is the presumed cyberstalker

A “Peter Ridley” contacted my and made the claim that  nasty posts, cyber stalking etc. are the work of an “imposter” using the moniker “Pete Ridley”.

The details for cyber stalking “Pete Ridley” account are:

The following account:

Posted this on my blog:

It sounds about right, considering the nonsense you have posted here. If that is you then “Mindfulness in the midst of chaos” says it all. 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

Clearly indicating they could get to a reader of this blog.

Let me be clear: this email account is banned permanently without any further consideration.

Will the “real” Peter stand up?

There is another email account that the “real” Peter Ridley claims to speak through:

I was approached by this “Peter” using the later account claiming “Pete” was an “impostor”. Both use email accounts with the extension. is the portal to web mail services for telecommunications company Orange (UK).

To be frank, if it is an imposter then “Peter” should contact the ISP and let them know of the confusion.

Final say

Message to the supposed “imposter” Pete Ridley, you can f___ off mate.

Message to the “real” Peter Ridley, sort it out with your ISP. If it is an “imposter” then identify theft is a crime. That is for you to sort out, not me or anyone else on the internet should have to fix.

Take the time of look at the following:

All comments from “Peter” will be held in spam and will only be let through after careful scrutiny.

The “real Peter” may think this unfair. It is not censorship, this is about protecting me and my readers.

That’s it, I’m not wasting anymore of my life on this.

127 thoughts on “ is the presumed cyberstalker

  1. john byatt says:

    the dumbo , i have been using my real name on the web, re climate change since 2007 ,
    after there were some leon ashby and viv forbes letters to the editor in the local paper that i replied to i started to receive sceptic propaganda in the mail,

    googled john byatt gympie times and one of the locals had asked if someone could reply to a letter from our local vocal alarmist john byatt.

    it was on the Agmates blog now just grounds, ross was posting on there so just went on to give him a bit of moral support ,

  2. Spatch says:

    Yep, then there were the Shanghai conferences – Maurice Strong – Carbon Taxes – it’s all coming together nicely as we said it would…

  3. john byatt says:

    I rarely speak to the boss nowadays best to keep a bit of distance ,

  4. john byatt says:

    found this as an alert moderator, please remove at ABC

    “I cant help putting the boot in here is one sceptic and little green men” poster from fieldings forum, as i say pulled down if you want more,
    google peggyb, al gore the antichrist, steve fielding

    Forums :: Senator Steve Fielding
    15 posts – 7 authors – Last post: 25 Apr
    Wonder how long before chugg climbs out of the bunker to give …. But no need to worry,Enki/Jesus and his Shining Ones I’m sure will be …

    old chugg, barry the bunker baron, cannot find his blog about the shining ones,
    they were all stuffing crazy

  5. john byatt says:

    Spatch got his own tag at TCS at least he called you spatchcock instead of that filthy frank that put up the urban dictionary version {fielding forum}

    have let geoff know about that russian porn site stuff , it was there for weeks as it was written in russian, we all reported it but the moderator was never there , someone got sick of it and reported it , north tasmanian man, so no one from the forum

    wonder what was on the porn site, ? i thought they were selling iphones

    • Spatch says:

      I ran some of that Russian porn stuff thru google translate and it was links to hard core adult and kiddy porn. Nasty stuff.

      What made me laugh was that we were getting flack from the site admin for minor infringements – a few harmless insults – usually in response to insults from the deniers – and all the while kiddie porn was sitting there for weeks right under the admins noses!

      Ahh yes, good ole chugg and the “shining ones”. ridley’s madness is the irritating type but chuggs was extremely funny.

      • john byatt says:

        and the flaming chugg list of every undersea volcano on the planet , page after stuffin page of it , was rolling on the floor by the time he finished,

        then the list of every bloody glacier on earth ,

        The day he lost the plot and posted all the alien stuff , i felt a bit sorry for him ,

  6. john byatt says:

    remember Pip, went to that Monckton lecture and could not get out of the place fast enough, Pip was probably the only one their with a bit of a clue, wonder if he has worked it out yet?

    ridley asked geoff at TCS if he was Havequestions because he asked the same questions, Note to pete, so does elsa,

    seems that HQ was not that mad that he got into the ridley email gang
    I see that riddles blog still has monkeybumface as a friend, why?

    The best time i had there was when you were away spatch and poop talk turned up , invited by admin, after a day pooptalk started postng in ulta huge red capitals, lost the plot after a bit of brain surgery from cooloola ,
    he is also in the ridley email gang ,

    Sad that that site closed down, hehehehe I notice that Carter at TCS uses the same temperature graph as fielding did, the one with the trend excluded,
    why do they all fall for that,?

    it appears that apathy rather than denial is the real problem though, more information about the risks need to be disseminated.

    just preparing a letter regarding the, Tragedy of the commons ,

    sometimes go to ABC unleashed when Cox or one of the IPA, Lavoisier goons are there, a new shining light Lisa merideth has appeared, excellent short explanations, very patient,

    • elsa says:

      Note to John Byatt: I don’t know if I have asked the same questions as others. I can assure you that I am me and only me on this site. I am not Roger or any other person. I also know that you have not answered the questions that I asked which are fundamental to your belief in the causes of global warming. So go on, answer the questions instead of ducking them by changing the subject.

      • john byatt says:

        the point was elsa , you all ask the same questions, you expect us to explain the science to you, this is your job, if you cannot understand the science by now then i guess that you never will

        so please change my reply, to “rubbish questions’

  7. john byatt says:

    Remember spatch, this absurdity that they went on with at chris’s blog

    Peggyb a rabid sceptic turns up, obviously not her but pete does not even question that and just replies as if it was the real peggyb,

    comments follow on from here

  8. Spatch says:

    Ah yes – that was all really strange – I really felt sorry for Chris having the lunatics invade his blog like that.

    If you’re feeling nostalgic check this out. It’s a snapshot of the entire Steve Fielding forum. It’s all there – the post with my location details is there too – wonder how long it will take for Pete to find it…

  9. john byatt says:

    I forgot all about the flying binghi and his appeal to history ,

    I learnt a lot on fieldings blog as you were continually being exposed to the latest final nail in the coffin self contradictions , so from that i now know all the sceptic arguments.

    that one day they posted Miskolczi and claimed his science as correct then the next day Spencer , this contradiction to miskolczi did not seem to produce a cognitive dissonance in them, they were capable of accepting both no greenhouse at the same time as accepting greenhouse with less sensitivity,
    they would claim that the warming was natural then the next day claim that it was cooling, denier or denialist does not reveal where the madness lie

  10. elsa says:

    “the point was elsa , you all ask the same questions, you expect us to explain the science to you, this is your job, if you cannot understand the science by now then i guess that you never will”

    I have never seen the main question that I asked of you asked by anyone else on this site. I suggest that you just can’t answer it.

    I think you should explain the science to us, not the other way round, since it is you that is making the claim to know so much.

    • john byatt says:

      Elsa it is only after reading the science for over two years that you realise just how little you know, you having never read it believe that you have some absurd questions that has the scientists stumped,

      Atheist blogs have “fanasty island for the YECYS
      RC has the “bore hole’
      another is the dunces corner
      we need ” what elsa would you like to ask’

      • elsa says:

        Would it not be easier just to answer the question than to try to tell me what I might or might not have read? Be careful orreaders may realise that you can’t answer it.

  11. Spatch says:

    One of my favourite moments was when we outed the truth behind the “award winning” scientist that Pete kept promoting all over the blogosphere – Roger Taguchi.

    It was such a hard fall back to earth for poor old Pete when we discovered that his hero Taguchi was merely a retired high school science teacher – and the “award” he received was a gold star from the school principal.

    (The unanswered question is whether Pete knew that or if he was mislead by Taguchi.)

    It was even funnier when Taguchi came on Fielding’s blog and admitted, after we’d outed him, that he’d never read a climate science text book – which came as no surprise to us. lol

    • john byatt says:

      Taguchi has the claim that from CO2 alone then doubling would give a temp rise of 1DegC,

      no problem as this is close to the IPCC 1.1DegC and the newer 1.2DegC

      even pete has post “from CO2 alone”, Taguchi did come onto fieldings blog and debate Tom, maybe it was actually pete because on other blogs pete usually replies ” i will email roger and get back ”

      Taguchi seems to be in the equal negative and positive feedback camp that would prevented climate change in the past , climate change in the past happened so feedbacks cannot be neutral

      TCS had Cox there last week claiming that the warming is due to TSI , today they are posing the possible return of the little ice age , again no doubt to reduced TSI,

      Elsa, okay ask one question at a time here, if it is not completely stupid then someone may help, dont think that will happen though as mothincarnate has given up on you due to your lack of comprehension


    • elsa says:

      And why could a retired high school teacher not be a knowledgeable and clever person with something useful to say on this subject? Do you have something against high school teachers? Why would they not be better placed than eg Phil Jones, with his degree from that top UK science university, Lancaster, which just happens not to teach dreary subjects such as physics which might have got in the way of his own brand of “science”?

      • Spatch says:

        Apart from the fact that Professor Phil Jones is an actual climate scientist who has published over 100 papers in the scientific literature and has won numerous awards ( real proper awards for his work in climate science, not gold stars from some lowly ranked high school) there’s not that much difference between him and Taguchi.

        I look forward to reading Taguchi’s work once he’s been published.

  12. john byatt says:

    Just to help with all this confusion of the blog names

    spatch has always been spatch and only spatch

    ross has also only been two names, not mentioned due security

    John byatt , me was cooloola , banned by moderator,after a few months ??

    came back next day as phoenix ( risen from the ashes} , everyone including PR knew because it was in my post, “Did i really fool ya spatch?’

    again we were all banned after a few months .

    came back this time as guess who and again they all were told straight away

    now if i was posting as cooloola at the time then cooloola was used elsewhere,
    so there was no confusion when i posted as phoenix then i used that elsewhere
    ridley knew all this but because steve’s blog was taken down then he probably thinks that no one can check so he can claim anything,

    spatch has now put up the archive so pete’s absurd claims can be checked

    Didnt see that coming ridley

    the reason for this is that the false pete ridley is an extremely weird sociopath that has caused concern to many people


  13. john byatt says:


    and colin dixon, seemed to have really off the planet scientific opinions,
    at last revealed’

    seems that he was a devotee of don tolman and his boot camp for brains

    “whatever you believe is fact’

  14. peteridley says:

    Hi Elsa, you will not get any worthwhile science out of John Byatt. You may be lucky and avoid his nasty side because he is using his real name now rather than hiding behind a false one, but watch out. He is quite liable to come back in another guise and wait for the language. On Fielding’s blog he (as “cooloola”), Ross Brisbane (as “DigitalAdvisor”/”ConcernedCitizen”) and “Spatch” were known as either “the duty dingbats” r “the three stoogies”. Disruption and invective was their game, pure and simple.

    I always made and still make allowances for Ross because he can’t help himself, but John and (still cowardly) “Spatch” are the pits.

    If you want to have a sensible debate with intelligent people I recommend that you pay a visit to Professor Judith Curry’s blog. In particular I recommend Roger Taguchi’s contributions on her “Physics of the atmospheric greenhouse(?) effect” ( See his postings on 7th, 9th & 22nd Feb.

    Judith is a “luke-warmer” not a CACC disciple like Mike here so you can have sensible exchanges there. You’ll never get it here. If the “duty dingbats” pay her a visit and try to disrupt her blog she’ll give them short shrift.

    Mike, thanks for restoring my “privilege” to comment. Several on your blog (especially ecologist Timothy) grumble on about the damage that humans are doing to the environment. I’ve reminded you before of the ways in which humans have improved the environment for the benefit of humans. We should be grateful for these anthropognic changes. Enjoy this wonderful world that we live in and continue to enjoy all of the benefits that humans have made possible through their ingenuity, including the fantastic improvements that they have made to the environment and our access to places of natural beauty. These are pleasures that people living 150 years ago in the developed world couldn’t even dream of and for the present day inhabitants of undeveloped nations still can’t imagine ..”. CACC “disciples” like you, Tim and Andrew moan on about the damage that humans are doing to the planet but you are choosing to ignore all of the great improvements that they have made for the benefit of the most important of all species, we humans.

    Let me give you an example. There is a large area (187 square km) in the UK “ .. The Norfolk Broads, an area of great natural beauty and a haven for wildlife .. ” ( that my family, friends and 2 million others love to visit in the summer. It is as lovely as the holiday brochures paint it, easily accessed thanks to human inginuity and full of natural and human-made beauty. How did it come about? “ .. It is ironic that one of the greatest areas of natural beauty and wildlife conservation in Britain is in essence man-made. Located in the quadrant to the north and east of Norwich , the Broads are the shallow lakes formed when ancient peat-diggings were flooded because of a rise in water levels in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. .. ” (

    “The origins of these Broads was not known until very recently as everyone just assumed they were shallow naturally formed lakes which were simply related to the surrounding and interconnecting rivers. In fact they were all man made many hundreds of years ago .. in fact they were all medieval peat diggings dating back mostly to the 12-14th century .. ” ( Read some more about how humans have improved the environment for the benefit of humans.

    BTW, what is peat – oh yes, an early form of “fossil fuel”!

    That reminds me of the story about the old gardener and the vicar.
    Vicar: “You and God have made a wonderful job of that garden”
    Gardener “ Well, you should have seen the mess it was in before I took over.
    The world is now a far nicer place for humans to live in than it was before we cut down those dense forests, introduced agriculture, roads, wonderful means of transport, hospitals, schools, etc. etc. etc.

    OK, we’ve done some damage on the way but we learn from our mistakes and eventually put things right. What we must strive to do is help underdeveloped economies to achieve the same comfortable environments and lifestyles that we take for granted but they can only aspire to and help them to learn from our past mistakes.

    Best regards, Pete Ridley

    • Spatch says:

      Ridley said:
      “If you want to have a sensible debate with intelligent people I recommend that you pay a visit to Professor Judith Curry’s blog. In particular I recommend Roger Taguchi’s contributions on her “Physics of the atmospheric greenhouse(?) effect” ( See his postings on 7th, 9th & 22nd Feb.

      Taguchi said on Curry’s blog
      “In any previous discussion mentioning backscatter, I goofed.”

      “I also goofed in my posting of Feb. 2, 2011 at 1:13 am, when I derived a value for temperature sensitivity (not corrected for IPCC truncation error)of 1.02 instead of the correct value of 0.70. I should have used the power output of 343 W/m^2 at the Earth’s surface rather than the value of 260 W/m^2 at altitude. ”

      “That’s what happens when you blindly substitute into a formula without truly understanding the physics.”


      “without truly understanding the physics”


      That about sums up Taguchi.

      He should go read a few climate science text books.

    • john byatt says:

      john byatt (03:02:00) :
      Ridley said ” i cannot stand cowards that hide behind fase names like spatch and cooloola , me and my buddies ADMRICH and POPTECH and many others cannot abide by this, geoff did you ever post under the very uncowardly name of HAVEQUESTIONS because you ask the same questions,

      he has lost the plot


  15. elsa says:

    While I would not say that the average high school teacher is more qualified than Phil Jones I suspect there are many that are. His scientific training seems to have been limited. I don’t know of Taguchi, so I can’t comment on him. The number of papers published and peer reviewed seems to have become a new way of testing science in the warmist world. Peer review ought to mean reviewed by someone who does not agree with you. Getting someone who holds the same views as you is not a test. We know where Phil Jones stands on this. He is not at all keen to release his data because it might be investigated by those who don’t agree with him, as he has confirmed in his e-mails. Yet it is only by exposing your data and work to those who do not agree with you that you can really test that work.

  16. elsa says:

    “What an utter load of crap. You’ve just displayed a complete lack of understanding of the peer review system. I’d quit now before you further embarrass yourself.”

    Like Mr Byatt you prefer insults to pointing out the fault in the logic. I think that in any other science a review that was carried out by somebody who completely shared your own point of view would be considered unlikely to advance things further. There is a 99% chance that they would find your paper superb. What really counts is if you can get someone who is opposed to you to review your work and comment. Even if you do not agree on much you can at least try to isolate the areas of difference so that you see which the areas are that need to be concentrated on to resolve disputes/advance knowledge. How would you propose to do it?

    That Phil Jones is against showing his data to people opposed to his views says a great deal about his whole approach to science.

    • Spatch says:

      If you’d clicked on the link that John posted you’d have all the data that you incorrectly claim is being suppressed.

      As for your continuing lack of understanding of the peer review process, you’ve gone and effectively removed yourself from any rational debate on climate science. Get back to me when you’ve got that part figured out.

      • elsa says:

        “As for your continuing lack of understanding of the peer review process”

        Perhaps since I am so stupid you could explain it to me. You seem to think that peer review ought to comprise person A, who agrees with person B, reviewing person B’s work. That is fine so far as it goes (which is not that far) but is clearly not as effective as someone who does not agree with person B reviewing person B’s work.

      • elsa says:

        I did not make a claim that data was being suppressed, I said that Phil Jones had been reluctant to disclose information in the past, which he has. That is not the mark of someone who likes to submit his work to genuine peer review (as opposed to a review by your mates which you seem to think counts for more). Given that the UK tax payer had financed his work it was especially unhelpful of him.

    • john byatt says:

      elsa the reference site is the Phil Jones site that contains the data that you keep claiming is unavailable,

      sorry but the only conclusion is that you are either just a troll trying to annoy by claiming ignorance, or you are actually ignorant,

      all of your future posts will be ignored unless they contain something that is worth responding to,

  17. john byatt says:

    read you at unleashed spatch, had been waiting for Cox with a baseball bat ,


    • Spatch says:

      I just did a quick drive by. You got plenty of swings in though.

      This comment at jo nova’s made me laugh:

      “OK went and did my bit posting a couple of replies. Got depressed and had to come back to this site for some sustenance!”

      Cox & the deniers are copping a hammering.

  18. john byatt says:

    Mike or CC, here is a post for you to expose , an appeal by the TCS to waste as much energy as possible for an hour,

    as linked at the Climate kleptics

  19. john byatt says:

    The trick is rather than replying to a post, do up a new post addressing what has been presented below, I see that geoff picked up someone on his icebreaker for sale/ice age link from my post re that,

  20. john byatt says:

    I looked at Geoff’s attempt at maths on the forum, i left it alone felt a bit sorry for him,

    along comes someone and dumps on him , I think that he is the treasurer of the TCS, left that alone also, not a good look when the treasurer does not understand %

  21. elsa says:

    “elsa the reference site is the Phil Jones site that contains the data that you keep claiming is unavailable”

    I don’t think I made any comment about data that was unavailable. I said Phil Jones was reluctant in the past to show his data to those opposed to his point of view. I don’t think that is a matter for debate, we all know it as a fact from the leaked e-mails.

    • elsa says:

      Unless of course by “unavailable data” you mean an answer to my question about how you have been able to disentangle the effects of the various factors that have caused temperature changes in the past. This is not answered by the link, nor I note by you now. I would always welcome your explanation on that front but I guess for now you are still unable to provide it.

      • john byatt says:

        Phil Jones data has always been on the web , it was also available at NOAA, M & M had the Phil Jones data at the time of the FOIs, they were after data that was covered by copyright, private data belonging to institutions that charged for access, Jones had no authority to give out that data, is there anything at all that you understand ? and what is this tangent that you have gone off on now? What on earth are you asking now ?

  22. john byatt says:

    Re Phil Jones email

    this is a perfect example of what happens when one reads a converstion between two people and jumps to a conclusion based on their ignorance of the context,

    Remember this – Porn links posted on Fielding’s website.

    I’m amazed that Pete hasn’t linked that to me yet. It was a simple and effective way to shut the forum down, albeit temporarily.*

    It was shut down permanently in the end though. I won’t divulge how that was done here though. *wink*

    *I’m not saying that I had anything to do with the porn links on Fielding’s site.

    I knew what spatch was saying , Geoff at TCS read that then put up a post that spatch had posted the porn on fieldings forum ,

    This is exactly what has happened due to the emails , idiots jumping to conclusions about things they do not understand the context of ,

    Thanks for the example geoff

    • Spatch says:

      Geoff fell for the trap I set hook line and sinker.

      I’ll break it down line by line.

      “I’m amazed that Pete hasn’t linked that to me yet. ”

      Pete’s accused me of many things – I was just saying I’m amazed he hasn’t accused me of the porn links yet.

      “It was a simple and effective way to shut the forum down, albeit temporarily.”

      That’s true, it did shut the forum down for a while so they could look for any more porn links.

      “It was shut down permanently in the end though.”

      Yep, Fielding pulled the plug on the forum, probably cos he lost the staff that was moderating it after he lost the election.

      “I won’t divulge how that was done here though. *wink*”

      That’s just me joking around – hence the *wink*

      Thanks for the laugh Geoff by falling for it then making it into a post on your moronic denier blog. What a goose!

  23. john byatt says:

    Abbott debates Abbott, dont think that he put it in writing though

  24. elsa says:

    “Phil Jones data has always been on the web”

    I don’t think that anyone disputes that SOME of Phil Jones’s data is and always has been available on the net. But it took a Freedom of Information Act request to obtain the bits that he didn’t want to show.

    • john byatt says:

      The bits were the private data elsa that jones had no authority to release ,
      they were not his property

      but i see that we are getting somewhere with your above acknowledgement

      No the freedom of information requests did not release that data, they had to pay for it

  25. elsa says:

    “what is this tangent that you have gone off on now? What on earth are you asking now ?”

    Well the answer to the question that I have asked you time and again is still outstanding John. You may diverge by talking about tangents, being rude etc etc. But if you can’t answer the question ( or even try to answer it!) your claim to know that CO2 drives global warming cannot stand.

    • john byatt says:

      “being rude”

      I am not being wude to woger elsa, i wonce had a pet worm and i weally woved him , i am transwerring my affection for my worm to woger because my worm got squished and his name was wobert .

      oh woe

  26. john byatt says:

    I think elsa’s question is “what has caused temperature changes in the past”

    I would think that people claiming that the climate always changes would have some idea of that before coming here?

    seeing that your lot claim that elsa, you should explain it, i am only interested in this particular change due to emissions of CO2 fossil fuel use,

    try to keep on track

  27. john byatt says:

    Here is gavin schmidt NASA answering a similar question about the jones data as elsa

    [Response: As an example of misconstruing almost every available fact, this comment rates high. Given that all of the relevant data and code related to this have been available for years, and yet the mono-maniacal desire to find something (anything!) wrong continues unabated, it is clear to any objective party that this continued harassment has nothing to do with science or climate or data or replication, but everything to do with partisan personal attacks. – gavin]

  28. john byatt says:

    Ridley said ” i cannot stand cowards that hide behind fase names like spatch and cooloola , me and my buddies ADMRICH and POPTECH and many others cannot abide by this, geoff did you ever post under the very uncowardly name of HAVEQUESTIONS because you ask the same questions,

    he has lost the plot

  29. Ian Worrall says:

    Unfortunately once you’re a victim it can be very difficult to clear your name

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: