Anthony Watts' Dog Whistle, re Sea Level Rise

{Updated 5/13/14 with breaking news, also check comments for another example of Anthony's dishonesty}

OK, here's an example of Anthony's dog whistle in action:

Posted on May 9, 2014 by Anthony Watts 

"Study: sea level rise acceleration still uncertain, we won’t have statistical certainty until 2020-2030 

Anthony writes: "This is a bit of a bombshell to those that claim sea level rise is accelerating and certain. From the University of Southampton: …"

Now watch how one of Anthony's pals, Jim Steele, runs off to proclaim scientists can't "… determine if there has been any change in the rate of sea level rise".  Even though a reading of the report makes clear they are talking about something quite different, and in fact, they explicitly reaffirm:

“By developing a novel method that realistically approximates future sea level rise, we have been able to add new insight to the debate and show that there is substantial evidence for a significant recent acceleration in the sea level rise on a global and regional level. ..."

Years of Living Dangerously the creepy side of the internet debate

{Updated 5/8/14 with counter-invitation to Mr. Steele, quoted at the end of this article.}

A while back I tried to engage the "ScottishSkeptic" in a constructive debate by taking his "The Sceptic View (Rev. 0.5)" and reviewing it's various claims - which I countered with my opinions, which I supported with copious links to authoritative work by the experts.  In response ScottishSkeptic threatened me with legal action claiming copyright infringement, although he backed down and invoked William Connelley to mediate, but that didn't work out as he'd hoped either and I was shown to have acted ethically and legally.  Which was about the last I heard of the ScottishSkeptic who never did confront my claims debunking his points in a constructive learning focused manner.

Now it's Jim Steele, the man who feels he has the right to misrepresent climate science and maliciously attack the character of scientists he disagrees with, who's threatening me, though not with legal action.  Nor by any challenge for a constructive debate.  No, he has chosen the veiled threat of stalking and physical confrontation.  It's neatly framed so plenty of deniability - still see for yourselves if the whole thing don't feel creepy:

Of Recursive Fury, SkepticForum and science denialist's strategy of harassment

Interesting news today, particularly in light of my own recent experience at SkepticForum.com with one Jim Steele and the moderator of said forum. The same moderator who believes injecting graphics of an exploding head (link with care, it's quite disgusting) into what's supposed to be a serious discuss about climate science is fair play.

But try going toe to toe with a malicious climate science denialist, even though the fella in question, one Jim Steele, grossly misrepresents and downright lies about the science - plus he injects copious amounts of slander (and more lies) towards serious published scientists he doesn't like, or anyone else that gets in his way.  But,  you'd better not call him on it over at the "skeptic's forum".

Fabricating Climate Doom: looking at Jim Steele’s deception

{did some clean up editing 4/7/14}

I have written another post where I strip down this article to it's few scientific claims.  Visit:"Fabricating Climate Doom: Checking Up on Jim Steele’s Science"

http://whatsupwiththatwatts.blogspot.com/2014/03/fabricatingclimatedoom-steeles-science.html

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

It's worth pointing out.
As with other climate science "skeptics" - our good Mr. Steele is great at making dramatic claims, freely attacking the integrity of accomplished scientists and their work with his one-sided story-telling.
But, when confronted with his many misrepresentations he won't defend his claims.
What's to be made of that? Perhaps he knows dang well that his charges are indefensible.  {4/4/14}

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Fabricating Climate Doom: Jim Steele’s Butterfly Effect

{Yes, it's true, this post is a heck of a marathon, but for the student interested in examining the art of rhetorical deception, I think it could be worth your time.

It's also true that I'm not doing nice.  But, considering the  flood of the slander and misrepresentations Mr. Steele allows himself towards serious scientists and their work  -  he ought to be man enough to take a little.

But, as is so typical with bullies, give 'em a taste of their own and off they run whining about unfairness.  The fact remains I document numerous examples of Mr. Steele misrepresenting the science and saying things that are plain false.}

I frequent an obscure on-line chat-room called SkepticForum and recently one Jim Steele joined the conversation with an opening thread titled: "More Respectful Climate Debate is Essential" wherein he links to his own essays which turn out to be extremely biased attack pieces and an excellent example of 'science by rhetoric' as opposed to evidence.  And since the conversation over there is like trying to dialogue with a gang of predatory alley cats, I'm going to review Jim Steele's essay on my own terms.

I include the complete text of Jim Steele's essay, no additions or subtractions, in courier font - with my comments and links to further information interspersed.  One reason I'm doing this is because Mr. Steele has quite successfully astro-turfed the internet with his science-fiction and I believe his game needs to be exposed.

I invite you on an exploration into Mr. Steele's alternate reality.