Eli Rabett has a little competition going for the
science rant of the year (surely a huge awards night will be held to honor the lucky victor). The following tawdry tale is probably ineligible is it doesn’t involve science (even by its loosest definition). And it’s not really a “best” rant either; more a “most pitiful” or an “embarrassing to the extreme” rant. But a “rant”; it is most certainly that.
Our tale begins with the publishing of a silly piece of
denialist piffle in the Canada Free Press. The sludge, entitled “The UN Climate Change Numbers Hoax”, is the usual oft-repeated deceptive nonsense, the content of which isn’t really important to this story, but read it if you must.
The authors? One, Tom Harris, is a well known shill and Astroturfer. You can read about him
here. The other is Australia’s very own John McLean.
I hadn’t heard of him either.
According to the blurb following the CFP piece, McLean is a climate data analyst based in Melbourne, Australia.
Hmmmm……a climate data analyst. Sounds important. Sounds, dare I say it, like the man is a professional. Perhaps we should take note of what he says?
The action then moves to Jennifer Marohasy’s blog, where McLean’s story is the subject of a post.
Almost immediately upon filing of said post, a commenter Luke accurately notes that McLean’s piece is unsubstantiated garbage.
McLean turns up and fires straight back, so stetting himself on the path to self destruction:Luke likes to attack individual with whom he doesn't agree.
Would he please state his own credentials in climatology, listing all his academic qualifications and all his papers published in peer-reviewed journals.
If he cannot provide adequate proof of his expertise then clearly he should be regarded as a "parasite poster" who merely lives off the research and claims of others.
And so the rant begins.
Then it gets interesting, as Luke notes that McLean is not who he advertises himself to be.
Something I am curious about though - the Canadian article (and I always believe what I read in newspapers) says "John McLean is climate data analyst based in Melbourne, Australia."
Well gee that sounds very impressive. I was looking for someone to help me with some multivariate analysis. Do you have a large clientele for your services?
But your OLO page says "John McLean has an amateur interest in global warming following 25 years in what he describes as the analysis and logic of IT."
And your home page says "Computer consultant and occasional travel photographer". I'm an occasional travel photographer too so look we've got heaps in common.
I then tried Google Scholar "Mclean John climate" and couldn't seem to find anything that looked right. And then I tried "Mclean John climate Australia" but didn't do any good either. But you know being unqualified and uneducated, I may be doing the wrong thing. I'm sure you can easily clear it up.
I was looking for your climate data analyst business section, but given I'm uneducated I couldn't seem to find it either. Web sites are so hard to follow.
Was wondering if you could get clear these difficulties up?
What’s this? McLean has only an amateur interest in climate science? He’s only a computer consultant and occasional travel photographer?. Not a climate data analyst?
McLean has quite a presence on teh intertubes (NZ climate change coalition, on line opinion and all), but what about the peer-reviewed publication list?
There’s one hit – a mere review in E&E. Energy & Environment – the journal that is so l33t, so exclusive, so exceptional, that it published David Archibald.
We can safely exclude it. E&E isn’t worthy of ICI’s citation index for good reason.
So when McLean has been caught red handed “enhancing” his credentials (or is that overstating? No…..exaggerating – is that it?), you’d think he might see the downside of demanding to see the “climate credentials” of others, particularly when even the most simple-minded can understand that such a demand is essentially meaningless and reflects more upon the demander than the demandee.
No; not our John. He’s on a mission. He just channels the anger....for the next 12 hours:
Just answer the question, parasite.
THIRD TIME - Please state your own credentials in climatology, listing all your academic qualifications and all your papers published in peer-reviewed journals.
Luke, I'm still waiting for you to answer the question.
....
You provide no evidence whatsoever of any qualifications or experience in a field in which you so sharply criticise others.
For the FOURTH TIME, Show us your credentials for your comments.
I don't think you can. I think you're just a parasite poster who probably gets his comments out of some book or off some web site. "The Parasite's guide to making personal abuse" sounds about right.
....
Come on boy wonder, show us what credentials you have.
Luke, you just keep on illustrating that you're all mouth and no credentials.
FIFTH TIME - Please state your credentials in climatology, listing all your academic qualifications and all your papers published in peer-reviewed journals.
Surely that's simple enough request for you.
....
SIXTH TIME ... Please state your credentials in climatology.
What is your problem? Surely the request is simple enough.
If you have any academic qualifications in climatology please tell us what they are?
If you have published any papers on climatology - in a peer-reviewed journal of course - please tell us the papers, the journal and the date of publication.
What could be easier?
Or are you simply the parasite that I referred to earlier ???
Personally I think you are a gutless little shrill with no credentials whatsoever in this subject, but that's only between the two of us.
....
Luke, will you just stop your pitiful attempt at diversions and provide the information that I request.
I think you have NO QUALIFICATIONS and have had NO PAPERS published. In other words you attempts to abuse people, papers and anything else in this forum are meaningless because you have no credentials.
Now what does your book of insults and diversions have to say about that ? (Now why do I suspect you will respond to this question at not the one that I have asked SEVEN times...)
Proteus, my request should not be one of life's mysteries.
Either Luke has academic qualifications related to climatology or he does not.
Either Luke has had papers on climatology published or he hasn't it.
My request is simple ... unlike the IPCC's subjective claims ;-)
....
Luke, your attempted diversions don't interest me at all.
Instead of worrying about my article please answer what I've been asking you since 10:26 this morning (that's NINE hours ago)
EIGHT TIME - If you have any academic qualifications in climatology please tell us what they are? If you have published any papers on climatology - in a peer-reviewed journal of course - please tell us the papers, the journal and the date of publication.
If you have none then why won't you be a big brave boy and admit it ?
....
Luke (a.k.a. Parasite), I'm still waiting ....
I don't give a **** about your attempted diversions. Where's your climatology credentials?
NINE times I've asked this very simple question... Why have you attempted to duck and weave for almost 10 hours ??
....
Parasite, I see you are still avoiding the question.
Too gutless to answer it or are the answers to both parts of my question a big fat ZERO - i.e. you don't have any credentials in climatology at all ??
Gee, if you have no credentials then your postings - including your purile attempts at diversions - are not worth much at all.
....
Hi Parasite ....
TENTH time - what are your academic and/or professional qualifications for making comments on climatology?
I will just keep ignoring your attempts to side-track the issue.
WHY CAN?T YOU ANSWER THE QUESTION, PARASITE ?
....
ELEVENTH TIME - in a bit over 12 hours... Parasite Luke, please state your own credentials in climatology, listing all your academic qualifications and all your papers published in peer-reviewed journals.
It looks like you're here on this blog under false pretences. You don't have the faintest bit of credibility on climate matters at all.
You're just a parasite living off websites like Real Climate and whatever slurs you can dredge up from elsewhere!
....
So there you go. Twelve hours of self-destruction. I almost felt sorry for the poor man, as even the most rabid of denialists will in all probability disown him now. He’ll most likely be reduced to stalking inner city parks late at night, whipping open his trench coat to display that treasured E&E screed and CFP piece to unsuspecting passers by, all the while howling rabidly at the moon.
Let that be a lesson to you all.
Read the rest of this post!
