Watt about the book burning?

Does anyone know if the book burning at San Jose State University, that Watts Up With That (WUWT) is so up-in-arms about, actually happened. The only image I can find is of someone holding a match below a copy of the book, but no evidence that they actually burned the book. I can’t imagine that they actually set fire to the book in their office, but maybe I’m wrong. The only stupid thing they did, as far as I can tell, is not realise that posting such a photo would rile climate skeptics and get them to moralise about the values associated with burning books. Of course, it would almost certainly result in them violating Godwin’s Law which should then reduce the credibility of anything they said, so maybe it was a clever double bluff!

This entry was posted in Anthony Watts, Climate change, Global warming, Watts Up With That and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Watt about the book burning?

  1. Rachel says:

    I don’t think it was a very smart move from those two at San Jose State University. But it pales in comparison to some of the stuff coming out from the denier camp, like calls to have climate scientists charged in court with punishment by death. That was supposedly not offensive because it was a joke. Well I’m guessing this was also a joke.

  2. Yes, I don’t really like using the “it was a joke” argument because I’ve seen it used by those who are clearly being offensive. It was rather stupid to pretend to burn a book, but they can’t really be criticised for burning a book if they didn’t actually burn a book. They should probably have known better though. It seems fairly obvious that the response would have been quite extreme and that they would be attacked by those who think that this book is somehow contributing to the debate and that, by pretending to burn it, they’re then proving their lack of objectivity.

  3. (Coming from someone who has had his books burned and banned… )

    I’ll just say this. Those doing the book burning are mostly in the denier camp. All this nonsense appears to have been staged for PR/agitation purposes.

  4. Yes, I would certainly agree. It all seemed rather hysterical. What books have you had burned and banned?

  5. Since 2005, I’ve published progressively themed fantasy for teens (http://www.amazon.com/Luthiels-Song-Dreams-Ringed-ebook/dp/B002E19K9A/ref=tmm_kin_title_0/189-8399229-6009446). The books elevate female characters in heroic roles, promote acceptance of veganism, and portray dominionist and objectivist theory as narcissistic, tragic, and ultimately twisted.

    The books were banned from three public schools in Georgia for ‘inappropriate content’ and I’ve received numerous letters from students who disagree with both the content and character of the novels and claim to have burned them.

    Now if I were seeking to play the victim, as the character on this Watts blog seems to, I would hire a publicist and proclaim to all the world that Nazis are building pyres in which to incinerate my works. For clearly the Watts blog is attempting to gain sympathy from uninformed people while at the same time trying to demonize anyone concerned about climate change by evoking them in such a light.

    Clearly the blog has shifted from mangling climate science to outright demonization of the opposing view-point. A sad, but not unexpected, turn.

  6. Interesting, those seem like the kind of books my daughter would quite enjoy.

    As far as WUWT is concerned, it does seem remarkably extreme. I hadn’t really been following it much until recently, but it is essentially what motivated me to start writing this blog. It certainly doesn’t seem possible to comment on WUWT without being attacked and so the only way to address what is said there is to write something separately.

Comments are closed.