Even when we have video of a death threat there are those who try to deny that scientists have been threatened. Like, oh, The Australian. Media Watch reports on media coverage of death threats on climate scientists:
One news outlet comes out of it, in our opinion, almost unscathed: Fairfax Media's The Canberra Times. The ABC doesn't look so great, and The Australian looks worst of all.
What The Australian did in several stories was pretend that a lack of death threats in emails over just six months at the ANU showed that there had been no death threats. For example: (Google "Police not told of 'threats' to ANU climate scientists"):
The Australian yesterday revealed Privacy Commissioner Timothy Pilgrim had debunked claims of death threats in 11 emails sent to university staff. ...
Fairfax Media and the ABC reported last June that ANU climate researchers had been subjected to a vicious and unrelenting campaign that included death threats. ...
As Media Watch says:
The Australian could have checked the hard copy of the Canberra Times's original article in June last year.
You will be chased down the street with burning stakes and hung from your f*** neck, until you are dead, dead, dead!
Die you lying bastard!
F*** off you lying communist c---!!
Eat S*** and Die!!!
-- The Canberra Times, 4th June, 2011
Or even better, The Oz could have actually gone to climate scientists around the country and asked for examples of threatening and abusive emails.
That's what we did. We got these from just two scientists, one in Melbourne, one in Brisbane, received in that same six month period. They're on our website, and they are not pretty reading and yes they were reported to police.
The response from Chris Merritt in The Australian is truly pathetic. Most of the story is about Media Watch's criticism of the ABC's reporting, even though Media Watch said The Australian was worse. Merritt's defence of his paper's reporting:
Holmes also criticised The Australian, but the basis of his criticism was in error.
Holmes gave the impression that the newspaper's reports debunking death threats at the ANU had extended to other alleged death threats at other universities.
Well, yes, he gave that impression by quoting The Australian's stories that said just that.
Merritt continues:
The Australian's reporting of the issue has focused on tracking the progress of Mr Turnill's FOI request, which focused only on ANU.
And only covered emails and six months of those. Not that you would know if this if you relied on The Australian's stories on the emails. There are now nine of them and not once has this important piece of information appeared.
Merritt continues with:
Holmes also mistakenly asserted that The Canberra Times had not reported there had been death threats at ANU. But articles to the contrary were published by that newspaper on June 4 and 5 last year.
In context it's clear that Holmes meant that The Canberra Times had not reported that there had been emailed death threats at ANU in the previous six months. Which is what the FOI request covered. Not that Merritt and The Australian would ever tell you that.
And The Canberra Times was correct to report that there had been death threats at ANU as Media Watch confirmed by talking to Will Steffen. Not that Merritt and The Australian would ever tell you that.
- Log in to post comments
A sick sad sorry state of affairs, indeed.
In other news, old Sydney Town has broken another weather record [here](http://www.theage.com.au/environment/weather/rain-just-a-trickle-in-dri…) and [here too.](http://www.theage.com.au/environment/weather/nsw-is-getting-hotter-2012…)
Denial of reality, that [global warming is real and is happening](http://www.ted.com/talks/james_hansen_why_i_must_speak_out_about_climat…), is truly a sad evil beast.
It's also worth highlighting one of the gems from the Media Watch segment.
Quote from Christian Kerr's report: "Chief Scientist Ian Chubb, who was the ANU's vice-chancellor at the time, last night admitted he did not have any recollection of reading the emails before relocating the university's researchers."
As Media Watch pointed out: "Professor Chubb was Vice-Chancellor at the time the scientists were moved. But he couldn't have read the emails before that, because they weren't sent until the following year."
Will The Oz correct this egregious blunder?
I hope this is directed to the attention of the egregious Tallbloke, whose grotesque performance from here on down makes him doubly worthy of the name Denier.
There is also greater irony in the fact that [the Australian reported on death threats, exhibiting an willful amnesia](http://watchingthedeniers.wordpress.com/2012/05/05/death-threats-why-gu…).
Of course all the usual denial blogs and journalists jumped on the bandwagon claiming that NO death threats had ever been made against scientists *ever* (Bolt did a feature article in the HUN).
It was all a lie/beat up. The Australian did the damage it wanted to do: play fast and loose with the truth, but when exposed slink behind some paper-thin excuses.
True to the Oz's style: dishonest, misleading and cynical.
Boobialla : "Will The Oz correct this egregious blunder?"
If they do, you can bet it'll be very small print tucked away inconspiculously at the bottom of a page - not at the top of the front page like the original error. :-(
The Monckton and the Mob story does not open. What gives Science Blogs?
Trent,
Works for me, although it's very slow right now. It's a link to Hot Topic.
Tim,
I see that we've lost the numbering of comments. This is a shame, as it makes it harder to be clear which one we're replying to, and there's no Reply link on each one either.
Brenda, anger and contempt are two different things.
Where did you pick up your latest item of idiot tinfoilhat lie? I'd guess from a numbskull like Alex Jones, but that's probably slightly too sophisticated for you.
Ah, another nobody nutter, much like yourself.
I suppose that's the attraction.
Bring back my killfile capability! Quick!
WTF is going on here?
Brent,
That's a great spoof site (Poe?). What could anyone possibly add?
'Brent infestation removed' is inevitable. Please don't trouble yourself to respond.
Only slightly OTT.
Fascinating stuff from Curry.
One of her nutters, er... denizens, suggests physical violence;
"When the popular perception of these “Never let a crisis go to waste” leftist pseudoscientists is such that they find themselves at risk of physical assault whenever and wherever they show themselves in public, we can slack off."
Curry's response to a complaint about the above;
"Well Tucci78 is regarded as high entertainment by many of the regulars here. Not so much accepting his sentiments, as being entertained by his presentation of them"
If other people find threats amusing , well that's OK then.
Amazing! I thought it was worth expanding on that exchange that Michael has referred to above, and Curry's reaction to it:
And how does Judith Curry contend with the bile spouted by this lunatic?
Here's someone else who has clearly learned nothing from the HI Billboard fiasco - and all this is going on, ironically, in a comment thread discussing it.
Further on that same thread at Judith Curry's David Wojick - you know; the HI 'climate science curriculum' guy, weighs in:
The only new 'heavy duty' sponsor that's been reported recently is the Illinois Coal Association - and hence yet another shot aimed squarely at whatever vestiges of foot or limb may remain at HI.
'Ideological warfare' indeed!
And, speaking of Greenpeace, they've just reported Bayer, GlaxoSmithKline and Verizon have withdrawn funding from HI.
So, at this stage it wyuld appear to be Greenpeace, what?: 15 Heartland 1 (own goal!)
It's instructive to examine further rambling from one who would teach schoolchildren:
Well, they had the conference... ;-)
And more post-satiric rambling follows.
The libertarian nutters are on the rise at Curry's.
Justice Through Music!
http://www.jtmp.org/jtmp/index.php?q=node/28
C'mon Climate scientist, more Justice Through Music!
http://www.jtmp.org/jtmp/index.php?q=node/33
Let's all chant together now....Justice Through Music! Justice Through Music!.....Oh, wait....
http://tinyurl.com/cytcpbs
Nevermind.
Judith Curry outed herself as a lightweight, slipshod intellect in the Real Climate/Kloor debacle over Montford's novel in 2010.
The look of polite horror on her face at the Lisbon non-event as the leering, horsefaced Rog Tallquack pressed a cheap Josh t-shirt onto her (you can almost see her thinking 'do these morons expect me to put this piece of trash on and pour a pitcher of beer over my tits'?) left me thinking her flag nonsense was delusional but possibly well intentioned in 2011.
But now in 2012, she's not just off with the crazies, but finding excuses for and pandering to the dangerous, rabble rousing, lunatic lynch mob crazies.
Expectations for next year aren't looking good for Dr. Curry.
chek,
You're right. At RC she came over as a run-of-the-mill idiot.
It's good that the "sceptic" blogs leave so much lunatic drivel uncensored, though, exposed for all to see. That stuff does them more damage than anything the rational side could do.
It's more likely that she felt marginalised in a sea of scientists who were much smarter and more influential than she was. Now she's the biggest fish in a small pond and surrounded by lightweights who validate her as long as she gives them what they want to hear, even if she doesn't herself buy it.
Hmmm, there's a word for that.
When I put Judith Curry into Google, it says "people also search for" ...
Curry's current post is a huge chunk of chum tossed to her rabid denialist crowd, a typical strawman from a "philosopher of science" about "the unscientific belief in science".
In her previous post, she lays the cards on the table:
David Wojick's comments are remarkable for their lack of discretion.
Also worth reading is Joseph Bast's ludicrous email to Curry in response to her post. Here's a taster -
Wow. That's, like, brilliant. $5m in earned overwhelmingly hostilemedia exposure.
'Ideological warfare' indeed.
And, gee, it's all going so fantastically swimmingly brilliantly indubitably cross-our-hearts-and-hope-to-die double-plus-good well; that's the story, right?
Um...
Yet somehow Heartland thinks this fruitcake would produce material that would be accepted for teaching children.
"Our PR response to Fakegate has been called “brilliant” even by the folks at DesmogBlog. History will record it as another major scandal that helped bring down the man-made global warming movement."
quick quick quick, Heartland, no time to waste! the faster you persuade people that global warming is a lie, the sooner the planet can stop warming!
no time to lose, Heartland!
"The Canberra Times was correct to report that there had been death threats at ANU as Media Watch confirmed by talking to Will Steffen!"
Australian National University former chancellor Ian Chubb has gone on record in the Australian today saying:
“For the record, there were no alleged death threats except when journalists picked up the story.”
Similar to what I posted on the other thread where you repeated this:
So...apparently it is correct that there were alleged death threats. Which is entirely consistent with what the OP says.
Do you have better support for your claim (and you know, an actual cite would be helpful)? Or were you merely disputing the timing, not their existence?
RT seems to be a one-track record, and one where he can't even manage to get the words right.
If he were a chicken, staggering around and bumping into the walls as he is, he's be put down.
And no Roger Smallbrain, that wasn't a death threat...
Bernard: ...more like Palin's turkey.
Tallbloke is probably getting his "facts" from the Oz:
Chubb: no death threats in emails
Tis a pity Australia is too gutless to run something like the Leveson inquiry.
One more time for the hard of thinking: MediaWatch's Jonathon Holmes writes -
Here, yet again, is the text of the original Canberra Times story (since the original link now 404s on their website.)
Australian climate scientists and climate campaigners are subject to horrible threats and abuse, including death threats, and including in the Deniers' cherry-picked time period.
One of the horrible abuses they are subjected to is attempts to nit-and-cherry-pick away the threats and abuse.
(There are precedents for this in history, you know. None of them are pretty.)
That The Australian is one of the chief offenders in the latter category says everything you need to know about News Ltd.'s dismal record in this matter.
As some here appear to have missed it, see correction and clarification on 'ANU death threats' from the ABC themselves:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/corrections/