2011-03-23 07:10:22Watts' hypocrisy
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
121.222.20.55

Eyebrows pricked up at this:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/03/22/the-not-evil-just-romm-2-solution/

I’m taking this bold step [providing my surfacestations data to them] because the method has promise.

Eg - Watts deigned to let BEST have his surfacestation data because he thinks their "method has promise". So that's why he's refusing to release his surfacestation data - he doesn't trust what others might do with the data.

Am I the only one that finds this secrecy and a lack of transparency a little ironic from someone who cries foul at any hint of secrecy and a lack of transparency?

2011-03-23 07:26:40
Paul D

chillcast@googlemail...
82.18.130.183

I just posted this comment there:


“I’m taking this bold step [providing my surfacestations data to them]”

FOI request – Please send me a copy of your data ASAP.

I wonder if he remembers that he banned me a few years ago??
I guess the chances of it being accepted is small and I doubt if he will bother emailing me with a response (he did when he banned me).

2011-03-23 07:28:18Heh
Daniel Bailey
Daniel Bailey
yooper49855@hotmail...
97.83.150.37

If Watts could play anyone in film it would be:

Harvey "TwoFace" Dent

2011-03-23 08:32:43irony
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
64.129.227.4

Yes considering how much Watts et al. have criticized climate scientists for not being sufficiently forthcoming with their data, this is a pretty extreme level of hypocrisy.

2011-03-23 09:10:36Two-face
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
121.222.20.55

I smell another Rob Honeycutt post :-)

2011-03-23 09:14:38
Rob Honeycutt

robhon@mac...
98.207.62.223

Oh...  My ears were burning.  Nope, that was the guy in the picture Daniel posted.  :-)