This is a reposting of the first of five responses I made regarding various aspects of Jim Steele's 1/7/15 WattsUpWithThat 'essay' - in light of Steele's recent comment, I think it's only fair to bring it up again. I'm tempted to run though it, polish, up date, but even considering this was written while still in a bit of shock over Jim's ruthlessness, I believe it's best to leave it alone.
My letter to San Francisco State University may seem a bit extreme, but we do the best we can, with what we have - and considering Mr. Steele's extremism and previous interactions with him, I wanted to be sure he knows, they know.
___________________________________________________________
Sunday, January 25, 2015
Yesterday I became aware of a shocking, misinformation laced "Watts Up With That" blog post written about me January 7th by our good Mr. Steele. Considering Anthony Watts won't allow me to comment at WUWT it seems appropriate to share this email I've just sent to Mr. Steele (among others). I won't be responding to the specifics in that contorted dishonest WUWT blog post. Although I'll be happy to answer any questions submitted to the comments sections after this open letter.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To whom it may concern,
Ms. Mendoza, Assistant to the Dean, San Francisco State University
Ms. Griffin, Public Affairs, San Francisco State University
Ms. Kelly, Academic Affairs, San Francisco State University
Mother Jones
Four Corners Free Press
Climate Science Defense Fund
I am copying you on this email to Mr. Jim Steele because I feel seriously threatened by your emeritus instructor (http://www.sfsu.edu/~sierra/
INDEX - Jim Steele's climate science horror collection, Landscapesandcycles, 2014
http://whatsupwiththatwatts.blogspot.com/2015/01/steeles- horror-collection-2014.html
But, I believe I've written nothing to justify the viciousness and misleading prose of his recent WUWT article - over a matter that would best be handed with dispassionate dialogue.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Mr. Steele,
regarding your 1/7/2015 WUWT blog post. I can see we are quite different, you fight your intellectual battles within the confines of an echo-chamber of like-minded who have convinced themselves that scientists are manipulative and untrustworthy - unless they share your "sceptical" storyline that modern climatology is a farce. Along with that you seem to believe that anyone defending those scientists and their work is an enemy in your no-holds-barred grudge match.
I myself would rather objective, educated, informed individuals judge the validity of our respective opinions, claims and assertions. I remain prepared to digest new evidence and recognize my mistakes. Like scientists, I love learning and expanding my understanding, even when new evidence shows that my assumptions were wrong. Also, just like serious scientists, I willingly allow the strongest evidence to drive my "beliefs".
I do take heed of Mark Twain's observation, the one you closed your attack piece with:
¶22 Mark Twain astutely recognized, “In religion and politics people’s beliefs and convictions are in almost every case gotten at second-hand, and without examination, from authorities who have not themselves examined the questions at issue but have taken them at second-hand from other.”
That's why I've gone through the time and trouble to objectively itemize the various claims you're so strenuously broadcasting to all who will listen… precisely because I choose to go to first-hand sources. Which I've done, contacting a number of scientists singled out by you these past months. Many have responded and shared information and studies, sometimes many studies. I've spent hours, days, seriously looking through it all and digesting the information to the best of my abilities.
