Well a rather nasty individual has been tenaciously posting smeary things about me, since my 'Pushers of Doubt' piece. He has twisted and turned and misrepresented me at every opportunity (and created a few more) but that's the nature of the big-boys game they play I guess.
That original piece obviously hit a skeptic nerve! It was picked by the school of deniers radar, and posted on a weird and extremely dodgy Gore-bashing site called 'Climate Depot'. It's a place where the top deniers of the future (and deniers of our children's future) get groomed.
Anyway Mr Nasty has got his teeth sunk into me, and is turning up the nastiness volume. Here is a taste, if not a very nice taste:
"Dave, You still haven't admitted stealing my writing for your own comments, although I guess I should be flattered that you liked them so much, huh? I notice that they're sitting on your site still, just as though you wrote them yourself. Do you think of me every time you see them? That's nice. I haven't mentioned your children, since they have nothing to do with your web site, but you did. I wonder: will you tell them one day about your plagiarism? Would you recommend it to them? A lot of people have noticed what you did, if you haven't already seen it at http://www.climatedepot.com/Press Page Down four times and there you are in the left-hand column, bold as brass: Claim: 'Climate Alarmist plagiarises comments from skeptic'. Our CCG site's visitors have zoomed in the last couple of days, all because of you. So I should thank you for your stupid indiscretion. Silly, don't you think, to steal comments from someone you've been insulting? Someone you probably instinctively dislike? Silly man. Does it feel good to be noticed? Or are you hoping this little misjudgement doesn't surface in the consultant circles you try to make a living from? You'd be feeling a bit guilty, I would think. Come on, Dave, own up! Confession's good for the soul. Cheers, Richard Treadgold.
For the record, HANDS UP! - I did cut and paste one of his nasty comments to me. I paraphrased and parodied him and mirrored his arrogance and bullying right back at him – he didn’t like it. He called it plagiarising. I guess it was wrong to do it, without posting his comment. I might do that now, if I didn't delete it at the time.
But what should I do now? I know - I will issue a full retraction, Little Britain style:
Dear Mr Treadgold
I have decided to retract unreservedly. Having being admonished by you and a rather large looking 'scientist' in a suit, carrying a large black brief case, I now realise the silly error of my ways. It seems that the entire 'CO2 scare thing' is a vicious evil communist plot, after all, and that it's perfectly fine to carry on burning fossil fuel ad nauseam. Silly me.
Good news for everyone isn't it. We can celebrate. The children can breathe again - and we can all get back to burning fossil fuel again - like there's no tomorrow.
I apologise unreservedly for ever thinking CO2 was anything other than wonderful pure and life-giving.
Silly me.
;-)
There is a serious side to this sinister episode though.
If a relatively tough 50 year old bloke like me soon starts to feel threatened, targeted and tormented in this way, is it surprising that the majority of climate deniers get away with it, and carry on practising their art of telling ridiculous lies - unchallenged.
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." (Edmund Burke)
Copy of my email to Mr Treadgold:
You try and bully me, you misrepresent me, and you turn up the nastiness dial. You show yourself up.
It won’t deter me from speaking my truth.
And it might back-fire on you.
I will be monitoring your site, and I may seek legal advice later.
I will not be responding to you and I will not be posting more of your comments on my site after today.
You have helped me write a new blog story.
There is an apology for paraphrasing your words without also publishing your comment.
And a retraction.
That’s all.
Dave
Dave Hampton
the carbon coach
Posted by: dave hampton | October 29, 2009 at 02:17 PM
He does sound like a nasty piece of work, Dave.
Good on you for standing up to him and his bullying though. I expect he is either a rabid convert-believer who has you pegged as an insecure and socially awkward sort who will back down easily from a robust confrontation, but that would be his second mistake.
The first, obviously, was to have picked the losing side in a battle the survival of our culture, and his third big mistake will have been thinking that he might make some long-term capital from this confrontation, rather than alienating any of the few remaining folks who were undecided about the reality of climate change. After all, who wants to be on the side of a bully?
Well done, Dave, and please keep up the good work. I think you're getting to them!
Posted by: Nick Rawle | October 29, 2009 at 04:22 PM
keep up the good work Dave! But why waste time on this guy? He is spam, totally unproductive and is distracting you from your true calling. Remember the training, don't waste time debating the science, it is unequivocal. Those who choose not to accept it have to deal with it in their own way. You are not going to change them as they are not going to change you, unless you let them.
Posted by: C Robb Worthington | October 29, 2009 at 10:49 PM
Dave,
Thank you for admitting you copied my comments. But you've invited me to re-post the comment which you previously censored, part of which you used without attribution, so thank you for the opportunity.
Now your readers can judge for themselves what I said, whether it was offensive and how it justified your decision to turn against me. Or it might at least return the discussion to the topic: the world's climate.
Here's my post in full:
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Dave, you say to me "All of your 'arguments' have been thoroughly debunked, a million times over."
I'm waiting; debunk away.
It will be especially good to see how you paper over the satellite temperature record; it shows no undue warming since 1979, a kind of plateau since 2001 and even a little cooling since 2005. Surely you cannot claim dangerous warming from that?
Please don't imagine you're "indulging" me by responding to my criticism. I don't care what you think. But I represent many ordinary people who ask these questions and make the very assertions I have made. You're speaking to quite an audience when you reply to me. That's not to make you bashful, heaven forbid! No, it's just to show how important it is that your reply is the very best it can be, for it will be assessed by all kinds of honest enquirers.
By the way, your increased traffic was because this silly piece about "a drug called doubt" was held up for ridicule at Climate Depot. I saw it there and came here, with everyone else, to laugh at such thinking. It's funny, although a bit sad.
If you want to try some reasoning, debunk away.
Cheers.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Now, where were we… Oh, yes: does anyone want to discuss the actual climate?
Thanks.
Richard Treadgold.
Posted by: Richard Treadgold | October 30, 2009 at 09:22 PM