting observation that the sceptics are always willing to publish adverse points of view and debate them, even though it often means taking unwarranted personal attacks in the process. Look at WattsUpWithThat, or ClimateAudit or any of these.

    On the other hand the alarmists are constantly deleting or editing ‘difficult’ posts they can’t answer (RealClimate and Open Mind are the most famous for this, but ClimateProgress is similar), and they do it without even a glimmer of conscience.

    It forces the conclusion that the sceptics want to try to be right, while the alarmists only want to appear to be right.

  2. Nicely said, Bob, and I entirely agree. When I discovered the plagiarism I left a terse comment with Carbon Dave which I expect has already been tipped into the bit bucket. It says simply:

    Dave: Don’t plagiarise my comments. Don’t claim you’ve posted all comments when you haven’t. I’m still waiting for you to “debunk” the assertion that the climate is not warming dangerously.

    Please, kids, don’t try this at home. I mean, don’t hold your breath on a reply.

  3. Bob D on 27/10/2009 at 12:35 pm said:

    Here’s what I posted in response to ‘Steve’:

    Steve:
    You’re a little out of date, mate. All your sources are old, and somewhat amusing, considering the wealth of knowledge there is out there now showing just how weak these arguments are. I had a good laugh when you even provided a link to the infamous ‘hockey stick’ graph! If you’re going to join the AGW debate you’re going to have to come up to speed.

    The fact is that Basic Physics, as you put it (your 1st link goes nowhere), provides for a theoretical 1.0ºC warming due to a doubling of CO2 from 280ppmv, according to the IPCC (TAR) [alpha=5.35]. Any other theoretical warming is due to feedbacks. These feedbacks were until recently largely uncertain, according to NASA.

    Positive feedbacks raise the warming level, negative feedbacks lower it. Up to now the models have always assumed positive feedbacks from clouds. In fact we now know from ERBE observations that these feedbacks are negative. See Lindzen and Choi, GRL, 2009. This means the total warming is in fact less than 1ºC, nearer 0.5ºC in the tropics, slightly more at higher latitudes. In other words the sensitivity is much lower than expected by the IPCC. This is consistent with the observed climate response we’re seeing. It also explains why all the models are so wrong, and why none of them predicted the current cooling.

    And on warming: we know the planet warmed from 1976 to 1998, when it reached its recent record high. That was not surprising – the PDO was in its positive phase. Now it’s gone negative, and we’re cooling. Experts are predicting another 20-30 years of cooling, in spite of the increasing CO2. This of course confirms that CO2 doesn’t drive climate to any appreciable degree, and any effect it may have is easily swamped by natural variations.

    Regarding some of your other points – the Arctic sea ice extent is recovering at almost half a million square kilometers a year, the Antarctic ice is increasing, hurricane activity is at a 30-year low, droughts have been decreasing, as have extreme floods. Sea level rise slowed recently by a whopping 60%, mainly due to the oceans cooling. Look it up.

Leave a Reply to Bob D Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Post Navigation