Say what you want about deniers - they're the fastest readers, bar none.

[wtmusic]

[div style="float: right;"]How else to explain 13 negative reviews of climate scientist Michael Mann's new book, The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars: Dispatches from the Front Lines, which showed up on Amazon the day the book was released?

Here's how:

"It is a shame that the science deniers are much better organized than the rational people. As of 8 AM this morning, Dr. Michael E. Mann’s latest book The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars: Dispatches from the Front Lines had 15 reviews, all of which were 5 stars. My review (posted below) had 58 out of 59 votes for being helpful.

Something has changed. As of the moment of writing this piece, there are now 42 reviews:

“5-star”: 24
“4-star”: 4
“3-star”: 0
“2-star”: 0
“1-star”: 13

Sigh.

Has the books suddenly gotten worse?

No, “Watt’s Up With That,” one of the most prominent climate science confusion sites, put up a post calling on readers to attack Mann’s book and to attack positive reviews."

http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2012/02/12/422774/michael-mann-author-book-hockey-stick-climate-wars/

[Scuba]

1. "...put up a post calling on readers to attack Mann’s book..." because that's science, right?

[The Croquist]

13. Watts did not call for readers to attack Mann's book

First of all he posted what Tom Nelson posted regarding the book.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/02/08/michael-manns-new-book-is-out/
http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2012/02/i-just-bought-kindle-version-of-michael.html

Here is what was posted:

Tom Nelson reports:

I just bought the Kindle version of Michael Mann’s “The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars: Dispatches from the Front Lines”

I hate the idea of spending $9.99 on a climate hoax book, but I plan to get my money’s worth.

Searching Mann’s book for “denier” yielded 125 hits; “Morano” had 27 hits; “McIntyre” had 166 hits; “Watts” had 16 hits.

Mann’s book currently has 15 reviews on Amazon, all five-star, many by his warmist friends. I hope some climate realists eventually review the book as well.

Watts added:

While I realize that many people don’t want to buy this book, please don’t pull a Peter Gleick and do reviews apparently in absentia. (I can’t emphasize this enough – don’t post a review if you have not read it.)

Where is the call for readers to attack Mann's book?

[Warren Stupidity]

18. Where is the call? In your quoted excerpt.

"I hope some climate realists eventually review the book as well."

It took a couple of clicks to process "climate realists"'s meaning in your upside down world.

[The Croquist]

20. Not upside down at all

It seems to me that the statement

[b[While I realize that many people don’t want to buy this book, please don’t pull a Peter Gleick and do reviews apparently in absentia. (I can’t emphasize this enough – don’t post a review if you have not read it.)

Addresses the claim that Watts called for trashing the book.

[Warren Stupidity]

2. they are well funded.

So things like book reviews on amazon are going to get covered real quick. It is their job.
Why we allow well funded paid rw trolls to use DU to promote climate denial remains a mystery to me.

[The Doctor.]

4. The mystery is 'what trolls?'

I think I've seen maybe one denier troll here ever and it didn't last long.

[kestrel91316]

5. We have several long-term DUers who are GW deniers and

IMHO paid trolls. I of course cannot name names, though I don't keep a list. It's just that I see them in denial mode and think, "Oh, YOU again!"

[The Doctor.]

6. If you remember them,

PM me. I like seeing what happens to people when confronted with realities they can't or don't want to acknowledge.

[joshcryer]

7. That is a very strong allegation that shouldn't be made lightly, imo.

I've been called a paid shill for the renewable lobby for defending AGW on other forums.

[The Croquist]

14. Well funded?

I'm a skeptic. I am funded by no one. Watts' Surface Station project was funded by himself and his volunteers. To misquote the Wendy's commercial:

Where's the funding?

[Warren Stupidity]

16. you should apply for back dated remuneration.

http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/en/campaigns/global-warming-and-energy/polluterwatch/koch-industries/

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/jul/01/exxon-mobil-climate-change-sceptics-funding

http://www.good.is/post/nine-of-out-ten-climate-denying-scientists-have-ties-to-exxon-mobil-money/

http://motherjones.com/blue-marble/2010/04/inside-kochs-climate-denial-machine

But seriously, google is your friend here. You want funding? Go for it.

[The Croquist]

19. "Big Denial Funding"

I am addressing your links below but I would like to point out that Dr. James Hansen collected in excess of $1,600,000.00 in outside income from 2006 - 2010. That was money in his pocket.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/11/18/dr-james-hansens-growing-financial-scandal-now-over-a-million-dollars-of-outside-income/

Try comparing that to your claim of well funded deniers.

The first link on Dr. Willie Soon shows that in 10 years he received 1,033,100.00 from corporations. That works out to 103,310.00 per year. That was for research not direct money to him.

The second link on Exxon Mobile states that it donated $75,000.00 to the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) and $50,000.00 to the Heritage Foundation in 2008. I couldn't find total ExxonMobil Corporation contributions for 2008 so I hope you'll settle for 2009. In 2009 they donated 8,586,760.00 to various organizations.

http://www.exxonmobil.com/Corporate/files/gcr_contributions_pub-policy09.pdf

Here are some 2010 contribution numbers:

employees and retirees, Exxon Mobil Corporation, its divisions and affiliates, and the ExxonMobil Foundation provided $237 million in contributions worldwide, of which $110 million was dedicated to education

I think that puts the $125,000.00 into perspective.

http://www.exxonmobil.com/Corporate/community_foundation.aspx

The third link states that 9 out of 10 of authors questioning man-made climate change have links to ExxonMobil.

Dr. Craig D Idso runs The Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change. Over a 10 year period (1998-2007) it received 90,000.00 from Exxon Mobil. That's $9,000.00 per year.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_the_Study_of_Carbon_Dioxide_and_Global_Change

Dr Patrick J Michaels says that maybe 40% of his research is funded by the petroleum industry. It doesn't say how much funding that is. Keep in mind that research funding is not the same as money in his pocket.

http://www.desmogblog.com/climate-skeptic-pat-michaels-admits-cnn-forty-percent-his-funding-comes-oil-industry

Dr. Bruce Kimball’s funding is apparently already included in Dr. Craig D Idso's figures. That means they are splitting $9,000.00 per year in funding.

Dr. Willie Soon who gets about 103,310.00 per year in research grants has already been discussed.

Dr. John R Christy is one of many people affiliated with the George C Marshall Institute. In the last 12 years ExxonMobil has funded $840,000.00 to the George C Marshall foundation. That's $70,000.00 per year. exxonsecrets.org lists 47 "key people" and "people" associated with the George C Marshall foundation. That works out to 1,489.36 per person per year assuming no other costs.

Ross McKitrick is one of many people affiliated with the Fraser Institute. They're gotten $90,000.00 from ExxonMobil in the last 14 years. That works out to $6,428.57 per year assuming he got it all which is not a valid assumption.

Dr. Indur M Goklany is one of 132 associated with the Heartland Institute. In the last 12 years ExxonMobil has funded $676,500.00 to the George C Marshall foundation. That's $56,375.00 per year or 1,199.47 per person per year before the electric bill is paid.

Richard Lindzen is one of 32 associated with the Annapolis Center for Science-Based Public Policy. In the last 12 years ExxonMobil has funded 1,048,500.00 to the Annapolis Center for Science-Based Public Policy. That's $87,375.00 per year or 2,730.47 per person per year without accounting for the mortgage of the building.

David H Douglass. I find no link between Douglass and ExxonMobil.

The fourth link claims that every dime Koch Industries donates is related to climate denial. It is simply an absurd claim and warrants no further comments.

The 2007 IPCC meeting in Bali hosted over 1,000 “experts” and God knows how many others. The local airport was so crowded that they had to park private / chartered jets at other airports. How much do you think that cost?

[jimlup]

3. We can fight back - I for one plan to buy Mann's book /nt

[kristopher]

8. Sounds like the same tactic the nuclear lobby uses.

They are organized to swarm unfavorable information anywhere on the internet or the print media and attempt to dominate discussion. Dialogue and truth are irrelevant, it is all about the messaging.

[txlibdem]

9. You've got it backwards: those are ANC tactics

"They are organized to swarm unfavorable information anywhere on the internet or the print media and attempt to dominate discussion. Dialogue and truth are irrelevant, it is all about the messaging."

These are the tactics of the Anti-Nuclear Cult.

[kristopher]

10. No, that's the ANS you're thinking of.

The American Nuclear Society, that is. It is a prototypical astroturf effort designed and funded by the public relations specialists in an unpopular industry seeking corporate welfare.

How the nuclear industry uses its bloggers network to lie to the public
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=115x316695

Supporting Links for OP (sorry for the extreme length)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=115x316695

[txlibdem]

12. I don't need links, just your own posting history

and that of those of your followers attached firmly to your hind end.

Attempting to change history and point fingers will not change your posting history.

Anti Nuclear Cult is always wrong. Instead of clean zero carbon nuclear they gave us coal, Fracking natural gas, global climate change, the current species mass extinctions, and possible human extinction as well. Way to go guys!

[Nihil]

11. Or the natural gas lobby ...

> They are organized to swarm unfavorable information anywhere on
> the internet or the print media and attempt to dominate discussion.
> Dialogue and truth are irrelevant, it is all about the messaging.

[Dead_Parrot]

15. Ahh, dialogue.

I do not think that means what you think it means.
http://www.google.com/#q=%22DOI%3A+10.1039%2Fb809990c%22+site%3Ademocraticunderground.com

[muriel_volestrangler]

17. WUWT organising rapid trashing of new science writing? Say it ain't so, Joe

Joe Bast is the President and CEO of the Heartland Institute, a right wing “think” tank in Chicago that has been the prime mover behind major disinformation initiatives on both global climate and tobacco dangers.
...
We’re going to be finding out a lot more about the Heartland Institute and their operations in coming weeks and months, thanks to an anonymous whistleblower who, on Valentine’s Day, opened a gmail account, sent a bundle of damning internal documents to key climate bloggers and researchers around the country, then closed the account and disappeared.
...
One key document discussed plans to control information for key audiences in the business community -

Heartland plays an important role in climate communications, especially through our in-house experts (e.g., Taylor) through his Forbes blog and related high profile outlets, our conferences,and through coordination with external networks (such as WUWT and other groups capable of rapidly mobilizing responses to new scientific findings, news stories, or unfavorable blog posts). Efforts at places such as Forbes are especially important now that they have begun to allow high-profile climate scientists (such as Gleick) to post warmist science essays that counter our own. This influential audience has usually been reliably anti-climate and it is important to keep opposing voices out.

...

Efforts might also include cultivating more neutral voices with big audiences (such as Revkin at DotEarth/NYTimes, who has a well-known antipathy for some of the more extreme AGW communicators such as Rornm, Trenberth, and Hansen) or [climate scientist Judith] Curry (who has become popular with our supporters). AVe have also pledged to help raise around $90,000 in 2012 for Anthony Watts to help him create a new website to track temperature station data.

http://climatecrocks.com/2012/02/15/how-is-joe-bast-like-joe-camel-looks-like-were-going-to-find-out/