2012-01-29 08:26:52LIVE NOW - Mike Mann's hockey stick book now live at Amazon so post your reviews!
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
121.215.212.33

You can now post a review of Mike Mann's Hockey Stick book at:

http://www.amazon.com/Hockey-Stick-Climate-Wars-ebook/dp/B0072N4U6S/

No customer reviews yet so get in there quick if you've already written the review and post yours!

2012-01-29 09:03:28
John Hartz
John Hartz
john.hartz@hotmail...
98.122.98.161

I just ordered the book a couple of days ago from Amazon at pre-release price. I suppose i should at least skim it before i write a review.

2012-01-29 13:53:12
jyyh
Otto Lehikoinen
otanle@hotmail...
193.64.22.195

oh dear, my amazon account has been silent for about 6 years, I didn't even know I had that nick still in use somewhere. Net doesn't easily forget.

2012-01-30 11:12:00Another reminder
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
130.102.158.12

To everyone who I sent the book to, particularly those who have a review prepared, please post it in Amazon now.

Also, to all SkSers, I strongly recommend you go and like some of the more prominent reviews there - which makes them more likely to be selected by Amazon as the featured review (as is my understanding of the process). There are some great reviews by Scott Mandia and Steve Lewandowsky among others.

2012-02-01 13:28:09
Tom Curtis

t.r.curtis@gmail...
112.213.149.122

Just purchased my first Amazon book so that I can place my review.  Apparently I no need to wait 48 hours.  (The book I purchased was the 2nd edition of David Archer's "Understanding the Forcast")

2012-02-01 20:46:57Just posted my review
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
121.215.212.33

Okay, I know I've been nagging all of you to post a review. I've been furiously reading the book in my spare time (!), mostly on the train to and from work and finally finished the book today and wrote the review on the train. On Feb 9 when the book is officially launched, we'll post an SkS review in a blog post. We can either do mine (I'll flesh it out for a blog post with some more text and a few pics) or if someone has written a cooler book review, we'll go with theirs. Here's my review:

The Hockey Stick Wars takes us into the heart of the climate change controversy via the scientist standing in the eye of the storm - Michael Mann. He provides an eye-opening account of the lengths the opponents of climate science will go to in their campaign to slander climate scientists and distract the public from the realities of human caused global warming.

 Before jumping into the dogfight, the book tells us the human story of how Mann got started in science. It was surprising to learn that his PhD began with the notion that natural variability might be greater than what climate scientists thought. I also didn't realize he'd coined the term "Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation" (AMO) off the cuff in an interview (that's the kind of trivia that a science geek like me delights in). Ironically the AMO and natural oscillations are often invoked by contrarians to cast doubt on the human influence on global warming.

Mann also describes the progress of paleoclimate science through the 1990s which puts his 1998 hockey stick research in a broader perspective. The hockey stick paper focused on all the “scientifically interesting” periods of regional climate change over the last 600 years. So a phrase that jumped out at me was Mann's characterization that the "least scientifically interesting" thing he could do with all his regional data was average it out to find the hemispheric average. It was this "least scientifically interesting" graph that sparked a smear campaign against the graph and against Michael Mann that has lasted over a decade. 

As someone who has endured more attacks from the forces of climate denial than possibly any other person on the planet, Mann provides great insight into the modes of attack. He labels it the "Serengeti strategy", inspired by African lions isolating members of a zebra herd. The climate denial movement isolate individual scientists, fling reckless charges of fraud or incompetence in the attempt to discredit climate science in general - with the ultimate goal being distraction from the realities of climate change. 

The sustained level of attack that Mann has been forced to endure is extraordinary. He's withstood threats to himself and his family, sustained PR campaigns targeting his university, mocking Youtube videos, slandering Google ads and intimidation from Republican congressmen and district attorneys. While reading through the litany of attacks, I couldn't help wondering what the attackers thought will happen - if they successfully intimidate the scientists, do they think the ice sheets will stop sliding into the ocean and sea levels will stop rising? 

The book ends on a hopeful note. The virulent attacks on climate scientists have woken a sleeping bear as the scientific community has not stood by while their own are attacked. Mann speculates that perhaps Climategate and the attack campaign was the turning point when the denial movement tacitly accepted they had no honest, science-based case for denying human-caused global warming and had to resort to smearing and intimidation.

2012-02-01 23:40:37Review now accepted by Amazon
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
121.215.212.33

So you can "like" it if you so desire...

2012-02-02 06:39:09
Rob Painting
Rob
paintingskeri@vodafone.co...
118.92.83.225

I liked it, so I did.

2012-02-02 21:46:55Steve's review is now online
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
121.215.212.33

Check it out, like it if you dare:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Hockey-Stick-Climate-Wars-Dispatches/product-reviews/023115254X/ref=sr_1_10_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1

2012-02-02 21:56:04Arthur Smith's review
Tom Curtis

t.r.curtis@gmail...
112.213.149.122

is available on his blog.  I haven't checked if he posted on Amazon, but it is an excellent review.

2012-02-03 04:57:24
Rob Painting
Rob
paintingskeri@vodafone.co...
118.92.69.100

I liked Steve Brown's comment too, so I did too.

2012-02-03 07:30:07
Steve Brown

brownsg@gmail...
77.102.30.107

Thats a heck of a lot of people who have managed to read the Kindle edition in about 3 hours since it went on sale ;-)

2012-02-04 19:32:41
John Mason

johntherock@btopenworld...
86.133.61.107

Dropped a plug into the discussion thread below Leo Hickman's Guardian piece on the anti-Mann Facebook campaign:

"In a few days' time, a book will be out which will expose this system exactly for what it is. Non-combatants on here who are just curious as to what on Earth is going on will find The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars a fascinating and enlightening read. It shines a bright light on some very dark places."

Whether the mods allow it is questionable as they might see it as advertising - we'll see. But suggest others start dropping curiosity-arousing hints in similar places over the coming days. The more "undecided" who obtain and read this book the better.

Cheers - John

2012-02-09 09:36:03
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
64.129.227.4

The deniers have gotten wind of the book - there are now 8 one star and 1 two star reviews, and they're thumbing down the good reviews and thumbing up the bad reviews.

I encourage everyone to try and counteract the denier ratings abuse.

2012-02-09 09:53:08And also post our reviews
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
130.102.158.12

I did email out over a dozen copies of the book to SkSers who specifically requested it - what happened to all those reviews?

How this plays may be a good indication of the marshalling powers of the denialosphere compared to our side.

2012-02-09 10:22:02
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
64.129.227.4

Yeah, the deniers are great at organizing and swarming like locusts when they want to have an impact.  They kick our butts in terms of organization.  Prove me wrong guys! :-)

2012-02-09 10:23:18The rating down of reviews is going crazy
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
130.102.158.12

All the positive reviews are getting rated down vigorously by big numbers. We're getting seriously swamped. Am going to blog post my review on SkS today.

2012-02-09 10:26:50
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
64.129.227.4

What do you think of encouraging people to rate the existing Amazon reviews in your post, John?  Maybe make note of the denier swarm?

I won't post anything else today, so it's all yours.

2012-02-09 10:29:12
Tom Smerling

avi@smerling...
216.164.57.97

To match the "swarm" SkS will have to reach out much father than the authors forum.   Would it make sense to post something, carefully worded, on home page?

2012-02-09 10:54:59
KR

k-ryan@comcast...
216.185.0.2

WUWT has made note of it, and is pointing folks to it - I suspect many of the bad reviews are from that connection. Not a direct call for down-rating the book, mind you, but a heavy critique of the good reviews that had been posted, and an expressed wish:

"I hope some climate realists eventually review the book as well"

I will compliment the WUWT post, though - the author (Tom Nelson) discourages people from writing reviews in absentia - noting that they should actually read it first!

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/02/08/michael-manns-new-book-is-out/

2012-02-09 11:15:17Hold the compliment
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
130.102.158.12

He accuses Peter Gleick of posting a review of Teenage Deliquent without reading it when I know for a fact that he did read it - that's just a denier slur propagating around the denialosphere.

Dana, just blogged my book review and mention the WUWT swarm at the end of the review. I hadn't read your comment till just now so as always, we think alike.

2012-02-09 13:37:45
Tom Smerling

avi@smerling...
216.164.57.97

I haven't followed WUWT much.   So this is probably old news to other SkSers.

We have our work cut out for us.   And who are all these WUWT visitors??

 

2012-02-09 15:39:06vote for the "turd" review?
Tom Smerling

avi@smerling...
216.164.57.97

OK, maybe this is "too clever by half."     But I'm tempted to say:   Mmaybe we should all vote "helpful" to the ridiculous review at the end "This Book Stinks," by Robert.

"This book is exactly like a turd. It's small, it stinks, and it's disgusting. Just like Mann."

It doesn't have that many votes, either way, so even 20 or so helpful votes would elevate it to the top of the "most helpful critical review."  (it seems to work by %, not absolute numbers).

Actually, it is the most helpful, because it reveals the true nature of so many of these troglodytes!

(OK, maybe I need some sleep....)

2012-02-09 16:15:45WUWT deniers
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
71.137.109.172

The WUWT visitors consist of pretty much every denier who needs that constant reassurance that there's nothing to worry about, AGW is just a scam.  But yes, the WUWT traffic is ridiculously high, much higher than SkS, which I just find depressing.  Then again, I think it's the only denier site with more traffic than SkS, so at least there's that.  WUWT is just where the folks in denial conglomerate.  That's why I call Watts the "denial enabler".  He's really damn good at throwing chum in the water for them to create a frenzy over.

2012-02-09 16:19:41Tom, go to bed :-)
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
130.102.158.12

Remember, we're the good guys :-)

WUWT were in the right place at the right time and through serendipity, ended up with the huge traffic it gets.

I think the same thing of SkS. It's more good luck than good management that we've taken the trajectory we have, through the iPhone app then the multi-level rebuttals leading to this amazing author community. You really couldn't have predicted the paths we would've come and who knows what will happen over 2012, is shaping up to be another eventful year.

2012-02-09 16:32:33BTW, dodgy reviews of Hockey Stick Wars
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
130.102.158.12

If you see a denier review that crosses the line, click the Report Abuse link beneath the review - if Amazon gets enough of them, they take down the review. Here's one I just reported:

http://www.amazon.com/review/R20VEKGG6H3FWY/ref=cm_cr_dp_perm?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B0072N4U6S&nodeID=133140011&tag=&linkCode=

If you see any others, post the permalink here.

2012-02-09 16:35:46credit where credit is due
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
71.137.109.172

You have to give credit, Watts' surface stations project was very clever.  Made the deniers feel like they were participating in exposing the AGW hoax.  That got them hooked - until then all they could do was complain and rant about conspiracy theories.  He gave them a relatively easy way to act on their denial.  The results seemed to confirm that denial (omg, a temp station on asphalt!), and that's all they needed - confirmation bias took over.  Great denial enabling.

Likewise you deserve tons of credit, though for better reasons, John.  You made SkS look cool and professional, which goes a long way.  The rebuttals database was genius in providing an easy resource for myth rebutting using peer-reviwed science.  That solid foundation was what led to what you call the subsequent 'luck' - the app and the authors community.  If SkS wasn't already so good, we wouldn't have all joined in.  I know when I first joined, I already had so much respect for what you'd created at SkS that I was happy just to be able to contribute.

I'm a big believer that you create your own luck - you have to put yourself in a position to allow 'luck' to come your way.  You did that for SkS, and as much as I hate to say it, Watts did it for WUWT.  He fills a need for a lot of deniers.

2012-02-09 16:44:47
Rob Painting
Rob
paintingskeri@vodafone.co...
118.92.78.198

Yes, but the rats will abandon the Watts ship as it slowly sinks beneath a warming sea. Shame we'll never know who many of those people were, so that they can be dealt with appropriately in the future.

Perhaps put on a coral atoll to develop their own temporary little communities? What rising sea level? 

2012-02-09 18:40:47
jyyh
Otto Lehikoinen
otanle@hotmail...
85.78.72.84

Put mine up at http://erimaassa.blogspot.com/2012/02/review.html. Thought about adding comment on Watts and other deniers but I don't want to moderate comments too much. It'll have a couple of readers mainly from Witsendnj.blogspot, possibly couple from russia, so it doesn't promote the book very well. Sorry.

I did vote some of the reviews by the mislead on Amazon down and thumbed up one proper one, though, might do that again.

2012-02-09 19:43:18Another review I reported as abuse
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
121.215.212.33
http://www.amazon.com/review/R28YHUD2DSHJ5O/ref=cm_cr_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8&ASIN=023115254X&nodeID=&tag=&linkCode=
2012-02-09 19:57:01I posted a comment on this review and rated it as unhelpful
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
121.215.212.33
http://www.amazon.com/review/R1K7WMQ8HWW1EE/ref=cm_cr_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B0072N4U6S&nodeID=&tag=&linkCode=
2012-02-09 20:04:33The reviews seem to be getting worse
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
121.215.212.33
I flagged this as abuse. Note, Amazon need several abuse flags before removing a review so go check it out. This one is pretty disgusting.

http://www.amazon.com/review/R2IU50TKR6I62A/ref=cm_cr_pr_viewpnt#R2IU50TKR6I62A

2012-02-09 20:35:16
Rob Painting
Rob
paintingskeri@vodafone.co...
118.93.8.142

I flagged them as abuse also. Flying monkeys don't read books, that's a great part of the problem.

2012-02-10 01:08:54
Tom Smerling

avi@smerling...
216.164.57.97

nice work on reporting abuse.   It's working least 8 comments taken down on Amazon!

It is clear that most of the trolls never bothered to read the book -- which might be grounds in itself for removing a review.

2012-02-10 02:29:30
John Mason

johntherock@btopenworld...
86.133.202.150

Guys,

In some ways I think this is being played the wrong way round. I think the swarming by deniers, many via Watts, who told them not to post anything unless they had read the book knowing full-well (how could he not??) that they would descend on the place anyway, actually reinforces what Mike documents in the book as neatly as could be possible.

Don't mimic the tactics of the deniers - instead, anticipate them, give 'em enough rope (the most important bit) and then expose them for what they are. Let their comments remain in order to demonstrate this stupidity. In the long run, that's a far more effective strategy. Hence my comment on the SkS review here, and another to come once I have finished reading Mann, which is indeed an excellent read and compares well with the excellent Climate Cover-up.

This is a game of chess. First you get your pieces into place. Then you strike.

Cheers - John

2012-02-10 06:26:17
Rob Painting
Rob
paintingskeri@vodafone.co...
118.93.213.155

John M - sorry, but it doesn't seem to work that way. That's a fundamental error that some SkS contributors fall into too - exposing them for what they are doesn't work very well. I realized that very early on in the game. The deniers are effective because they keep banging on the same drums over and over again. Giving them a platform only reinforces the myths.

I think you need to read JC and Stephan's debunking handbook. It matches up very well with what I've observed too. 

2012-02-10 06:47:34
Rob Honeycutt

robhon@mac...
98.207.62.223

Who thinks anyone coming over from WUWT has actually paid for the book?  I think buying something that would cause money to go to Michael Mann is so anathema to every fiber of their beings it would be utterly impossible for them to click the buy button.

2012-02-10 09:30:31
Steve Brown

brownsg@gmail...
77.102.30.107

I've copied my Amazon.co.uk review on to the Amazon.com US site now too, which should help redress the balance.  I'm expecting my UK review to be swamped shortly as it's the only positive one there out of two in total.

2012-02-10 10:47:27The abuse reporting seems to be working
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
130.102.158.12

Helps that the deniers post such misinformed, ugly reviews that show no signs of having read the book. However, we need to keep on it - if you see another other abusive reviews, post the permalink here and everyone, be sure to report any abusive reviews that others link to from here.

2012-02-10 12:30:34Another abusive review
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
130.102.158.12

Just tagged this one as abusive:

http://www.amazon.com/review/R1EZHGAJ7PZIXJ/ref=cm_cr_pr_perm?ie=UTF8&ASIN=023115254X&nodeID=&tag=&linkCode=

The greatest scam in human history

The propaganda that M.Mann is spreading will one day be the basis of an investigation and he will end up in jail, together with Al Gore and other climate allarmists. 
The social,financial and psychological damages that they caused are beyond comprehension. 
No criminal organization in history has ever come even close to having such a dezastruous impact on so many people, for such a long time, and make so much money in the process. 
This book will one day be an exhibit in a criminal court and M.Mann will be the accused.

The spelling (dezastruous) says it all. No indication at all that the poster has read the book.

2012-02-10 12:32:29World's most incompetent "scientist"
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
130.102.158.12

World's most incompetent "scientist"

Folks, this bozo is the inventor of the famous "hockey stick" temperature graph, which conveniently wiped out both the medieval warm period and the little ice age and launched the Great Global Warming Hoax. A congressional review of his work declared it to have a value "not greater than zero", and further mentioned that "you could feed baseball scores into Mann's PCA (Principal Component Analysis)program and it would still spit out a hockey stick". A group of real climate scientists recently voted him the "Most Incompetent Pseudo-Scientist of the Century". Read this volume only to acquaint yourself with modern junk science and incompetency. Another huge embarrassment for Penn State.

http://www.amazon.com/review/R20VEKGG6H3FWY/ref=cm_cr_pr_perm?ie=UTF8&ASIN=023115254X&nodeID=&tag=&linkCode=

Another I've just tagged as abusive.

2012-02-11 03:21:10
Tom Smerling

avi@smerling...
216.164.57.97

Wow, Rob H.   You really got into it with "Click4z," and persisted, with impressive restraint, until he went silent (for now).

http://www.amazon.com/review/R31IM2LLGF9LNR/ref=cm_aya_cmt?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B0072N4U6S#wasThisHelpful

I'm glad you didn't leave that canard unchallenged. . .

Seems like the forces of darkness may be getting beaten back on Amazon, at least until Watts, Morano, Limbaugh et al issue their next call to arms....

2012-02-11 03:41:40
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
64.129.227.4

Doing better now, 33 good ratings vs. 12 1-star ratings, and the good ratings are now showing up first (meaning they have more 'helpful' ratings).  We may have out-organized the deniers this time.  Amazon's moderation clearly helped, removing a lot of the crap reviews.

2012-02-11 04:28:43
Rob Painting
Rob
paintingskeri@vodafone.co...
118.92.66.145

Tom, nice that you provided examples of the abuse and harassment in your review.

2012-02-11 13:25:10
Tom Curtis

t.r.curtis@gmail...
112.213.149.122

John Cook, sorry, but it looks like I will not be finishing the book anytime soon due to a familly crisis (on top of other time pressures).  I will, however, purchase it so that I do not have a copy on false pretenses, and hopefully post a review when I finish.

2012-02-11 14:20:32
Rob Honeycutt

robhon@mac...
98.207.62.223
I get the sense that Anthony's army has tossed down their weapons and gone home.
2012-02-11 19:41:24
John Mason

johntherock@btopenworld...
86.133.202.150

Rob (P),

It's a difficult call IMO. By "exposing" the deniers I mean show everyone else how hopeless they are. "If you hear that drum again, from now on ignore it", sort of thing. I'm well aware that they will keep coming back, but if they may be made less effective (or ideally completely ineffective) that's a step in the right direction!

Have just posted the following to Amazon, taking advantage of Watts' crew and their swarming:

I first became aware of the changed nature of the debate about the world's climate and what Mankind is doing to it a few years ago. For years, arguments batted back and forth over the science, in newspaper columns and across the internet. There had always been a palpable sense of hostility to the scientists doing the research but a few years ago there was a shift, so that it became the prominent theme. In 2009 I read the excellent Climate Cover-up (also recommended) and the events than then unfolded confirmed pretty much what that book was documenting - the emails incident, disproportional seizing upon small errors in IPCC sub-reports that for years had lain undetected and so on. And - in particular - the personal harrassment of the folk doing the science.

Mann's book brings the whole story up-to-date, and comes out at a time where we have recently witnessed, for example, the disgraceful intimidation of Texas climate scientist and committed Christian Katherine Hayhoe. What these guys are up against is an organised disinformation machine that gets personal when its other methods fail to gain traction and then pretends it was doing nothing wrong. On certain blog sites, links to this review page were posted together with the advice that people should read the book before reviewing it, knowing full well that some would simply swarm onto here and post unpleasant reviews (many of which have now been removed). If you want an example of how this machine works, there you have it! If you want to learn more, read and digest the contents of this revealing book, about what it is actually like to be out there, on the front line. Highly recommended.

Cheers - John

2012-02-11 20:08:46
Rob Painting
Rob
paintingskeri@vodafone.co...
118.93.7.15

John M, yeah it's tricky. But I think if we beat them back - as appears to be happening at Amazon, then we only need a few examples of the spite and stupidity. When the flying monkeys flash mob like that the truth gets drowned out by all the commotion. 

Went over and liked your review by the way.

2012-02-11 20:39:23Thanks all
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
121.215.212.33
This is an example of things going right, it seems (knock wood). I think SkS made a contribution to pushing back on the WUWT swarm.
2012-02-12 04:49:25
Rob Honeycutt

robhon@mac...
98.207.62.223

I ended up not getting as many emails done because I was over there hammering on clickz4 idiocies.  So, there was a small cost there, but I think it was well worth while spending the time batting down the forces at WUWT.

A few weeks ago I did the same thing on Mann's TEDx talk youtube video.  I felt like that was well worth the effort too.

I think think normal folks find themselves dragged into reading comment battles like that (like slowing down to see the car crash), so I think there is a valuable audience in it.  

2012-02-12 05:10:39
Rob Honeycutt

robhon@mac...
98.207.62.223

I just noticed something interesting.  If you look at all the "X of Y people found the following review helpful" the positive reviews rate much higher than the negative reviews.  It looks like most positive reviews are running about 65-70% postive and the negative reviews are running 25% or less positive.  And some reasonably large numbers.  300+ with some.

2012-02-12 09:00:09
Tom Smerling

avi@smerling...
216.164.57.97

there was something really addictive about this exercise.    For a couple of days, my marriage became exactly like that cartoon ("Come to bed!"  "I have to finish something important.   Somebody said somethign wrong on the internet!")

A few other data bits:

  • Amazon lists only 13 one-star reviews, but I counted 18 when I went thru them one-by-one.   Any idea why?   I see no reason to publicize this, at all, of course.
  • Similarly, Amazon lists in the summary only 33 5-star reviews, but I counted 35.
  • Of the 18, exactly one showed a clear sign of having read the book.
  • 100% of the one-star reviews were written on the 8th and 9th; within one day of WUWT's call.  I wouldn't be surprised to see a second swarm sometime, so I doubt our work is done.

The attacks on MM's book will probably help elevate its visibility and help sales.

:) nice work everybody!

 

 

 

 

 

 

2012-02-12 09:21:19going forward
Tom Smerling

avi@smerling...
216.164.57.97

This is tricky but...

I'm increasingly thinking that exposing the sheer viciousness of the haters is a positive thing.    I did this once before with the hate mail and death threats we received when I worked on Middle East policy.   It worked pretty well.   Nothing like a bunch of true crazies to help discredit and fragment a larger movement.  (Check out OWS and violence this week.)

Distasteful as it may be, it might be worthwhile to keep a collection of the craziest, most vile emails etc, to make available to journalists.   

2012-02-13 03:16:49tall as of 2-11
Tom Smerling

avi@smerling...
216.164.57.97

OK, time to move on ....but here's the 2-12 tally on the extent of this troll "rout"

sort by Newest:     80% (6/8) of the recent reviews (from 2-10 on) are 4-5 stars

sort by most helpful:    the first 36 most helpful reviews are 4-5 stars.    Trolls all sank to the bottom.   (as did, for some reason Stephan Landowsky's review -- you can needle him about this, JC!)

2012-02-13 03:29:41
Rob Honeycutt

robhon@mac...
98.207.62.223

Tom...  I totally agree.  Pointing out, and even drawing out, their viciousness works great.  The challenge is maintaining ones cool when you draw it out.  I've always felt I've done my best commenting work when deniers were attacking me and I was maintaining my cool, continuing to point out scientific facts.  

I think you're right.  This was a troll rout.  We should continue to monitor the situation there because you never know when there may be another call to arms by another prominent denier.

2012-02-13 03:42:58
Tom Smerling

avi@smerling...
216.164.57.97

Really good point, Rob, about "keeping one's cool", which sharpens the contrast with the haters.   In most cases, when we stoop to their level, it becomes a he said-she said shouting match, so onlookers throw up their hands and walk away.   

For example, I thought Peter Gleick kind of "lost it" in his replies to troll comments on his Forbes article   Entertaining and cathartic for sure ("get back under your bridge!), but probably not effective with undecideds.

 

2012-02-13 04:04:12
John Mason

johntherock@btopenworld...
86.133.202.150

Certainly worth more watching. The swarming was down to Wattsbotts, who are too easily tripped-up. There are other places where Orcs breed....

Cheers - John

2012-02-13 04:33:24
nealjking

nealjking@gmail...
91.33.119.121

A good lesson may be to plan for such events, and prepare for the WUWT attack.

 

2012-02-13 18:54:46
John Mason

johntherock@btopenworld...
86.133.202.150

It has been most instructive. The outcome was that wave one of the reviews sparked off the shitstorm and wave two was then able to use said shitstorm to illustrate to any passers-by just what some of the deniers are like! It's been a useful lesson in tactics for all of us.

Cheers - John

2012-02-13 20:51:31
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
121.215.212.33
Definitely worth it. We were the 300 Spartans holding back the endless hordes of the Persians/WUWTians.

Minus the rippling abs :-)

2012-02-14 04:34:27
Rob Honeycutt

robhon@mac...
98.207.62.223

Just noticed there is now a new wave of 5 star reviews that hit.  Probably came from Romm's post on the book.  No new 1 star reviews that I can see.  

Hey, John C...  Did you not get your free set of rippling abs that we were giving out at the SkS party?  We'll make sure to get you a set this year.  They're guaranteed to please the ladies and strike fear into the hearts of your opponents.

2012-02-14 05:03:54
Dikran Marsupial
Gavin Cawley
gcc@cmp.uea.ac...
139.222.14.107

perhaps we should take the "meet the spartans" approach? ;o)

Leonidas: The Oracle also said our painted on abs look fake!

2012-02-14 07:37:26
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
121.215.212.33

Rob, I heard a great line the other day that I'm adopting as my motto:

I love my six pack, I'm protecting it with a layer of fat

Disappointing to hear Peter Gleick lost it in the comments thread. We need to take the Leonidas approach: "Give them nothing but take from them everything". That goes for the SkS moderators too, we should always be controlled and unemotional, never losing our temper. Let them become unhinged.

2012-02-14 13:26:20
Tom Smerling

avi@smerling...
216.164.57.97

Just for fun....and as a sign of how things are trending over at Amazon...

The long-time record holder for "most helpful" one-star review (below) first appeared on Feb 8 and by Feb 12 was scoring about 50% "helpful" (that high in trollville).   

But the author ("JrF" aka "Jonny Feese") deleted his own post, and reposted the same review on Feb 13.  

In doing so, he inadventantly, but helpfully, created a controlled experiment.

Now his post's second incarnation, instead of scoring 50%, is running ...9%.  In fact, he's gone from first to last among the 1-star crowd:   in fact, it's now the #1 least helpful review of all 65+.

It just shows how the tide has shifted.    :)

P.S. Gotta love that headline. . .

-------------

4 of 44 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars i did read this and thinks its poor. I am allowed to think this., February 13, 2012
This review is from: The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars: Dispatches from the Front Lines (Hardcover)

Had to repost this review after abuse from AGW nutters.