John Mashey seminar live on web

Via Deep Climate, John Mashey’s seminar on “The Machinery of Climate Anti-Science” is being streamed live here. It starts two hours from now, 7:30 PDT.

The battle of truth versus disinformation is nowhere better demonstrated than in the distortion of climate science. More than 97 percent of practicing climate scientists support the fact that global warming is happening and caused by humans, yet the public often thinks that scientists are seriously divided on this issue.
In this special public lecture, Silicon Valley computer scientist and technology expert Dr. John Mashey will expose the underhanded, but effective PR/lobbying tactics of the anti-science campaign. It has included Internet-propagated disinformation, personal attacks, threats of violence and hate mail, including the manufactured non-event “Climategate.” His talk will examine the organization and activities of anti-science funders, think tanks, and spokespeople over the last 20 years, including recent developments and initiatives to counter their efforts.

Comments

  1. #1 Shinsko
    April 7, 2011

    I’m having a few problems with the audio – every 4th or 5rd word drops out.

    Tim, afterwards if a link to the finished talk is available would you post it?

  2. #2 Tim Lambert
    April 7, 2011

    It’s working well for me.

  3. #3 TrueSceptic
    April 8, 2011

    There’s a list of past seminar recordings [here](http://www.pics.uvic.ca/broadcast.php). I expect that John Mashey’s will appear there soon.

  4. #4 Andrew Dodds
    April 8, 2011

    Don’t suppose we can get a transcript? Some of us are too lazy to actually, like, listen..

  5. #5 John Mashey
    April 8, 2011

    Better uis to just read the slides. I just sent them a PDF a few .hours ago.
    I expect they’ll be up sometime soon.

  6. #6 Eli Rabett
    April 8, 2011

    Read the slides? Everyone of them reminded Eli of a comment a colleague made after putting up the only dense one in his seminar: Every talk has to have one completely unreadable and comprehensive slide.

  7. #7 bill
    April 8, 2011

    Oho – look who’s giving the next presentation in the series!

    (JM’s slides are up, but no video, yet.)

  8. #8 John Mashey
    April 8, 2011

    Note that the slides are here.

    Tom Pedersen mentioned somewhat bemusedly that people had been watching from Oz.

  9. #9 Scribe
    April 9, 2011

    Have you guys noticed that someone called “Stewart Franks” is appearring more and more often on TV and radio to put the denialist argument?

    I’m sick of it. He’s another industry stooge, paid by Big Coal. I’ve made a page on Stewart Franks at SourceWatch:
    http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Stewart_Franks

    Feel free to add material.

  10. #10 stopmurdoch
    April 9, 2011

    Yes Scribe, just this week he was on the widely listened to Qld ABC radio with Steve Austin doing his shtick.

    It wasn’t strictly ‘denialist’ but if you listened carefully he planted three main concepts (totally unquestioningly accepted by Steve Austin):

    1. There are plenty of scientists with varying degrees of doubt about ‘man-made’ climate change;

    2. We have always had extreme weather events and floods and droughts go in cycles and sometimes they are worse than others and it’s all there in history if you know how to look;

    3. There is no doubt that CO2 is a ‘greenhouse’ gas but there is no evidence to support AGW because we don’t know anything about ‘sensitivity’ of the atmosphere to additional CO2.

    Interesting that at the ABC this stuff comes straight from the top.

  11. #11 Scribe
    April 10, 2011

    I’ve alerted the ABC to his hidden agenda, but I think there are more than a few deniers at Aunty eager to see this sort of codswallop dished up.

  12. #12 stopmurdoch
    April 10, 2011

    Good! I’d keep a record of that and when he next bobs up on ABC I’d tell http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/

    The ABC is infiltrated by christian fundamentalists/neo-cons/Murdoch operatives but every time they get called out hopefully brings us closer to wrestling back the public broadcaster.

  13. #13 Black-Eyed Ms, Ps & Qs
    April 10, 2011

    if someone could get close to Franks’s inner circle they would find a very interesting background. the guy isn’t without sin but discretion and a desire not to duke it out in court prevent me from saying more, other than to mention that an old retorical accusation that used to fly about the threads here would cut a bit too close to the bone for stewy’s comfort. if my comment seems to be a little sordid, that is because it only reflects what I know. )-: the fact that he is a posterboy for the skeptics is a bad reflection on them, if they actually knew what he was like.

    *shudder*

  14. #14 Black-Eyed Ms, Ps & Qs
    April 10, 2011

    if someone could get close to Franks’s inner circle they would find a very interesting background. the guy isn’t without sin but discretion and a desire not to duke it out in court prevent me from saying more, other than to mention that an old retorical accusation that used to fly about the threads here would cut a bit too close to the bone for stewy’s comfort. if my comment seems to be a little sordid, that is because it only reflects what I know. )-: the fact that he is a posterboy for the skeptics is a bad reflection on them, if they actually knew what he was like.

    *shudder*

  15. #15 Black-Eyed Ms, Ps & Qs
    April 10, 2011

    if someone could get close to Franks’s inner circle they would find a very interesting background. the guy isn’t without sin but discretion and a desire not to duke it out in court prevent me from saying more, other than to mention that an old retorical accusation that used to fly about the threads here would cut a bit too close to the bone for stewy’s comfort. if my comment seems to be a little sordid, that is because it only reflects what I know. )-: the fact that he is a posterboy for the skeptics is a bad reflection on them, if they actually knew what he was like.

    *shudder*

  16. #16 Black-Eyed Ms, Ps & Qs
    April 10, 2011

    if someone could get close to Franks’s inner circle they would find a very interesting background. the guy isn’t without sin but discretion and a desire not to duke it out in court prevent me from saying more, other than to mention that an old retorical accusation that used to fly about the threads here would cut a bit too close to the bone for stewy’s comfort. if my comment seems to be a little sordid, that is because it only reflects what I know. )-: the fact that he is a posterboy for the skeptics is a bad reflection on them, if they actually knew what he was like.

    *shudder*

  17. #17 Black-Eyed Ms, Ps & Qs
    April 10, 2011

    if someone could get close to Franks’s inner circle they would find a very interesting background. the guy isn’t without sin but discretion and a desire not to duke it out in court prevent me from saying more, other than to mention that an old retorical accusation that used to fly about the threads here would cut a bit too close to the bone for stewy’s comfort. if my comment seems to be a little sordid, that is because it only reflects what I know. )-: the fact that he is a posterboy for the skeptics is a bad reflection on them, if they actually knew what he was like.

    *shudder*

  18. #18 Black-Eyed Ms, Ps & Qs
    April 10, 2011

    if someone could get close to Franks’s inner circle they would find a very interesting background. the guy isn’t without sin but discretion and a desire not to duke it out in court prevent me from saying more, other than to mention that an old retorical accusation that used to fly about the threads here would cut a bit too close to the bone for stewy’s comfort. if my comment seems to be a little sordid, that is because it only reflects what I know. )-: the fact that he is a posterboy for the skeptics is a bad reflection on them, if they actually knew what he was like.

    *shudder*

  19. #19 Black-Eyed Ms, Ps & Qs
    April 10, 2011

    if someone could get close to Franks’s inner circle they would find a very interesting background. the guy isn’t without sin but discretion and a desire not to duke it out in court prevent me from saying more, other than to mention that an old retorical accusation that used to fly about the threads here would cut a bit too close to the bone for stewy’s comfort. if my comment seems to be a little sordid, that is because it only reflects what I know. )-: the fact that he is a posterboy for the skeptics is a bad reflection on them, if they actually knew what he was like.

    *shudder*

  20. #20 Hank Roberts
    April 11, 2011

    > Posted by: Black-Eyed Ms, Ps & Qs
    > Franks’s inner circle
    > … accusation that used to fly …
    > would cut a bit too close to the bone …

    I’m a sucker for a well-mixed metaphor.

    If that word salad hides a real person posting a real hint about actual information, please forward the info to the Sourcewatch people; link above.

    They’ll know what to do with it.
    If I’ve just failed my side of a Turing test, it won’t be the first time.

  21. #21 Marion Delgado
    April 12, 2011

    I agree with Eli, though I think they (slides) work okay IF you follow Mashey in the lecture.

  22. #22 bill
    April 12, 2011

    Video is online. That’s good, because judging from a quick skim through just the slides Eli may well be the bunny on the money!

  23. #23 Black-Eyed Ms, Ps & Qs
    April 12, 2011

    If that word salad hides a real person posting a real hint about actual information, please forward the info to the Sourcewatch people; link above. They’ll know what to do with it. If I’ve just failed my side of a Turing test, it won’t be the first time.

    hank, the word salad does indeed hide a real person and not a turing test, but serving the salad would be difficult for me for a few reasons. its enough that there are astute people here who understand the subtext.

  24. #24 Black-Eyed Ms, Ps & Qs
    April 12, 2011

    If that word salad hides a real person posting a real hint about actual information, please forward the info to the Sourcewatch people; link above. They’ll know what to do with it. If I’ve just failed my side of a Turing test, it won’t be the first time.

    hank, the word salad does indeed hide a real person and not a turing test, but serving the salad would be difficult for me for a few reasons. its enough that there are astute people here who understand the subtext.

  25. #25 Black-Eyed Ms, Ps & Qs
    April 12, 2011

    If that word salad hides a real person posting a real hint about actual information, please forward the info to the Sourcewatch people; link above. They’ll know what to do with it. If I’ve just failed my side of a Turing test, it won’t be the first time.

    hank, the word salad does indeed hide a real person and not a turing test, but serving the salad would be difficult for me for a few reasons. its enough that there are astute people here who understand the subtext.

  26. #26 Black-Eyed Ms, Ps & Qs
    April 12, 2011

    If that word salad hides a real person posting a real hint about actual information, please forward the info to the Sourcewatch people; link above. They’ll know what to do with it. If I’ve just failed my side of a Turing test, it won’t be the first time.

    hank, the word salad does indeed hide a real person and not a turing test, but serving the salad would be difficult for me for a few reasons. its enough that there are astute people here who understand the subtext.

  27. #27 Black-Eyed Ms, Ps & Qs
    April 12, 2011

    If that word salad hides a real person posting a real hint about actual information, please forward the info to the Sourcewatch people; link above. They’ll know what to do with it. If I’ve just failed my side of a Turing test, it won’t be the first time.

    hank, the word salad does indeed hide a real person and not a turing test, but serving the salad would be difficult for me for a few reasons. its enough that there are astute people here who understand the subtext.

  28. #28 Black-Eyed Ms, Ps & Qs
    April 12, 2011

    If that word salad hides a real person posting a real hint about actual information, please forward the info to the Sourcewatch people; link above. They’ll know what to do with it. If I’ve just failed my side of a Turing test, it won’t be the first time.

    hank, the word salad does indeed hide a real person and not a turing test, but serving the salad would be difficult for me for a few reasons. its enough that there are astute people here who understand the subtext.

  29. #29 Black-Eyed Ms, Ps & Qs
    April 12, 2011

    If that word salad hides a real person posting a real hint about actual information, please forward the info to the Sourcewatch people; link above. They’ll know what to do with it. If I’ve just failed my side of a Turing test, it won’t be the first time.

    hank, the word salad does indeed hide a real person and not a turing test, but serving the salad would be difficult for me for a few reasons. its enough that there are astute people here who understand the subtext.

  30. #30 Hank Roberts
    April 12, 2011

    http://www.google.com/search?q=“stewart+franks”+”inner+circle”

    What?

  31. #31 John Mashey
    April 12, 2011

    re: #15-16.
    See comments about the origin & nature of this first iteration of this talk. The first page’s mention of Tufte was a hint.
    The ideal form for this would be a WebEx or a voice-over, after it settles.

  32. #32 John Mashey
    April 13, 2011

    Tim: some Aussie (likely) seems unhappy, perhaps due to coverage of this. See April 12 Wikipedia, as 124.191.73.156 tries to impose ill-informed, but strong beliefs on reality.

    Now, 124.191.73.156 shows 2 user contributions, both reverted within a day, one the above, and one this, on Kerry O’Brien (a person unknown to me).

    An IP lookup gives:
    Host : cpe-124-191-73-156.vic.bigpond.net.au
    I.e., Telstra ISP.

    Poor 124.191.73.156: doesn’t even have a name, just an IP address, and obviously doesn’t know much about Wikipedia rules. I expected flak from last week, but so far, this, or a drive-by at DC’s place have been pretty weak.

  33. #33 Tim Lambert
    April 13, 2011

    124.191.73.156 does have a name: [Joe Cambria](http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2005/06/hate-mail.php), a [notorious troll](http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2007/04/plonk.php).

  34. #34 Bernard J.
    April 14, 2011

    …and in the eyes of many, a synomym for psychological pathology.

  35. #35 Marion Delgado
    April 15, 2011

    I actually learned one important fact from Graeme Bird and Joe Cambria, namely, “Crazy people have blogs!”

  36. #36 Anna Haynes
    April 17, 2011

    Black-eyed, if your info on Franks is apropos and not sleazy,
    one of “the SourceWatch people” is moi; you could send it to warming101@gmail.com and I’d probably get it.

    No guarantees whatsoever that I’d use it, though.

    I do have one question – are global warming public-figure deniers equally prevalent, in countries that have decent health care systems?

  37. #37 Anna Haynes
    April 21, 2011

    (update: didn’t hear back from Black-eyed, most likely meaning that either s/he didn’t see my apr 17 comment, or the info in question was indeed invasion-of-privacy stuff.)

  38. #38 Anna Haynes
    April 21, 2011

    Some notes from Mashey’s talk, definitely incomplete:
    ==============
    Most lies about science aren’t Actionable, legally;
    e.g. “We didn’t go to the moon”
    But saying something like “Neil Armstrong is a lying SOB” – that might be libel.

    Historically, most GW denialism attacks have been on science – but last couple years, on people

    e.g. Penn State/state pen

    Encounters with SPPI and the like – curious names, 1 guy with a PO box is an Institute
    (Legally they’re nonprofits, yet so many seem to be on K street in Washington, lobbyist central; now why would that be?)

    (Oreskes)

    Social networks of climate antiscience

    Advisors, & orgs they were connected with – the same names appear over & over again.
    Monckton said Mashey did invasion of privacy, for calling out Monckton’s endocrine surgeon(?) as among Monckton’s climate experts

    Science societies aren’t used to facing these sorts of attacks

    1998 leaked API memo planned for “recruiting new voices” – then here come McIntyre & McKitrick

    Scaife funding came originally from Gulf Oil

    Look for people to make mistakes that you can actually take legal action on.

    A manufactured attempt to mislead congress and the American people
    You never want to ask, “did you get money from an oil co”; they’ll always say no. Instead [better, though not ideal] ask if their money has come directly or indirectly from a company or foundation connected with fossil fuels.

    Money can also come via $$ for book prizes, $30k after-dinner talks, etc

    Expose the money routes

    The poor don’t have oil, they don’t have tractors; the only way they’ll get tractors is if we get cheap solar-powered ones.

    It’s about reallocating priorities before we run over a cliff

    EROI (energy return on energy invested) – it used to be that for a barrel of oil – back when you could stick a straw in East Texas and have it come up – was 100x ROI.

    But now…ever hear of Deepwater Horizon in the gulf…? [a lot less easily-accessible oil]

    peak oil – we’ll likely use up the gas & oil; but need to leave coal in the ground

    The energy crunch is going to matter a lot;
    The better we can get with efficiency, the less painful.
    Calif. works very hard at efficiency, & we live ok lives; some of it (the solution) is just thinking about it;
    I worry about how people can do – I’d like to keep the maximum of human freedom & choice & everything; I’d like our nieces & nephews to have a reasonable life

    [The fossil fuel message machine says] having anything that removes petro tax credits is clearly evil & bad; & that anything that gives tax credits for building renewable energy systems is clearly waste of money, etc; There’s no end of reports like this out there

    One of the bizarre things that goes on is [communicating] that there will be magic research breakthroughs that will save us if we just throw enough money at them; there’s a thing called the Breakthrough Institute; oddly enough it’s a bunch of economists & political type folks, mostly.
    The B.I. messaging amuses me since I used to work at Bell Labs, which probably produced more breakthroughs than any organization in history; (Mashey’s bosses were hi-level – one was later the CTO, the other became president of Bell Labs). The mantra at BL was “never schedule breakthroughs” – you did research, you sprinkled it around, most of it wouldn’t work, lots of things would be tried, when you’ve found things that looked to have some promise you put some more energy into them. The biggest amount of money would go into the deployment. But you gotta figure out the right stuff first, & it’s unpredictable. Part of my job was explicitly to be close to the computing research & seeing if what they produced was something interesting that we might take into development(deployment?) & go use.
    If you say to Research, I really like a car that gets $300 mpg & costs $100, maybe you’ll get that, but maybe you get a submarine with wings on it, & it doesn’t do anything, you never know.

    If you really are paid directly or indirectly from the fossil fuel industry, the game plan [would be...] – if I were running a fossil fuel company, I would like to keep everybody as dependent as possible because as there gets to be less of it, I will get more money; maybe the economy crashes, but I own enough so it’s ok for me.
    ==============

  39. #39 Anna Haynes
    April 21, 2011

    (fyi the formatting’s a little screwed up in the “notes on Mashey talk” comment above; it’s all Mashey speaking, channeled through my ears/brain/fingers/keyboard)

  40. #40 Jim Michaux-Smith
    Pittsburgh, PA
    May 25, 2012

    Mr. Mashey, your name is Unique enough for me to believe we were in Mr Duncan’s math class in 1964. I struggled to pass that class, but I remember you kept up :-). He would be Very Proud of you. Last I saw him was in Califonia PA about 1966 or 1967.