Anthony Watts can't seem to man up and admit his mistakes and immoral behavior

Anthony Watts needs to get out of the kitchen because he can't take the heat, especially when what he says is wrong and what others say is true:


More from Climate Progress, March 29, 2011:  

http://climateprogress.org/2011/03/29/wattsupwiththat-attack-fabrication/#more-45565

1. Anthony Watts says:

   March 29, 2011 at 6:10 pm

   
   Since Joe has not seen fit to provide a link to the post in question, along with the errata I published, I will do so, here it is: [snip]
   
   [JR: That is another falsehood. There is a link to the post in question in my post here. I am tired of you publishing your nonsense here. And I'm certainly not going to give you another link -- particularly to an error riddled post that contains a variety of false attacks on me.]
   
   BEST has seen the correction and has thanked me for it. I was not aware of the issue until Dr. Muller communicated with me.
   
   [JR: That is also an outrageous falsehood. One of your commenters pointed out on March 23 (!) your mistake "It seems to me that using weather stations only in Japan doesn’t seem like a random process, yet the BEST team says the stations mimic the Global Data and were randomly chosen." Instead of correcting your post last week, you wrote, "Ah I see you are immediately back to wasting everyone’s time here, so I’ll waste some of yours with some sarcasm. I’m not going to give you any additional information, as you’ve proven yourself to be a hostile commenter who will just run over to the Rommulans...." ]
   
   Thanks for taking out Mr. Roddy’s ugly bestiality insinuation, it was hardly humorous by any stretch.
   
   As for being cock-sure about information in blog posts, here’s the problem in reverse where Mr. Romm made a very large error and also had to correct a blog post.
   
   [JR: Uh, the difference was that (1) I was quoting someone else and (2) the minute the error was pointed out I fixed it, whereas you refused to fix your post for 6 full days after it was pointed out. If I hadn't written this post, who knows if you ever would have fixed that falsehood.]
   [snip -- I'm not giving you more links back to another error-riddled post.]
   
   Blogging by its nature, gets peer review post facto.
   
   Thanks again, Anhtony
   
   [JR: Uhh, only for those who care about accuracy, as opposed to those who push disinformation, like you.]
   
2. climate undergrad says:

   March 29, 2011 at 6:16 pm

   
   None of this explains why Dr. Muller is consulting with a discredited-denier-former-TV-weatherman.
   
   There have got to be at least 1,000,000 people more qualified, possibly a lot more.
   
   Hell, I’m one of them with a B.S. in engineering science and a focus in energy and the environment.
   
   Funny how Watts didn’t mention whether or not he will concede on the “settled facts”(NAS) or “unequivocal”(IPCC) evidence that the earth is in fact warming.
   
3. Jeffrey Davis says:

   March 29, 2011 at 6:19 pm

   
   Accusing someone on consorting with a goat is a time-honored intenet mock. Always prefaced with the libel-defeating boilerplate, “I’ve heard that …”
   
   I can’t believe that Watts is so thin-skinned, humorless, and self-important as to object — in print! — to the accusation of goat consorting. It’s like running to mommy.
   
4. Mark says:

   March 29, 2011 at 7:05 pm

   
   Anything he says has one goal:
   
   Make the discussion sound like particularly nasty divorce proceeding.
   
   That’s all he has to do – integrity be damned – and he wins.
   
   At least, until the climate itself forces Watts to crawl into a hole in shame….. which it will.
   Meanwhile, does the man get a dime of federal funds? Then lets subpoena all his email! I especially want to know if he’s investing in real estate in Churchill Manitoba, water distribution technology, and so on. I mean, does he expect to leverage his current profits earned by smearing climate scientists, planning to really cash in big peddling things to desperate people in the future? Integrity be damned. But at least it would be consistent.
   
5. Wit's End says:

   March 29, 2011 at 7:13 pm

   
   Not Shakespeare, but apropos -
   
   Oh what a tangled web we weave
   When first we practice to deceive.
   - Sir Walter Scott (Marmion, 1808)
   
   And don’t be knocking my buddy, Mike Roddy, neither! We were on the teevee too!
   (okay, for five seconds)…
   
   http://witsendnj.blogspot.com/ 2011/ 03/ koch-kills-on-ed-show.html
   
6. HP ClimateHawk says:

   March 29, 2011 at 7:15 pm

   
   Mr. Watts. Your story about Hansen’s “little known” 1988 prediction is false. You never bothered to compare the Salon.com report with Bob Reiss’s book. Search for “west side highway” on http://www.skepticalscience.com for more info.
   
   Pull that false story down, Watts.
   
7. Richard Brenne says:

   March 29, 2011 at 7:17 pm

   
   Mike has withdrawn the goat comment, but no word from the goat itself. . .
   
   [JR: Remember, Watts has never apologized for the smears against NOAA or NASA scientists -- or the headline "When Warmistas Attack" or the attacks on the patriotism of Tamino and Rabbett or.....]
   
8. Mike Roddy says:

   March 29, 2011 at 7:27 pm

   
   Dear Anthony,
   
   I wrote almost all the text for the original Alternet 5 Awards for Most Heinous Climate Villains, and bestiality was never mentioned in the original or subsequent versions posted on that site:
   http://www.alternet.org/ environment/ 149120/5_awards_for_the_world%27s_most_heinous_climate_villains?page=4
   
   Ian Murphy, my coauthor who mostly did the illustrations, added the bestiality part in the Buffalo Beast version. Ian writes a lot of dark humorous pieces, which suits my taste. My name is also on the Beast version, but I don’t really care.
   
   We were having fun, Anthony, including with the aftermath. Now, however, I am wondering. And my advice to you, dear Anthony, is to remember what Lyndon Johnson said to his campaign manager in a 1948 run for Congress:
   
   LBJ: “I want you to accuse my opponent of having sex with every animal in the barnyard”.
   campaign manager: “But that’s not true!”.
   
   LBJ: “Yes, but I want him to deny it!”.
   
   We can’t help but laugh at you, Anthony, sorry. How could anyone possibly take your opinions about climate science and everything else seriously?
   
   And thanks to my friends for sticking up for me here.
   
   [JR: If you want to know the kind of comments Watts routinely allows, read this.
   
9. Neal J. King says:

   March 29, 2011 at 7:50 pm

   
   Joe,
   
   I don’t agree with your strategy:
   
   “So the question is, will Anthony Watts keep his word and concede, finally, that there has been substantial warming in recent decades and that the results given by CRU and GISS are largely correct?”
   
   I think it is more important that Watts & family stop pushing nonsense about “no global warming” than that he eat crow in public about getting it wrong. By trying to force the issue, you may just ensure that he does neither – thus sustaining the lifespan of this stalling point.
   
   There is a quote attributed to Sun Tzu, “The Art of War”: “Never cut off your enemy’s retreat.” I think this point has application in this situation.
   
10. Neal J. King says:

    March 29, 2011 at 7:57 pm

    
    climate undergrad @13:
    
    You ask, “None of this explains why Dr. Muller is consulting with a discredited-denier-former-TV-weatherman.
    
    There have got to be at least 1,000,000 people more qualified, possibly a lot more.”
    
    There is a very good reason for consulting with Watts: He has one of the most popular climate websites on the WWW, and he’s skeptical about global warming. If the BEST study takes into account his input and concerns, and still gets the conventional results (and that is what looks like happening), Watts & family will have no fallback and no cover.
    
    It would be worthwhile to get beyond this stage of argument. Let’s let that happen.
    
11. Steve L says:

    March 29, 2011 at 8:06 pm

    
    Hey Anthony Watts. Congratulations on being able to admit you were wrong. Seriously, I actually respect that. It seems very rare over there.
    
    But you better get used to it, because you guys are wrong about so very much. And it doesn’t matter how much you “shout them down in the comments” — you guys need to look in the mirror and figure out what is the honorable way to react when your shouting certainty is no longer convincing to anyone with a speck of decent intellect.
    
12. Rob C. says:

    March 29, 2011 at 8:15 pm

    
    Anthony Watts: you are committing acts that are morally and ethically on par with selling meth to gradeschoolers. At long last, have you no shame?
    
    Never mind, its a rhetorical question, and the answer is abundantly clear.
    
    
    

    LP says:

    March 29, 2011 at 8:27 pm

    ***
    A message to Anthony Watts:
    ***
    Please save the bullsh!t and playing the victim card for your own blog where it fits right in.
    Everyone who reads this website knows how entirely, calculatingly, unapologetically, full of $%&# you are. You can blame your “misunderstanding” on bad hearing or the mean ole internets as much as you want, but just remember this:
    
    Your blatant dishonesty and distortion is completely transparent to CP commenters like me and the rest of us – i.e. those who actually understand the science of AGW as well as the underhanded politics people like you peddle to deny it.
    
    Now think about what happens when time, reality, and hindsight catch up to those flocks of sheeple you choose to lead astray. Unless you’ve brainwashed yourself as badly as you have your own readers, I think you know just as well as the rest of us what’s really coming down the pipe.
    
    So please enjoy your 15 minutes of disingenuous fame, your absurd “science blog” awards, and whatever kickbacks you’re getting from the Heartland Institute and the Koch brothers for all your pollutocrat propaganda.
    …
    Because here’re the REAL accolades you will ultimately be remembered for:
    
    When your 15 minutes are up, when the harsh reality of AGW will be too much for even your own Dunning-Krugerite army to ignore, when the consequences are too dire and any possible mitigation too little too late – people will eagerly look back for whoever they can blame.
    
    The next generation and those beyond will ask with incredulous outrage how we chose to twiddle our thumbs on this issue when our best scientists warned us about it for decades.
    And although you may not be around to face the torches and pitchforks by that point – just remember every word you write on that joke of a website, every speech you give spreading your disinfo to the disinformed, will find its way into permanent history.
    
    So when people look back FOR THE REST OF HISTORY with disdain and ask how our generation could be so lazy, so selfish, and so utterly stupid to let this all happen – they’ll have the exact same perspective on you that we already do.
    
    I hope that level of permanent infamy is worth whatever cheap kicks you’re getting out of all this in the meantime.
    
    Just who’s going to be around 100 years from now to blame all your DELIBERATE dishonesty on “bad hearing”?
    
    Good luck with that.