Just a Random collection of posts mainly on WUWT a blog with vast readership - watts therefore needs to trim these posts BEFORE publishing. He cannot claim in his defence that the posts are not edited - there are so many with bans on posting that this would be a lie.
REPLY: You can choose to respond or not, not our call nor our duty beyond determining if the comment violates policy. I do think you just don’t know how to handle online criticism well – Anthony
- Myrrh says:
alex says: July 8, 2013 at 11:37 pm
Hey, guy, what did you expect? They would pay you for your denial? For your denial tour Europe? You are silly. The only thing I do not understand – why they hired you at all. Or you were not a denier at that time? Of course, you got a tenured job and thought you be safe. Now you know it better. Gotcha!
REPLY: so does Heinrich-Heine-Universitaet in Duesseldorf condone such use of their network to write such drivel, or are you “tenured” and thus above the law? – Anthony
and the whole point of WUWT post is about 52 or 97% consensus !!!!!----------------------------------
Some one steals a private BB and releases the private posts to the "skeptics"
Then McIntyre says
Steve: .... As to my remarks on your comments in the SKS forum: over the years, I’ve gotten tired of people privately conceding the validity of my criticisms of paleoclimate practices, but failing to do so publicly. In your case, your SKS forum comments show that you agreed with many of my criticisms, but, instead of saying so at SKS, you called me a “conspiracy wackjob” – an offensive and untrue allegation. instead of apologizing when I took issue in my above remarks – as you ought to have done – you complained that your remarks had become public. I understand that you were young at the time and I would be quite happy to accept your withdrawal of these offensive and untrue remarks and move on. But first you have to withdraw the allegations, rather than complaining about how they became public.
Robert way then says
That being said I do draw the line at what Steve did above. He said basically that in my hacked personal correspondence I said things about him (and many other people) that he didn’t like so he will continue to spread the contents of this hacked correspondence until I “apologize” to him personally. To me this is the type of behavior you very often see in classrooms where a cellphone is stolen and one person says to the other either you apologize to me or I’m going to keep spreading around the bad things you messaged people. You can each yourselves be the judge of what grade level this type of situation occurs the most at I will be issuing no apology to an implied threat or some form of blackmail
Now usually in a private conversation many things may be said privately. These may include private thoughts about others not included in the conversation.
If you then steal these conversations and you find things you dislike that's YOUR problem.
Obnoxious and libellous commentary which will not be retracted even if his mate Monkton disagrees.
So the message is: be a dimwit, make stuff up, and get paid for it.
Looking further, it appears that he’ll be able to keep it.
According to the PEER Union, they claim “vindication”:...
Saving the Antarctic scientists, er media, er, activists, er tourists trapped by sea ice=