Comments on: Judith Curry Is In With The Koch Brothers

By: Susan Anderson

Susan Anderson — Tue, 31 Jan 2017 00:13:46 +0000

Sorry:

before> 2009 in the last 5 years.

By: Susan Anderson

Susan Anderson — Tue, 31 Jan 2017 00:08:02 +0000

This is my real name. Thanks for the info, I’ll read more carefully. What I said was “have been consistent since she went rogue in 2009”. I was presented in real time when she “came out” as a Montford disciple on RealClimate. She was as described, evasive and playing the victim.

What part of since 2009 is in the last five years?

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Mon, 30 Jan 2017 21:07:02 +0000

“Susan”, there is a clear paper trail to the Koch brothers, as indicated in the post.

DM, her lawyer was paid for by the Kochs. Otherwise, I have no idea about any payments. Just asking.

Also she has not changed her views, as far as I can tell. Is there some view she changed that I didn’t notice? What views has she changed in this brief from anything she’s said over the last five years or so?

By: Susan Anderson

Susan Anderson — Mon, 30 Jan 2017 06:54:35 +0000

I think some of you are naive. Judith Curry’s actions have been consistent since she went rogue in 2009. They make sense. Ethics don’t apply. Neither does the traditional way of learning a subject and applying one’s skills to it. It’s much easier to fudge and play the victim card. It’s popular and well paid. And as been observed, there will not be a paper trail to the Kochs. I would suggest, however, that people not make actionable statements even in sarcasm, since we’re in for a dodgy time (Greg Laden, this is particularly for you). Things tend to be quoted literally out of context, and all of you should know that by now.

Remember how much in fashion it is to disrupt, which often means taking the value somebody else has built up and profiting from it without necessarily adding real value. Everyone thinks being a billionaire is more important than acting with and for each other in community.

By: Brainstorms

Brainstorms — Sun, 29 Jan 2017 18:09:44 +0000

The deniers are fakes.

By: Wow

Wow — Sun, 29 Jan 2017 13:46:45 +0000

Uh, you LITERALLY came on here and made “accusations … just like what [we] accuse Anti-AGWs of doing”.

Not one oz of self-awareness.

Not to mention tu quoue (or pointless if you’re not copping to doing it, just defending it on “you do it too!”).

PS No, she’s not changed her view. She never was a climate scientist and her forays into it were always criticising it.

MULLER changed his view.

And now those who shouted his bonefides from the rooftops insist he was a fifth-columnist, a fake skeptic, planted only to fool the deniers.

By: DM

DM — Sun, 29 Jan 2017 10:51:38 +0000

The accusations you all make here are sounding childish and just like what you accuse Anti-AGWs of doing. Friends of the court are not paid except for reasonable reimbursements, and there is no connection between her and the Koch Bros. You are sounding like conspiracy hounds because of what? She decided that she has changed her view? SMH

By: Wow

Wow — Sat, 28 Jan 2017 08:11:14 +0000

She looks pissed off. And #28 makes me feel glad about that. Look at what she’s doing: she’s turning others into people like her.

The ONLY thing I can think of that can POSSIBLY drive deniers like her to this is that they, too, see an existential threat in AGW, but in the idea of accepting it and doing something about it.

Not “they may lose money”, but “they will not exist any more”, though the mechanism is probably “they will lose money” and they don’t like it. Though there will also be identity politics running there, it will be a cause, rather than cause, their belief that AGW is, for them, an existential threat.

A threat to their existence and the existence of their descendents.

Sure, it’s crazy, but the alternative is they’re crazy and so selfish that they would rather the world burn than lose their political identity. And even then it wouldn’t explain their antics actually taken.

But if they see extinction of their way of life as the same sort of extinction as we see in the collapse of the industrial civilisation causing humanity, their ACTIONS make sense, even if their axiom to get there is batshit lunacy.

By: John Mashey

John Mashey — Sat, 28 Jan 2017 06:46:45 +0000

1) any trace of honestyt/integrity were gone by April 2010, when she attacked Deep Climate as 2X “reprehenisble” for documenting plagiarism in Wegman Report.

2) Then there was her support for Murry Salby’s CO2 nonsense.

By: Varsity Team

Varsity Team — Fri, 27 Jan 2017 04:44:22 +0000

Heavens to Betsy. The likelihood Curry received compensation from the Kochs is but a mere twinkle under the microscope compared to the odds Dr. Mann is footing your Go Daddy bill to blovi-speculate throughout your special little corner of the pop-up ad internet. The unyielding impermiability of your well-founded hypothesis is sure to drive audiences to your soapbox by the droves. God speed. #earthjustice