Must-see Delingpole meltdown on BBC: “It is not my job to sit down and read peer-reviewed papers because I simply haven’t got the time…. I am an interpreter of interpretations.”

The TV interview that tied James Delingpole’s tongue

The bellicose Telegraph climate sceptic has complained to the BBC of being ‘intellectually raped’ on Horizon during an interview with Nobel prize-winner Sir Paul Nurse

That’s the UK Guardian‘s headline for an amazing BBC show on climate.  The full thing is currently available only to Brits, but you can see the entire Delingpole interview below, starting with the most amazing excerpts:

No, Delingpole hasn’t got the time or the expertise to actually read the science, only the time to make up stuff — see “Sunday Times retracts and apologizes for shameful and bogus Amazon story smearing IPCC” — and smear climate scientists (see DelingpoleGate: Monbiot slams anti-science columnist for leading “Telegraph into vicious climate over email”).

You can see the full interview here, where Delingpole repeats the nonsense about how wrong it is to “hide the decline using Mike’s Nature trick” — which nobody did.  That’s a long-debunked myth pushed by anti-science extremists like Virginia AG Ken Cuccinelli (see the UCS debunking post, “Ken Cuccinelli Makes Basic Factual Errors About Mike Mann’s Research, Stolen Emails in Response to UVA“).

The Guardian notes:

Nurse told me that he simply presented Delingpole with a hypothetical question: if a dear relative was suffering from a fatal disease, would he opt for the “consensus” treatment recommended by doctors, or advice to drink more orange juice offered by a fringe maverick quack? In terms of the science of climate change, that fringe maverick is analogous, of course, to Delingpole’s own position.

Delingpole apparently found the line of questioning too much to handle and was purportedly lost for words. He at one point, according to Nurse, asked for the film crew to stop filming.

Delingpole told the Guardian he denied asking the crew to stop filming. “The interview went on for about three hours – there were various points where I said ‘I’ve had enough, I want a tea break.’ There was no point where I felt that the interview had to be stopped because I was in any way uncomfortable with what Nurse was saying.” Asked if he had called the BBC to say he had been “intellectually raped” afterwards, he said: “I don’t think I would have said that, because he is incapable of intellectually raping me.”

This is all pretty incredible stuff from a guy who routinely smears climate scientists, as the Guardian explains:

In a recent post, for example, he referred to the people who run London zoo as having “eco-fascist leanings” for daring to suggest that climate change might be connected with the extinction of corals.

To Delingpole, Roger Harrabin is the “the BBC’s High Priest of Gaian Worship and Climate Alarmism”. And in an outburst worthy of Sarah Palin, Delingpole reaches for his metaphorical semi-automatic:

“…the Warmist faith so fervently held and promulgated by the Met Office is exactly the same faith so passionately, unswervingly followed by David Cameron, Chris Huhne, Greg Barker, the Coalition’s energy spokesman in the Lords Lord Marland, and all but five members of the last parliament. And also by the BBC, the Prince of Wales, almost every national newspaper, the European Union, the Royal Society, the New York Times, CNBC, the Obama administration, the Australian and New Zealand governments, your children’s schools, our major universities, our minor universities, the University of East Anglia, your local council”¦ Truly there just aren’t enough bullets!

But he lacks the time and expertise to actually examine the science.

Kudos to “the new president of the Royal Society, the distinguished geneticist and Nobel prize-winner Sir Paul Nurse” for this evisceration.

Related Post:

55 Responses to Must-see Delingpole meltdown on BBC: “It is not my job to sit down and read peer-reviewed papers because I simply haven’t got the time…. I am an interpreter of interpretations.”

  1. peter whitehead says:

    This was a good ‘Horizon’ – well done BBC. Sir Paul Nurse did a good job. It was great to see him being shown round the Royal Society archive – the handwritten notes of the first meeting in 1660, the manuscript of Newton’s ‘Principia’, etc. If you get the chance to see this programme, it’s a gem

  2. John McCormick says:

    We have all met and read of people who have a persona of which they are so proud, regardless of its virtues or social value, that nothing will break through their shell because it could destroy the persona and the individual would be left to walk the streets muttering ‘what do I do now? who am I now? I doubt me.

    Imagine Al Capone waking up one morning in sunny Chicago to read his son was murdered in a revenge killing raid by his son’s gang of thugs. Would he rearm and reload? Could he break down and see he caused his child’s death? Would he change?

    Delingpole is nothing if he is not a denier. Its the people who pay him and give him an audience that have to be challenged. He is a creature of his own design and cannot retrace his steps. Time to flush him.

    John McCormick

  3. Michael. says:

    For those who want to see it, the full video can be viewed through other, non-BBC sources by doing a simple google search.

  4. rab says:

    Delingpole wants desperately to distract from the analogy by raising Climategate. But one can extend the analogy. Imagine now that one of the 70 doctors the cancer patient visited has a do-nothing approach which, if followed, would inevitably result in the death of the patient. And imagine further that the 70 other doctors, fearing for the patient’s life, found the ‘quack’ to be stubborn, grew impatient, and let their ire show.

  5. Mike Roddy says:

    It’s hard to top Lord Monckton, but Delingpole pulls it off. It’s not jut that the emperor has no clothes. He’s been shown to have a three inch unit and a two ounce brain.

    We need our comic talents to run with this. Too bad John Stewart has gone mainstream, and is not willing to go after guys like him.

  6. Former Skeptic says:

    How typical of of the hypocrite Delingpole. As one commentator in the Guardian noted, he has no problems dishing it out behind his keyboard…but can’t take it when it’s returned, even when spoken to politely and without rancor.

    Full credit to the Beeb for doing this.

    Now, can someone from our side of the pond do the same for Morano? ABC, perhaps?

  7. Dragan Glas says:


    I saw this programme – it airs in Ireland on the BBC’s channel 2 – and was also struck by Delingpole’s statement about not having the “scientific expertise”/relying on others/being an “interpreter of interpretations”.

    What he appears to completely fail to realise is that…

    If he lacks the “scientific expertise” to understand the science, he also lacks the expertise to distinguish between the “interpretations” of scientists, pseudo-scientists and quacks.

    If someone makes a false statement, there are only two explanations:

    The person doesn’t know what they’re talking about, which raises questions about their competence OR they are bearing false witness, which raises questions about their integrity.

    By his own admission, he is not competent to write on the subject.

    And, bearing in mind the other points made about his bias, he appears to be bearing false witness.

    I think it’s fair to say that he’s a conspiracy theorist rather than a journalist (in the proper sense of the term).

    Kindest regards,


  8. GreenITGuy says:

    I’ve been observing this fantastic blog for over a year now. I’m generally content to observe and learn. However, something just happened that gave me cause to comment.
    Working every morning at a local coffee shop in the Midwest US (utilizing the free wireless internet), I overheard a gentleman wondering aloud why the automotive industry did not: “Hook a generator on the back wheels of a hybrid and re-charge the battery while driving.” After making sure of his meaning (that we should re-charge the battery using the battery), I attempted to make the simple explanation about conservation of energy that we have all made now and again: You can’t get energy out of nowhere, nor can you even break even.

    After a concise layman’s explanation of the concept, his simple answer made it quite clear that I was wasting my time. He said, “Well, I just don’t believe that.”

    If we can’t get the average individual to understand the most basic principle governing the universe, I honestly believe we’d all better prepare for the decline of human civilization.

  9. pete best says:

    The right are the right especially ones who are somewhat extreme in their warped belief system. Defeating them is not easy but you wont appease them.

  10. bgood2creation says:

    As a grade school teacher I study the science of climate change and read some of the peer-reviewed papers because I want give my students the best possible picture of how and why the climate is changing. This guy is supposed to be informing a wide audience, and he has no time to read the literature! What a pathetic form of journalism he practices!

  11. Jeffrey Davis says:

    Delingpole. What a name. It’s like Fate actually has a sense of humor.

  12. Mark says:

    When I was at college there was a polite, knowledgeable, and well respected Prof who was known as the smile of death amongst the students. This was because he had the unerring knack of being able to politely and effortlessly ask the very questions in exams that really exposed your understanding or lack of it. This beautifully done question is a fine example.

  13. Mike says:

    It is a sad state of affairs that any news organization publishes someone as dumb and arrogant as Delingpole. He says of himself: “James Delingpole is a writer, journalist and broadcaster who is right about everything.” He does not even want to be taken seriously. Why would more than 5% of the reading public take his word for anything?

  14. paulm says:

    “Delingpole told the Guardian he denied asking the crew to stop filming.”

    The guy just can’t stop denying!

    I won’t be surprised if he loses his column at the telegraph now.

    And I hope SIr Paul goes on a mission.
    One down a few more to go….

  15. john atcheson says:

    So, once again, why does this guy have any access to us through the media? Covering his pathetic rantings is about as serious as covering a flat earther wearing a tin foil hat.

    It is interesting that the Guardian — a not-for-profit organization — eviscerates him, rather than covering him.

    In 2100, when our children are cursing our names and spitting on our graves, a few sympathetic historians will say, “Perhaps if the people had been given the facts they may have made the right decisions.”

    I do believe that when people are informed, they generally make the right decisions. But the media is the problem, here.

    There have always been whackjobs and iconoclasts, but until recently, they were treated as such. Nowadays we get “balance” between idiots and lunatics and scientists.

  16. Russell says:

    Asked the same question , WSJ Opinion editor James Taranto went one better by admitting the copy of Nature just handed him was the first he’d ever seen.

    So Dickensian is the intellectual poverty of these poor wights that one hopes Santa or Rupert will add learned journal subscriptions to the lumps of coal and bonus checks in their Christmas stockings

  17. J Bowers says:

    For a review by an ex-employee of Phil Jones at CRU:

    What I learned from Paul Nurse’s Horizon, “Science Under Attack”

    As for Delingpole stating he’s an “interpreter of interpretations”, as I’ve pointed out elsewhere…

    1. A person who speaks by divine inspiration or as the interpreter through whom the will of a god is expressed.
    2. A person gifted with profound moral insight and exceptional powers of expression.
    3. A predictor; a soothsayer.
    4. The chief spokesperson of a movement or cause.

    “This is why those of us who oppose his scheme to carbon-tax the global economy back to the dark ages must do everything in our power to bring the scandal to a wider audience.”
    James Delingpole

    If it walks like a duck…

  18. Jeff Huggins says:

    This is the sort of thing we need in the U.S. — and it is (and should be) the responsibility of the U.S. news media to present/cover these sorts of things.

    Bravo to the BBC and to Sir Nurse.

  19. paulm says:

    Love the reporting from the Economist….least cold year.
    I guess the Economist is one of the least most unpopular magazines around.

    Let’s start with the warming. Despite a frenzied last-minute drive involving snowstorms in Europe and the eastern United States, planet Earth failed to save itself from another last-place finish in 2010: once again, it was the least cold year on record.

  20. He really did nail him with the truth. Well done!

  21. Charles says:

    Heaven help us. This is freaking hilarious … or would be if it weren’t so damn serious. He resents Sir Nurse’s analogy and yet can’t resist his own rude smirking.

    It’s a sad sign (but not at all surprising) that Delingpole’s editor’s would allow such shoddy journalism. As an interpreter of interpretations, Delingpole does a damn poor job, interpreting, it seems, only what he wants to interpret. The dark side of what might be called postmodern journalism.

  22. 350 Now says:

    Which Americans will suffer first, and the worst, from climate chaos from AGW?

    Likely these kids:

    Google the location of Kuinerrarmiut Elitnaurviat 5th Grade – Quinhagak, Alaska
    Maybe Caribou Barbie can tweet that.

    Just putting a face on the victims for our do-nothing elected officials…

    This method of “spelling out messages” reminded me of the 2003 movie LOVE ACTUALLY.

    Which reminded me of a suggestion to Pres. Obama of -life imitating art:

    Consider the scene in the film when PM Hugh Grant hands US President Billy Bob Thorton his ass on a plate:

    US Pres: “We got what we came for and our special relationship is still very special.”

    PM: “I love that word relationship. It covers all manner of sins, doesn’t it? I fear this has become a bad relationship. A relationship based on the President taking exactly what he wants and casually ignoring all those things that really matter to Britain. We may be a small country but we’re a great too. A country of Shakespeare, Churchill, the Beatles, Sean Connery, Harry Potter, David Beckham’s right foot, David Beckham’s left foot, come to that. A friend who bullies us in no longer a friend. And since bullies only respond to strength, from now onward, I will be prepared to be much stronger. And the President should be prepared for that.”

    I hope Pres. Obama can muster up a similar courage to McConnell and Boehner in tonight’s SOTU, actually.

  23. Some European says:

    I made a video with some quotes from Delingpole’s talk at the Heartland Institute’s 4th denialapalooza conference or ‘ICCC’. But due to copyright issues you might not be able to view it.

    I uploaded a shorter version which I hope passes the copyright filter this time.

    To view Delingpole’s full talk, watch:

  24. J Bowers says:

    Re. Charles — “The dark side of what might be called postmodern journalism.”

    Yellow Journalism

    “…, in short, is biased opinion masquerading as objective fact. Moreover, the practice of yellow journalism involved sensationalism, distorted stories, and misleading images for the sole purpose of boosting newspaper sales and exciting public opinion.”

  25. John Gibbons says:

    Here’s an Ode to the Telegraph’s finest climate scam-busting Scribe, as penned by one of the, ahem, fine minds who follow individuals like him:

    Ode to James Delingpole

    Delingpole, Delingpole,

    he is so clever, he is no fool

    All the lies of the eco-fascists,
He knocks them down with both his fists.
And if they try to make a trick,
Delingpole will give’em a kick.
His fingers are fast and his pen is sharp,
Makes Monbiot look like a panting carp.
He writes as well as Christopher Booker,

    The ladies think he is a looker!

    For Delingpole I lift my hat,

    He is lean and Gore is fat.

  26. Robert H says:

    Is prostitution legal in Great Britain? Just wondering…

  27. MapleLeaf says:

    Bravo to Sir Nurse and to the BBC– it was wonderful to watch Delingpole squirm and implode. Hopefully Delingpole goes down in flames and goes back to reporting on football (something he actually might be qualified to do).

    The Guardian also gets it right with the help of SkepticalScience:

    Joe, this might deserve its own thread….IMHO.

    A good day or two for science and integrity…..but a long road still lies ahead of us fighting the good fight.

  28. John Mason says:

    This was Delingpole’s “Plimer Moment” (ref – the Monbiot interview a while back), but I doubt it will make him quieten down. However, it was most entertaining, and Nurse was excellent! My family – who I watched it with last night after supper – all agreed on one thing!!!!

    In general, it was an excellent programme. It covered so many battles many of us have fought this past 15 months, and covered them well.

    Cheers – John

  29. 350 Now says:

    Jon Stewart/Wyatt Cenac’s “Bird like me” – Audubon to the rescue in Turkey Creek Mississippi

    As Dr Mead wrote, never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world…

  30. Theodore says:

    I am also an “interpreter of interpretations”. To me, the whole issue is one of credibility. Who do I believe – those who know a lot about the subject or those who know little? Do I believe those who understand the history of earth or those who subscribe to the “I Dream of Jeannie” theory of human origins? Do I believe those who advocate sound long-term energy policy or those who wish to couple a finite resource to a non-finite demand? The credibility of those who oppose renewable energy is damaged in every case by their obvious motives or by insufficient understanding of the issue.

  31. Lou Grinzo says:

    We should never overlook one detail when viewing the deniers: All those who put themselves into that camp for financial reasons are not being paid by the FF companies and other corporate interests. Some of them are doing quite well with books and paid speaking engagements which allow them to siphon money from the ideological deniers at the bottom of the food pyramid. Their primary product is themselves, not the (anti-)science they peddle.

    In fact, these people, like Limbaugh, are happiest when progressives are in office and we’re actually making some progress — it gives them something to be against, which rallies the faithful and keeps them in demand. I’m sure that the hardcore deniers will view this Delingpole incident as further proof of the “liberal bias of the media”, and cry about how he was treated unfairly, etc.

  32. Ian Forrester says:

    I’ve often wondered what a rabid weasel looked and sounded like. Now, after listening to and watching Delingpole, I know.

  33. Chris Winter says:

    Paulm: Thanks for that link to The Economist. It is a wonderf one of the least misinformative columns I have read. And (not to put too fine a point on it) your post #19 was among the least poorly written. ;-)

    John Gibbons: It’s good that I wasn’t drinking anything when I read that!

  34. Jeffrey Davis says:

    I suspect that there won’t be many climate septics like Delingpole in the future willing to be interviewed by legitimate reporters. They will demand to be able to screen questions or to appear only before people paid by friendly sources. Delingpole comes off as a Monty Python-scale twit who becomes flummoxed by a question that he really ought to have worked out before hand. And would have were he a legitimate thinker on the subject.

    “I don’t have the scientific expertise …”

    The mother of all doofuses.

  35. Steve UK says:

    Incidentally, if you want proof of the quality of the interpretations that Mr D. re-interprets try this one out;

    Try and not hurt your chin on the table when your jaw drops open.

  36. Heraclitus says:

    Peter Sissons, former BBC news anchorman, has again attacked the BBC’s cluture of ‘political correctness’ – this article in the Mail seems suspiciously well timed

    Maybe not such a good day or two for science and integrity on every front.

  37. Rob Honeycutt says:

    Just watched the whole thing online. Sir Paul Nurse did a fantastic job of, essentially, threading the needle. He didn’t belittle the deniers but managed to very effectively allowed Delingpole to toss himself into the waste can. He focussed a lot of time on what scientists can do to be better communicators. And he showed his genuine excitement for the scientific process.

    Great piece.

  38. Russell says:

    25 John Gibbons deserves the Ode restored to its unredacted glory :

    Delingpole, Delingpole,

    He makes Lord Monckton seem no fool

    All the fibs of eco-fascists,

    He turns to lies. It is delicious

    How mere facts make him quite sick,

    Pure denial is his schtick.

    His fingers are fast and his pen is sharp,

    As his fans are daft- it invites snark
    His writing recalls Christopher Booker
    Awarding a lit prize to a hooker!

    For Delingpole I lift my hat,
    He’s upstaged Gore, the bloody twat.

  39. Rob Honeycutt says:

    Watching the video you get the sense that Delingpole got into his head that he was going to hold a special position in world history as being the “reporter” (if you can call him that) who first brought Climategate to the forefront and saved the world economy because of it.

  40. From Peru says:

    You can see the COMPLETE Horizon documentary, “Science Under Attack”, here:

    Canal de MultiInternetfreak

    BBC Horizon – Science Under Attackf 1/6

  41. Jim Groom says:

    ‘I am the interpreter of interpretations’ = bullshit artist.

  42. Mulga Mumblebrain says:

    In Australia we have numerous Delingpoles. They are all of the political Right. They all, also, spread hatred and contempt for Moslems, our indigenous, environmentalists of any type, trade unions, teachers (a favourite target for abuse) and ‘enemies’ like, increasingly, China. Hate and fearmongering is what they do. They are paid to foment anger, rage and paranoia in their devotees.There is a character type, and a type of propaganda involved here, that varies little from target to target. The other side, for example climate scientists, are always liars with sinister conspiratorial motives, never the honestly mistaken. Argument is pretty thin, mostly by assertion or appeals to their acolytes’ paranoia, credulousness and capacity for hatred. A Manichean worldview is ubiquitous-the other side always evil incarnate, not that I reject Manichean divisions, just the inversion of reality explicit in the Right’s version. No attempt is made to offer compromise or seek common ground. That would be ‘moral equivalence’ a term that has spread from defence of Western aggression in the Middle East to other fields as well. And, while the thought controllers of the opinion pages and blogs might be repulsive and vicious, their followers and the comments allowed to see the light of day are often frighteningly aggressive and filled with frankly homicidal rage. So Delingpole’s call for more bullets is just par for the course.
    I believe we are near to the greatest crisis in human history. I do not mean the ecological crisis, although that is grave enough. No I mean the currently unfolding battle for the soul of humanity, which amounts, I fear, to a global civil war between the forces of life and those of death. Despite our species’ record of crimes of genocide and murder, of exploitation, cruelty and indifference to the suffering of others ie of its psychopathy, there was always a shy, faint, hope that we could evolve to something higher, if not innately then at least socially. But we have reached the situation, instead, where the dominant power on the planet, the money power, has so perverted humanity and the social order worldwide that everywhere power, political, propagandistic and economic, resides with the very worst human types. That anthropogenic climate change, just a few decades ago a topic of almost universal concern and where the initial phases of planning to address its wretched dangers were uncontroversial, has now descended into a maelstrom of lies, distortions, mass moroncy and homicidal rage on the part of an army of belligerent, ignorant imbeciles is staggering enough. But that those responsible in creating, fomenting and furthering this outbreak of suicidal mass hysteria are simply, as the evidence grows daily more and more undeniable, ‘doubling-up’ their lies and distortions is utterly unspeakable. Until we acknowledge that we are in a fight with the forces of darkness that infest the twisted minds of those with a basic antipathy to life and humanity, we are heading for oblivion.

  43. pointer says:

    Love this comment from the Guardian article:

    24 January 2011 9:24AM
    Surely the proof of the pudding is in the eating. In other words, the most important factor is whether a majority of people have been successfully treated using a particular drug, not that a majority of scientists agree that it should work.

    Sounds so reasonable, until you realise what Slidewinder did here: s/he makes the assumption that scientists present opinion, not what their research has objectively revealed.

  44. GreenITGuy wrote in 8:

    I attempted to make the simple explanation about conservation of energy…. He said, “Well, I just don’t believe that.”

    If we can’t get the average individual to understand the most basic principle governing the universe, I honestly believe we’d all better prepare for the decline of human civilization.

    I am not especially optimistic. At the same time in my view that sort of ignorance is just so much intellectual ballast. It hasn’t stopped the progress of human civilization such as it is so far.

    But oddly enough I had almost exactly the same sort of conversation with a bus driver on my evening commute just last week. The subject was even the same: he had in mind some sort of perpetual motion machine for transportation — although based off of internal combustion. He also had difficulty wrapping his brain around the concept of peak oil.

    I decided not to trouble him with radiation balance theory quite as of yet. Might try bringing him some pretty pictures a little while later though. Possibly infrared satellite images of carbon dioxide plumes rising up from the coasts of the United States, or the thermal radiation image of a candle flame being snuffed out by a tube of carbon dioxide while the flame continues to burn. See if he can make heads or tails.

  45. Sou says:

    Looking at a few of the comments on Delingpoles’s blog the problem doesn’t seem to be that the scientists could communicate better, it’s that there is a large divide between the ignorant/fearful and the open/educated (akin to the rich vs poor divide).

    To the ignorant/fearful, Sir Paul comes across as being arrogant rather than self-confident and knowledgeable. He is viewed as taking advantage of the ignorant blogger (poor defenseless little Delingpole /s).

    Fear of knowledge is a dreadful malaise. It seems to be reaching epidemic proportions. It could be viewed as a form of envy.

  46. Hasis says:

    I’m surprised that no one has brought up the fact that Nurse also interviewed John Christy. I thought that that segment too was brought off beautifully. Christy is allowed free reign to wax lyrical about ‘it’s all the sun’, but when Nurse subtly presses for Christy’s evidence he is given nothing more than ‘it’s in a bore hole in [can’t recall name of place]’.
    Scene changes to Nurse outside, where he uses a fairly uniform height hedge beside the path as an analogy for the consilience of evidence, which creates a scientific consensus [different shrubs have different dimensions, but, together, they ‘work’ as a hedge] …he stops beside a shrub that towers above the others and…introduces the concept of ‘cherrypicking’. So subtle and yet so lovely to watch!!

  47. Nick says:

    It’s pretty clear that Delingpole depends on his column to construct a persona,as he is defenseless in conversation. He is just a noisy fanboy who has picked a side to barrack for through thick and thin. Ungracious,defensive and pathetic.

  48. John Mason says:

    Pointer #43,

    “Sounds so reasonable, until you realise what Slidewinder did here: s/he makes the assumption that scientists present opinion, not what their research has objectively revealed.”

    You have touched upon one of the fundamentals here. This is one of the key things we need to engage with and clarify to the public.

    Cheers – John

  49. JasonW says:

    For the sake of this “balance” thing that so many seem to be fond of these days, I am willing to cut Delingpole _some_ slack, by which in a three hour interview he had five minutes of meltdown, whilst speaking lucidly in the other 2 hours 55 minutes. However! In these five minutes he was suddenly, brutally and quite deliciously exposed. ;)

  50. MightyDrunken says:

    Mulga Mumblebrain makes another insightful post on the minds of others, I am becoming a fan!

    Delingpole is simply a troll. The way he childishly attacks the ideas and people he does not like, is not only sickening but somehow feeble. I used to frequent his comment section on the Telegraph and act as a voice of reason. As time went by I could not take him seriously, he was so rude and ignorant. I think his column only exists to attract a certain audience and create controversy.

  51. Mulga Mumblebrain says:

    Sou #45, one of the bedrocks of the denialist Dunning-Krugerite rabble is their obscurantism. They make little effort to hide their contempt for scientists, as ‘know-it-alls’ and ‘smart-arses’. Trawling the Stygian depths of anti-intellectualism, where people really seem to believe that science is just ‘a matter of opinion’, and that their opinion on science is equivalent to that of an actual scientist, has been a successful tactic for the Right in garnering votes. I’m afraid it’s another example of how a perverted mass democracy, where the duller elements are relentlessly brainwashed by masters of that dark art, cannot arrive at rational outcomes, even when human survival is at stake. Honestly, who would you rather have run your country, Hu Jin-tao or Tony Abbott?

  52. Amoeba says:

    It’s perfect the perfect Dunning-Kruger demonstration.
    In a blind test, I bet that the over modest PN would in all honesty rate his abilities and knowledge as below that of his colleagues, while in contrast, JD would rate his abilities and knowledge as considerably superior to that of his colleagues, he probably thinks himself as the greatest journalist of all time.

    But in this hypothetical test, when their colleagues rate them it seems most likely that PN would be rated very highly indeed, while JD is rated as a dunce who’s been lucky.

  53. J Bowers says:

    For those with access to the BBC, Storyville follows Monckton on tour in ‘Meet the Climate Sceptics’, BBC Four, 10pm, Monday 31st January.

  54. Dave Kahn says:

    For people outside the UK the entire Horizon programme is currently on YouTube. See