The Australian ran a story earlier this week implying that threats made against scientists were “manufactured”. Of course the denial movement is all in a tizz, claiming a threat was never, ever made against anyone… honest!
Grahame Redfearn over at Crikey does a masterful take down of this nonsense:
In my view, the campaign of abuse is designed to intimidate climate scientists, discourage them from engaging with the public and discourage them from carrying out their research. Failing to condemn it shows just how low the climate change debate has become.
The Australian disease: pathological denial of evidence
No evidence of threats?
Glen Isherwood of the Australian Citizen’s Electoral Council threatened physicist Hans Schellnhuber with a hangman’s noose in Melbourne in July 2011:
No, not at all threatening. Isherwood boats about is activities in this video:
What is even more ironic?
Professor Schellnhuber, the director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research and an Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change member, said he was amazed by the intensity of the political uproar in Australia over a relatively soft carbon-pricing policy.
While he was opening a recent climate conference in Melbourne, a man in the front row waved a noose at him. “I was confronted with a death threat when I gave my public lecture,” Professor Schellnhuber said.
“Somebody got to his feet and showed me a rope with a noose.
“He showed me this hangman’s rope and he said: ‘Mr Schellnhuber, welcome to Australia’.”
Just in case you think I’m making this up, here’s the freaking evidence:
I’m not sure cognitive dissonance describes The Australian’s approach to reporting on this. It’s borders on the pathological:
The Australian in 2011: Scientists receive death threats
The Australian in 2012: No they don’t…
If it was at all possible for corporations to develop Alzheimer’s disease, then The Australian qualifies as the first known example.
Campaigns of verbal abuse designed to intimidate
I’ve never received a death threat, but like most of involved in the debate have received by fair share of abuse. When I first started blogging I received a stream of abusive messages from certain well known members of the denial community.
When I publicly demanded they cease on this blog, this is the response I got:
“You are such a f******* liar you stupid c***t. They are not threatening messages. They are offensive messages. What a dumb lying c**** you are.”
“So you got that evidence you stupid c***?”
I received this email from one Grahame Bird in March 2010.
Let’s be clear – verbal abuse is threatening. Such activities are designed to intimidate.
Cyber stalking: a denier tracks down details of one my readers
Deniers have also proved to be cyber stalkers. One Pete Ridely in the UK who tracked down the details of one of my readers and ever so subtly hinted at visiting them to “discuss” climate change:
Next time I’m visiting friends in Brighton I’ll pop along to the Maitreya Kadampa Buddhist Centre in Bexhill on Sea for a chat. Is it still Sea Road?
BTW, do you have any scientific or engineering education or training or was it all theology and meditation?
Best wishes, Pete Ridley
They researched my readers educational background, current place of work and other details in order to show they could be reached.
I banned Ridely, horrified that he/she/them would invoke such sinister tactics.
The truth: deniers running a cynical, brutal and nasty campaign designed to intimidate
The denial industry is running a campaign of intimidation in an attempt to silence scientists and activists.
The evidence is abundant.
But of course, true to form they deny the evidence of their own activities.