Swindle update

An interesting report from The Times (hat tips to Rog and Richard Tol).

Following the broadcast of The Great Global Warming Swindle, Dr Armand Leroi, who had been planning to work with Durkin on a documentary, sent him an email expressing concern about the programme and saying “To put this bluntly: the data that you showed in your programme were . . . wrong in several different ways.” He copied the email to scientific author Simon Singh. Durkin responded to Leroi saying “You’re a big daft c*ck.â€? A further email from Singh, urging Durkin to engage in serious debate, received the response “Go and f*ck yourself”. Leroi subsequently stated that he was withdrawing his co-operation with Durkin.

This was the day that Frank Devine chose to begin his column in the Oz, which has enthusiastically plugged Durkin’s work, “Climate change predictors really need to acquire a few social graces.”

11 thoughts on “Swindle update

  1. Prof Carl Wunsch warns of the risk to scientific credibilty made by “rhetorical excess” and the “over-dramatization and unwarranted extrapolation of scientific facts.” I think the horse has truly bolted out that door.


  2. I think anyone who saw Titanic knows that there is a risk of overdramatization where Leonardo di Caprio is concerned, Rog.

  3. After Tony Blair’s announcement the other night, I’m conceding to Tol that AGW is the dominant view at least in England. I suspect Durkin’s rudeness is a reflection of that – he knows he doesn’t have a leg left to stand on.

  4. Yes it’s hard for him to take going up against someone that knows his science and isn’t bluffed by his BS or fooled by his passive aggressive front. His attacks on Williams will sink what little credibility he had.

  5. “oooh! Naughty Durkin swears in private email shocker.
    Whatever next?”

    What was he thinking when he apologized?

  6. An interesting article in the March 10 New Scientist discussed how someone called David Wasdell analysed the recent IPCC report, and compared it with the draft IPCC report before it was sent out to governments for final changes. He found that the final version removed most of the references to dangerous positive feedbacks such as carbon cycle feedback effects.

    I found a copy of his report at http://www.meridian.org.uk/Resources/Global%20Dynamics/IPCC/index.htm .

  7. Now that the Swindle is being shown in OZ, how about an update?

    In Weekend Australian (7-8 July), they had an article by Durkin with a couple of graphs from a paper by “a leading astrophysicist from Harvard”. I tracked the source down to Willie Soon’s 2005 paper .

    Aside from dubious stats techniques and nonstandard temperature data, his funding is from fossil fuel sources. Not mentioned by Durkin. Probably worried that his “soft-left soft-green middle classes” would think he is politicizing science if he mentioned that.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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