Fumento, in a field of rakes

After accidentally proving that he was using a sock on Wikipedia, Fumento is back for more. I think that putting a "(sic)" after misspellings is rather petty, but since Fumento does it when he quotes others, I've yielded to temptation and sicced all over his many spelling mistakes. Fumento begins:

There are lots of reasons people blog. One may be that nobody else would ever publish their material. Some of these people nevertheless fill a valuable nitch (sic) that just doesn't appeal to outside publications; others are simply inept. The latter describes Tim Lambert and his Deltoid blogsite. An anti-American Aussie, he regularly displays his ignorance on a wide variety of issues, perhaps in the belief that quantity makes up for quality.

Anti-American? Huh? When have I ever criticised America about anything?

Lambert is perhaps best known for his embarrasing (sic) defense of the pre-election surprise paper in The Lancet that desparately (sic) tried to show that Americans had killed 100,000 civilians in Iraq. (At the time Human Rights Watch was using a figure of about 15,000 as was bin Laden himself!) Ever since I first chided him for thinking his blog had the least ability to support his Jihadist friends, he's made it one of his missions in life to try to hurt me personally. He has a separate motive in that when I've posted responses on his website his traffic shoots up.

Actually, I've hardly been paying any attention to Fumento---I didn't even know that he had started a blog until Tracy Spencer told me. And no, my traffic did not shoot up when when Fumento posted responses on my blog. Fumento seems a bit delusional about his importance.

So instead he merely claims I have posted on his website, using a false name. In blogging terminology, that's called using a "sockpuppet." He claims he's compared my IP address to that of the alleged sockpuppet's and they're the same. Problem is, we have no more proof than his word and this is the word of not just anybody but of Tim Lambert. Conversely, when John Lott used his infamous "Mary Roush" (sic) sockpuppet, numerous people were able to confirm that Roush's (sic) and Lott's IP address were the same.

Actually, we just had Julian Sanchez's word about the Lott/Rosh match, but more importantly, notice that Fumento once again has not denied being Tracy Spencer. If he isn't Spencer, why doesn't he say so?

At the same time, Lambert has accused me of rewriting my own Wikepedia (sic) entry. Actually he rewrote it; I struck it. Why? I don't feel encyclopedia entries are the places for vendettas. It's not appropriate in the Encyclopedia Brittanica (sic) nor is it in Wikipedia.

If you look at the history of the Fumento article you will see that I did not add the link to Deltoid and that while Fumento deleted it twelve times, I only restored it twice---others undid his other deletions. There seems to be a consensus there that the link is appropriate.

OK, that was silly enough but now Fumento really jumps the rails, arguing that I'm using sock puppets because .... oh heck, you can't summarize his argument:

Among Lambert's few friends is one named John Fleck whose blog is called inkstain.net. (Another type of stain comes to mind, but whatever.) Fleck writes of my "latest blubbering discussion with Tim Lambert." But as I've said, Lambert's pathetic efforts to lure me into "discussion" have failed. No discussion; ergo no blubbering discussion. But if Lambert had said that on his site it would have left his few readers scratching their heads, so Fleck posted it instead. Fleck, therefore, is a human sockpuppet.

Is it just me, or did Fumento leave out about 20 steps in his chain of reasoning there? In any event, for the record, I do not and have not told Fleck what to write.

But the next bit is the best. Fumento offers conclusive proof that I've used sock puppets: an evidence-free email from Joe Cambria:

Another Aussie who is part of a discussion group to which Lambert belongs e-mailed me the link to a thread in which he charges Lambert with using at least two different false names to post comments on his own website, "Kevin Donahue" and "Robert Johnson." He directly and repeatedly confronted Lambert with this and Lambert repeatedly refused to respond, though he did respond to other aspects of the discussion.

Ah, so if you respond to other aspects of the discussion without denying the charge, then you have tacitly admitted it. Looks like Fumento has admitted being Tracy Spencer. And Fumento seems to have missed my comment in the thread he linked to:

Gee Joe, for someone who doesn't take me seriously you sure spend a lot of time following me around and posting comments on various blogs and sending me long rants via email and making wild accusations about me posting under assumed names.

No, I haven't been posting under assumed names. That's your scam, not mine.

Update: After I pointed his spelling mistakes Fumento corrected some of them and made several other changes without noting that he had altered the post. I expected him to do this, so I saved a copy of the original post here. My favourite addition is this one:

Turns out when Lott's IP address was correlated with Roush's, he immediately admitted he and Roush were the same. This puts him far above Lambert, who when caught red-handed admitted to nothing.

Turns out that when Fumento's IP address was correlated with Tracy Spenser's, he admitted to nothing.


More like this

Mike Hudson gets a whole column out of an exchange with Fumento: I decided to e-mail Fumento and gloat about his descent into ignominy. I told him that, given his positions on Love Canal and Gulf War Syndrome, it wasn't surprising to hear that he was bought and paid for by a chemical company. What…
Fumento has now made three posts on his blog and a whole pile of comments on other blogs in response to my revealing his use of a sock puppet. He has called me a liar, claimed that I am insane and falsely accused me of using sock puppets myself. What he hasn't done is deny that Tracy Spenser was…
We last saw Fumento blundering around in a field of rakes. Now read on. John Fleck commented on the situation: The thing is, Fumento is, at times, a quite talented journalist. But then, over and over again, he shows himself to be a complete tool. My first encounter with his work was a solid take-…
Last month Tracy Spenser posted [this comment](http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2005/10/crime-of-the-century.php#commen…) on my blog: Looks like Fumento has made a fool of you again? When are you ever going to learn? www.fumento.com/weblog/ar www.townhall.com/blogs/c- And when are you going to…

What a ninny. Seixon advised Joe Cambria that my IP address is Irish. (Presumably he could see it when I commented on his blog.)

By Kevin Donoghue (not verified) on 05 Dec 2005 #permalink

Seixon is obviously another of Tim's sock-puppets.

By Ian Gould (not verified) on 05 Dec 2005 #permalink

I'm feeling rather left out! Is no one going to accuse me of using/being a sock puppet?

By Meyrick Kirby (not verified) on 05 Dec 2005 #permalink

I don't know if it counts as a sockpuppet, but on Climate Audit, someone just implied that I was almost as obnoxious as Tim. Maybe that makes me an honorary sock-puppet.

Tim, I have a question for me you. How do I do you get to all those different IP address as quickly as I you do? Is it a Santa Clause type of thing?

By John Cross (not verified) on 05 Dec 2005 #permalink

Has anyone been to Fumento's site?

Apparently he is "Factual Powerful Original Iconoclastic"

It's a shame he feels the need to point this stuff out. I would have thought that he would be happy to rely on the quality of his work to convey his attributes.

Powerful? hmmm. I keep thinking of the godfreys vacuum commercial where they can lift a bowling ball up with the suction.

Hubris, thine enemy is blogging.

Farking hilarious - obviously Fumento's reason for blogging has a lot to do with his Powerfully Original Ego.

Fumento has a new post

Somebody should remind that he's already proven his sock puppetry by posting on another blog.

But now he claims it's some random person who just happens to read Fumento and enjoys defending him from the mean blogs on the Internets.

By walterthump (not verified) on 05 Dec 2005 #permalink

You do a hell of a lot of great debunking of junk science and incisive political commentary. Are you sure you aren't wasting your time by spending time and energy refuting this asshole?

By Gar Lipow (not verified) on 05 Dec 2005 #permalink

"No discussion; ergo no blubbering discussion."

Definitely, stick with the lone howling rant in the wilderness. Style should match content.

Tim. I'm sorry but as far as I can tell your post was not only deliberately misleading but you must have actually tampered with Fumento's transcripts in order for it to happen. Either way it means I cannot trust your posts anymore. I did a quick check on Fumento's blog and found that he did not write nitch, embarrasing, desparately or Wikepedia but instead wrote niche, embarrassing, desperately and Wikipedia respectively. Roush is a person name so unless you can tell me how Lott's pseudonym was actually spelt it's not a spelling mistake and 'Roush's' seems grammatical to me but tell me if I'm wrong. The only correct (sic) was for Brittanica which should have been spelt Britannica.

Let's just say I'm rather disappointed and now won't be regularly visiting your site unless I have time to fact check everything I read. It makes me wonder if anything i read was true. Now if I'm wrong I'll humbly apologise but until then this criticism stands.

AshaB ...

Has it occured to you that Fumento may've corrected the spelling errors after Tim pointed them out in his post?

By Don Baccus (not verified) on 06 Dec 2005 #permalink

AshaB, if you look at the Google cache you'll find nitch, embarrasing, desparately and Wikepedia are still there. He still hasn't corrected the spelling of my name, though.

By Kevin Donoghue (not verified) on 06 Dec 2005 #permalink

and Roush continues to be an incorrect spelling of Rosh.

The irony being that Tim's [sic]fest was clearly a parody of the Fumento [sic]ness.

"AshaB, if you look at the Google cache you'll find nitch, embarrasing, desparately and Wikepedia are still there. "

All that proves is that Tim is capable of hacking the Google cache in furtherance of his slanderous antiAmerican agenda.

Asha, I copied and pasted the text on my blog this morning and Brittanica was mispelled then. There is also the google cache.

So Fumey boy's now employing the Mike Jericho defence? "Someone else has been using my internet conection without my knowledge to praise me and attack my enemies." Maybe it was his dog? Has he dusted his keyboard for pawprints?

Also funny to see that by attempting to cast doubt on Tim's veracity, AshaB only ends up highlighting Fumey boy's own lack of transparency in posting on his blog.

One slice of humble apology coming up I guess.

Fumento is so notorious that your thorough destruction of him seems superfluous, but it is amusing nonetheless. As a professional epidemiologist I can attest to the rigor of your analysis and defense of The Lancet paper. But why am I even bothering to say this. Fumento is such an intellectually dishonest dumbass water carrier for the hard Right it is a waste of bandwidth.

Tim wrote: "Anti-American? Huh? When have I ever criticised America about anything?"

This can only be a result of not knowing where to begin. I know I have that problem more and more these days.

By Steve Bloom (not verified) on 07 Dec 2005 #permalink

"Tim wrote: "Anti-American? Huh? When have I ever criticised America about anything?""

To criticize President Bush is to be Anti-American!!! (background bursts open to disgorge marching band with drum majorettes playing "God Bless America" as fighter planes fly by in formation above, ending in skyrockets)