2011-06-28 09:14:38My response to Carter published in The Age this morning
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
121.222.9.229

This was published overnight:

http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/half-the-truth-on-emissions-20110627-1gne1.html

A major point of the article - HadCRUT doesn't cover the whole globe hence underestimates the warming trend. Steve Goddard debunks me by plotting HadCRUT data:

http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2011/06/27/john-cook-thinks-he-can-directly-measure-the-climate-system/

Must... resist... urge... to respond... to Goddard's stupidity!

2011-06-28 12:54:20Okay, this is pretty cool
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
121.222.9.229

Email from Garnaut's office:

Congratulations on your oped today. Professor Garnaut and I read it over a coffee this morning and both thought it was excellent.

Keep up the good work.

Cheerio,

Anna Freeman

Director - Public Affairs I Garnaut Climate Change Review

Can't help noticing Prof Garnaut has peeps to send his emails :-)

2011-06-28 13:32:53
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
71.137.108.93

Very cool John.  The article turned out quite nicely.

2011-06-28 18:03:40Nearly choked
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
121.222.9.229
In Australia, we have an expression, to "get the yips". Kind of like choking - in club cricket, I've seen guys coming into bowl and they somehow psyche themselves out and become completely unable to deliver the ball properly, cant even get their runup right. I got the yips writing this article. I had a hard deadline - something bloggers don't normally experience and that combined with the prospect of bring published in one of Australia's broadsheets (the editor called me in the morning asking for the theme so their illustrator could come up with a graphic to go on the page) psyched me out and I seemed incapable of finishing off the article to satisfactory quality.

Fortunately Dana was available on Skype and gave me some helpful feedback plus a scientist from the Bureau of Meteorology offered some very helpful advice that got me over the line (I sent it off at 4.55pm). I would suck as a professional journalist with deadlines and editors leaning over me. I've had it too easy living the relaxed existence of a blogger for so long.

2011-06-28 18:23:56
Rob Painting
Rob
paintingskeri@vodafone.co...
118.92.115.234

Yeah, but you're reaching more people now. Be nicer if you could have snuck in a bit about CO2 acidifying the oceans too. I think people are in for a major shock when fisheries start to go 'tits up'.

2011-06-28 20:09:13There was one message I wanted to communicate in that article
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
121.222.9.229
Employing the sticky techniques, I had one core message in that article - Carter uses half truths (cherry picking) to mislead and distort. I start with that message, reinforce it throughout then finish with it.

The reason this was my message is because when you're debunking misinformation, it isn't sufficient to just explain the science. You need to dislodge misinformation with an alternative narrative. My narrative is Carter is a liar who uses devious techniques to mislead people. As I explain the science, I reinforce the narrative with each example.

Since it was published, I've gotten a few messages on what I should've included in the article. But I'm okay with keeping a narrow focus in the article. I'm reminded of the saying "if you try to say 3 things, you say nothing". All the information is there to drive home the narrative. Hopefully the article will clearly send out that message.

Thought I might some abuse from deniers after that article but not a peep yet. I don't want to go borrowing trouble but it is strange that scientists and other climate bloggers get all this abusive emails but I get very little in the way of personal abuse.

2011-06-28 20:27:58
Rob Painting
Rob
paintingskeri@vodafone.co...
118.92.117.64

Uh-oh!, now you're tempting the fickle hand of fate. Some crazed pensioner will be on to you quicksmart! 

2011-06-28 20:35:31
Rob Painting
Rob
paintingskeri@vodafone.co...
118.92.117.64

Oh, and nice job by the way!

2011-06-28 23:14:26Response by Bishop Hill
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
121.222.9.229
Bishop Hill critiques the article here:

http://www.bishop-hill.net/blog/2011/6/28/thou-shalt-extrapolate.html

I couldn't resist posting a few comments which stirred up a hornet's nest - even Steve McIntyre came out to play. Bad timing on my part - bedtime here in Aus so it'll be 8 hours before I can rejoin the conversation. But other SkSers, feel free to join in. And try to be as polite and calm as possible, despite provocation!

2011-06-29 01:54:57
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
64.129.227.4

There has to be a tradeoff between keeping it simple and to the point, and covering every topic you want to cover.  It's usually smart to err on the side of keeping it simple.  You're then open to the criticisms as with Bishop Hill here, but they're not your target audience anyway.

Not surprisingly, several commenters on his blog immediately attacked John and SkS, but to his credit, Bishop Hill asked them to play nice (several didn't listen).  I left a comment as well.

2011-06-29 05:41:12
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
64.129.227.4

The Bishop Hill crowd is interesting.  A few reasonably intelligent commenters.  Several who attack John, SkS, and myself.  Bishop Hill has now twice asked people to stay on topic.

2011-06-29 06:26:42Bishop Hill
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
121.222.9.229

Thanks Dana for stepping in - deflected some of the hate :-)

I don't read the site (apart from posts where he criticises SkS) but my impression is he's a pretty reasonable, civil guy. His critiques of SkS were all civil and some of the criticisms were reasonable. What's his story?

2011-06-29 06:52:57
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
64.129.227.4

Don't know his story, other than he wrote The Hockey Stick Illusion, which I hear is quite inaccurate.  That's all I know about him though.  Compared to other 'skeptics' he seems okay.

I didn't so much deflect the hate as absorb it though :-)

2011-06-29 17:27:32I must live in the slow lane.
Glenn Tamblyn

glenn@thefoodgallery.com...
121.219.174.124

You guys are too quick for me. I had started on a piece for the Age - it is my city after all unless there are any other SkSers in Melbourne - but JC was in there first. I will probably stick to slower analytical pieces. Easier when writers block is a perennial problem and I have to spend 95% of my working day away from my laptop.

That said, good piece John.

And is it my imagination or was Carter mugged? He gets a major piece in the principle Op-Ed page of the paper, opposite the editorial. Then next day we hjave JC weighing in against him. AND, Tim Colebatch the Economics Editor weighing in side-byside with a piece on why the Carbon Tax won't be the end of the world. and using Carter's own data sources.

Maybe he is feeling a bit ganged up on. My heart bleeds for the poor guy.

I don't think Bob will be back at The Age for a while. Editorial Bias? Oh Yes!

2011-06-29 19:52:36It was The Age who were mugged
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
121.222.9.229
I have no idea why The Age ran Carter - brain explosion perhaps?

But they were deluged with complaints in the morning that the paper went out and by around 9am, I was asked to write an article. Shortly afterwards, I spoke to the editor who mentioned they'd received several requests to publish responses. I got the impression they were a little dismayed by the backlash.

The next morning, I woke up, grabbed the iPad on my bedside table (yes, it's never far from my person) and opened up The Age app. In the opinion section, there was my piece, another piece and a few more letters to the editor. All very harsh on Carter. Then Jo Chandler posted another incisive piece today. The Age are hoping they've atoned for their faux pas with this two day barrage.

Meanwhile Bob Carter is flying off to Washington having a good laugh at all the fuss he's caused.