|Michael Spencer Graphic|
John Cook is the founder of one of the world's most famous "Sky Is Falling" websites about global warming, SkepticalScience.COM. The name of the web wants to express the point that the climate skeptics shouldn't even be allowed to use the term "skeptics". They only deserve expletives while the "true skeptics" are the champions of panic such as Cook himself. He is a typical example of the alarmist "grassroots movement" who has no relevant education (his top academic achievement is to have been a "former student" – in other words, a dropout) and no significant intelligence but whose persistent activism – in combination with the pathologically corrupt atmosphere in many institutions that favor "a certain kind of views" – has allowed him to become something like an "honorary scientist" and to have earned a huge amount of money, too.
Anthony Watts writes:
If it wasn’t enough that John Cook dresses himself up as a Nazi in his SkS uniform on his forum, now we have him caught in what looks to be identity theft of a well known scientist.
This isn’t a brush away issue that he can ignore, as Dr. Lubos Motl found out yesterday, John Cook has been using the name of Dr. Lubos Motl to post comments that Dr. Motl has NOT written.Here is Crook Cook on a forum admitting that he uses the identity of Scientist Luboš: (click on image to enlarge)
Anthony Watts continues:
What sort of “experiment” was John Cook running by stealing the identity of Dr. Lubos Motl, and writing comments under his name?
Cook is a man who has co-authored two papers about how climate skeptics are not to be trusted because in essence, “they are crazy conspiracy theorists”. Yet, John Cook, now of the University of Queensland after leaving his connections at UWA, has so little moral integrity that he’ll post comments on his own website (the SkS forum, see below) as a skeptical scientist, such as Dr. Lubos Motl?
Who else has John Cook impersonated? Has he encouraged his team to do this? These are valid questions that need answers.
Malcolm Roberts has been corresponding with UQ and his most recent can be found here - http://bit.ly/1Lp9VZu
John Cook makes and/or implies false climate claims, contradicts empirical evidence and relies on an unscientifically fabricated and false consensus that you support.
I hope that you do not support UQ staff making statements contradicting empirical science. Please clarify: is it acceptable for UQ staff to make statements contradicting empirical evidence?