Wednesday, September 02, 2015

If the Foo Shits

Stefan Rahmstorf has been having fun analyzing Bjorn Lomborg's scientific publication record.  Stefan has not been impressed, 20 publications, 54 total citations and an h index of 3 using the Thompson Reuters Web of Science.  Eli gets about the same with Elsevier's Scopus data base.  Both WoS and Scopus only look at articles published in peer reviewed journals, so popular pot boilers like Lomborg's Sceptical Environmentalist are not tracked.


For giggles Eli went and looked up Chris Monckton's record.  Chris has been bragging on how he is " the author of numerous peer-reviewed papers on climate change" in the Augusta Free Press.  That Chris writes a lot on climate change and other things like miracle cures for everything is not under question.  How much of it appears in the peer reviewed scientific literature is another.  The answer is not a drop, or maybe one.  Here is the Scopus report.
Legates, D.R., Soon, W., Briggs, W.M., Monckton of Brenchley, C. Climate Consensus and 'Misinformation': A Rejoinder to Agnotology, Scientific Consensus, and the Teaching and Learning of Climate Change (2013) Science and Education, pp. 1-20. Article in Press. Cited 1 time. DOCUMENT TYPE: Article in Press SOURCE: Scopus  
Monckton Brenchley, C. Global Brightening and Climate Sensitivity (2011) Evidence-Based Climate Science, pp. 317-333.  DOCUMENT TYPE: Book Chapter SOURCE: Scopus  
Monckton, C.W. Free speech about climate change (2007) Society, 44 (4), pp. 14-17.  DOCUMENT TYPE: Note SOURCE: Scopus  
Sawyer, N.E., Monckton, C.W. 'Shoe-fit' a computerised shoe print database (1995) IEE Conference Publication, (408), pp. 86-89.  
One cite Chris.  Oh Foo

33 comments:

jimlj1715 said...

Legates, D.R., Soon, W., Briggs, W.M., Monckton of Brenchley, C. Climate Consensus and 'Misinformation': A Rejoinder to Agnotology, Scientific Consensus, and the Teaching and Learning of Climate Change (2013) Science and Education, pp. 1-20. Article in Press. Cited 1 time. DOCUMENT TYPE: Article in Press SOURCE: Scopus

That's the W Soon who published w/o indicating that his source of funding was ff companies?

Impressive.

PG said...

52 citations! Goodness gracious me!
And here was I thinking he was a complete joke, when in fact he is an incomplete joke. Apologies Bjorn.

Blogger profile said...

PG, why did you think Lomborg went into denial? He's not competent enough to get anywhere on his own, so he says what powerful people want to hear so he can get their cash spent on bribing politicians to spend taxpayer money getting him a cushy job with tenure and government handouts and no responsibility.

Fernando Leanme said...

I wrote a very lucid and educational treatise explaining why Ramstorf was wrong, but it didn't get through the censors. I guess he hates Lomborg.

Blogger profile said...

No you didn't fern.

You were hallucinating. Because your imagination, populated with scary environmentalists and an elitist NWO conspiracy conspiring against you is so much more satisfying than the reality where you're a moron with nothing to say.

afeman said...

Mr. profile said... 77 of the the last thread's 130 comments.

Blogger profile said...

And the value of that one you did there was 0.

Yet you appear to have put a hell of a lot of effort into it.

Clearly the problem with your statistic cannot be that it is wasting your time...

Bernard J. said...

I find it extraordinary that the Australian government would offer him $4 million on the basis of 54 WoS citations and an H index of 3.

At most Australian universities one would need to have at least ten times the value for each to be in the running for a grant that size, and preferably have a citation count around 100 times as great.

It goes to illustrate the ideological partisanship - and indeed the seeming corruption - of the Australian federal government.

Blogger profile said...

" I find it extraordinary that the Australian government would offer him $4 million on the basis of 54 WoS citations and an H index of 3."

It's not Tony's money. And he wants to give him the job.

Nuff said.

EliRabett said...

"I wrote a very lucid and educational treatise explaining why Ramstorf was wrong, but it didn't get through the censors. I guess he hates Lomborg."

but it was too long to fit into the margins of this book

Blogger profile said...

No, it was just "I like his ideas, you just hate him" and it got through these "gatekeepers".

afeman said...

The computer is your friend.

anthrosciguy said...

"The computer is your friend."

That depends on the value of "you".

afeman said...

anthrosciguy: The computer is everybody's friend! Please report to security to disintegration, and have a nice day!

Blogger profile said...

afeman, obviously your problem can't be wasting other people's time. Not even if it's someone else doing it other than you.

PG said...

From now on I will refer to Monckton as Cited 1 Time of Brenchley
I hope you'll all join me

Blogger profile said...

How about "Froggie"?

We can then sing him a seranade:

Oh Froggie went a-counting and he did lie
Mmm Hmm
Oh Froggie went a-counting and he did lie
Mmm Hmm
Oh Froggie went a-counting and he did lie
He put it right up there on that slide
Oh Froggie went a-counting and he did lie
Mmm Hmm.

Fernando Leanme said...

No Eli, it wasn't the length. It was the contents. The guy likes having an echo chamber in his blog. If he wasn't so focused on running a propaganda site he would let. Y comments through and then try to take them apart. The funny part is I increase traffic with my comments. People like "Booger profile" really get off calling me a moron, others come back to see if I responded to his insults. But as you know, I'm for world peace, human rights, and corn syrup-free food.

Blogger profile said...

" No Eli, it wasn't the length. It was the contents. "

So the contents of the empty box you typed the above in would not accept your self-identified "very lucid and educational treatise explaining why Ramstorf was wrong" because of...? What?

And Stephan doesn't patrol this blog gatekeeping your comments. So that can't be the reason.

Oh, and sorry, I'll get right on to insulting you. When you're done doing it to yourself. No need to over-egg the pudding,.

Blogger profile said...

Of course, you DO realise by calling me "booger profile" you're now making me more important, and making others come back to read my responses, if any, to those "insightful" insults.

You're playing right into my nefarious hands.

"Bwahahahahah!" I believe it goes.

Jim Eager said...

Oh, come on Fernando, you probably just f'd up the RC commment process by forgetting to enter your name or email addy in your haste to post your "devastating" take down.

Then again, maybe Stefan has even less tolerance for your nonsense than Tamino does.

Blogger profile said...

Oh, no, Jim, he DID post his opus magnum on the RC site. You can go see it. I paraprhased it above, though as you can see if you look yourself, I did have to condense it quite severely to get it to fit in this tiny little text box:

"I like his ideas. You just hate him".

Matt M said...

Cmon FL,

You are a regular in the burrow and the head rabbit has invited you to post your comment here.

Matt M said...

Shouldn't FL comment be in the bore hole (the RC deleted comments section)? There are recent comments there but cant see FL there.

Blogger profile said...

Matt, he is there:

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2015/08/bjorn-lomborg-just-a-scientist-with-a-different-opinion/comment-page-2/#comment-635518

Jim Eager said...

BP, I'm giving Fernando the benefit of the doubt here (though I don't know why) and assuming that he posted another comment in that RC thread. If so, because there is none in The Bore Hole, as Matt pointed out, either Fern f'd up the comment process or he used some word combination that was snared by the RC spam filters. I've already mentioned a third possibility.

Blogger profile said...

It's the right name, though. And it has to be SOMEWHERE since Fern insists they tried.

So it's somewhere there, and this is the right name. And it's said the same damn thing the dribbling buffoon has said here on the subject.

Jim Eager said...

BP, is it really that hard to simply let it go?

Blogger profile said...

What?

Let what go?

Why?

John said...

I heard the joke about the Foo Bird over three decades ago.

Blogger profile said...

It wasn't a dude with a lute, was it? Because that's a Foo BARD.

wha wha whaaa.

EliRabett said...


It is the definitive 14 yr old male joke

Blogger profile said...

Don't be sexist. Women find fart jokes funny too. Until they're indoctrinated into the idea that they're "too mature" for that sort of thing, then they suppress it.

A baby girl in the bath will find her farting in it JUST AS FUNNY as a baby boy.

It takes time for

a) society to tell them they're not allowed to be amused by something so "immature"
b) society to tell them they should now be "more mature than that"

Worst is, they'll be told they're too mature for that whilst saying they're still too immature to be adult. No wonder teens are so naffed off with grown ups.