Time to cull the prat nominations.

Gowon. Let's in. It's bloody freezing out here.

I think it’s time to close off the first round of voting, since the viable candidates are by now obvious. People have really stuck to the letter of the law and voted for prats who’ve been very active this year. The front-runner, polling twice as many votes as anyone else, is Peter Gleick. Since he is both a prat and a self-confessed criminal, it seems appropriate and one can only hope that he’s the first of many alarmists lawyering up to prevent a little stay in that big house upriver. At the moment, he looks to be a very strong contender for climate prat of the year but there’s still three months to go, so we’ll see.

Some of the more predictable nominations, such as Al Gore, have attracted remarkably few votes. I suppose it reflects the perception of them as being yesterday’s men, no longer worth wasting a precious vote on. I had high hopes of Michael Mann being in the top five but again, he attracted surprisingly few votes. Apart from threatening to sue anything that moved, he’s been quiet this year. If he’d won it, I was sort of looking forward to hearing from his attorneys so I could write a nice simple two-word blog piece, to wit, fuck off – if you’ll forgive the word play.

Greg Laden didn’t get nominated, which was another surprise. I thoroughly enjoyed the unbelievable antics over at his place, on the piece he wrote about l’affaire Tallbloke. His frantic re-edits and gyrations to dodge a legal suit were so hilarious and yet at the same time, so transparently pathetic, that in the end, even his fellow alarmists were giving him hell. What a toe-curling embarrassment he was for the lot of them. Never mind Greg, given your nature, I’m sure there’ll be a next time, unless your carer has forbidden you from blogging any more.

The only person who didn’t get a single vote, was Louise “barking” Gray of the Telegraph. Too small a fish I think but to be fair to her, there was a slight programming problem. On the voting form, she appeared under the name Ian Chubb, whom nobody appears to have heard of. Harry is still working on that bug but after two weeks, still no sign of a fix. I’m beginning to have some serious doubts about the bloke.

There are even rumours from afar of people being able to vote several times, but even if such a “feature” existed in the polling software, I think climate realists have too good a sense of fair play to take advantage of it. Harry’s looking into it and the password protected README file is getting bigger by the day. I’d love to see what’s in that file. I really should have done a more thorough background check on him, but I suppose it’s a case of you get what you pay for.

The top five contenders are Gleick, Flannery, Bono, Hansen and Oreskes, so geographically we’re looking at three Americans, one Australian and one of the more embarrassing sons of Erin, whose tax arrangements do call into question his committment to the “big society.” He believes in it but would rather not help to finance it by paying his fair share of taxes; everyone else in Ireland gets to do that. While his credentials as a climate prat are not in doubt, he’s very much an all-rounder prat. On any topic he pontificates about, he’s a complete prat. It’d be much better if it had been someone who specialised in just climate prattishness but the voters have spoken.

He’s not exactly famous outside Australia, but Prof. Tim Flannery is their climate commissar, one of whose many claims to pratitude, was suggesting that teeth with fillings should be yanked out of the mouths of the dead, to save the world from Mercury poisoning. Thank goodness he’s on the alarmist side. I don’t think I could cope with having an ally like that on ours. He definitely a 24 carat prat, which probably accounts for him being the closest one behind Gleick.

James Hansen, of course, is world-famous and deservedly so. He’s spent his whole career predicting various Armageddons, none of which have actually materialised but there’s simply no stopping the man. In point of fact, he’s becoming even more alarmist by the day. While I deeply appreciate the damage he does to the credibility of climate alarmism, I feel he’s somehow broken clean through the upper stratospheric prat barrier, and can only now be regarded as something of a cross between a clown and a deranged person. If anyone out there decides to run a Climate Loony of the Year Award, he’d be the perfect exemplar.

Naomi Oreskes is that strange creature called a science historian, who appears to know very little about science, by which I do mean the basics. Things like you’ve actually got to test theories rather than just believe in them. She’s published a string of books that are a wonder to read if you’re a connoisseur of broken logic, poor research, vagueness, non sequiturs and to my mind, rather obvious hatchet jobs on notable climate realists. From my viewpoint, they represent the triumph of spin over fact, assumption over certainty and shadow over substance.

None of them are politicians but the person currently in sixth place, the Australian PM Julia Gillard, certainly is, if you’re prepared to overlook her pure political ineptitude, so I’m going to amend the rules to allow six finalists. There simply must be a politician represented in the finals. Although this gives Oz two people in the running, she’s just such a fundamentally sickening politician, I can’t resist giving her some grief. She’s up for re-election next year and I think of it as me doing my modest part in damaging what’s left of her already bleak prospects.

Most surprisingly, none of the UK nominees polled very well but they’ve all gone very quiet about the climate of late; they’ve got bigger worries, what with the economy and nagging the Germans to keep the Euro alive. Speaking of Germans, not one was even nominated. After this coming Winter of blackouts, soaring utility bills and people sitting freezing in unheated homes, I rather suspect next year’s Pratties will have more than a few nominees from the land of the Nibelungen.

Given such a number and rich variety of prats to choose from, I appreciate how difficult a task it has been for the voter, but on the whole, I think we’ve ended up with a fairly representative selection, including even a celebrity prat.

Now that we’ve narrowed the selection down to six finalists, the only remaining thing to do is come up with some sort of prize. Money looks to be out of the question, not even the Koch brothers are interested in kicking in any dough. However, there have been some great suggestions, ranging from a photostat of a 50 trillion-dollar Zimbabwean banknote, to the absolutely brilliant idea of a graphic of a Polar bear in a polka dot bikini. Anybody out there fancy a go at doing the Polar bear? Fen? Josh?

If all else fails, plan B is still the supermarket coupons, which reminds me, I’ve still got to check their expiry dates.

Since we’re not exactly doing a Diamond Jim Brady on the prize money front, we should really try to make up for it with a nicely worded presentation scroll. You know the sort of thing – presented to blah de blah in grateful recognition of their efforts in the advancement of whatever. That one I can handle myself but if anyone wants a try at doing it, feel free to drop it here as a comment, but please, restrain yourself with the wording.

At this point, I suppose I must offer my reluctant commiseration to the nominees who failed to make the final cut, but I’d remind them there’s always next year. I’d also remind people, that while the six finalists look solid, there’s still the option, at any point, of replacing the lowest scorer with the name of an exceptionally gifted prat, who’s decided to make a late dash for the winning tape. It could be one of the old nominees or even a hitherto completely unknown prat, who’s just committed an absolutely weapons-grade act of totally inspired prattishness. To borrow a phrase from the immortal Del Boy Trotter, it’ll have to be a blinder though. We’ll call that the Blinder Prat option.

I’ve been avoiding discussion of the thorny subject of tactical voting, but in all conscience, I feel honour bound to touch upon it. Obviously, for any of the countries with a finalist in contention, the prospect of your representative actually carrying away the Climate Prat of the Year Award can’t be pleasant. The temptation to vote for a foreign prat, just to avoid that dubious honour, will be strong. Please don’t do this; vote according to your conscience and to hell with purely nationalistic considerations.

Well, that’s the cull done but I’m obliged by the rules of the Prat Humane Society, to declare that no prats were actually physically harmed during it. The rules, of course, don’t cover their egos, since there’s nothing big enough to cover the egos of the likes of Mann and Muller, who I am pleased to see, have been having a jolly good go at each other lately. The clash is strangely reminiscent of the immovable and unstoppable objects paradox, in a dwarf versus midget sort of way.

We’re on the home straight, so nothing else remains to be said, except keep voting and may the best prat win.

©Pointman

Related articles by Pointman:

Announcing the inaugural Climate Prat of the Year Award.

Climate Alarmism and The Prat Principle.

Click for a list of other articles.

Comments
45 Responses to “Time to cull the prat nominations.”
  1. meltemian says:

    Do we get to vote again if our previous selection is now out of the running?

  2. Blackswan says:

    Pointman,

    Good to know the Ecoprat awards are flexible enough to include Ms Julia Eileen Gillard – she is SO deserving of inclusion – and her credentials for rating as a world-class fraudster are impeccable.

    Just this week a formal complaint has been lodged with the Legal Services Commissioner, the state of Victoria’s legal regulator, containing “allegations of unprofessional conduct / professional misconduct by the current Prime Minister of Australia Julia Eileen Gillard during the course of her employment in the 1990s as a senior solicitor – possibly even a salaried partner – with ASX Listed corporation and law firm Slater and Gordon.”

    Now, if such an august body finds she is not a person who has conducted herself in a professional and trustworthy manner, then I can only assume that her credibility in inflicting this nation with her loathesome carbon tax will be all shot to bits.

    As one blogger observed today – “If Gillard’s own legal partners and peers decided she was unfit to practice law then, why did the Labor Party EVER think she was fit to be Prime Minister?”

    Maybe if the truth of her character is finally revealed, her choice of Climate Commissioner will be also seen as worthless and the Flim Flam Man will be sent packing back to his musty old bones in the paleontology dungeons of some university campus.

    We live in hope.

  3. Martin Clark says:

    Perhaps the Climate Prat Award needs to be expanded to a round of national or at least regional awards?
    I guess by weight of numbers it looks like Gleick is likely to win. As far as I am aware, he is at least a relatively new kid on the block? May turn out to be a “One Hit Wonder” of course.

    Hansen & Flannery would have deserved nomination for any year of the last ten or so. and the others have been around for a while.

    Another suggestion: In line with the whole “per capita emissions” thing, we need some data on per capita climate prats, so we can determine where the “Prat Hotspots” are.

    I would have liked to nominate Stephan Lewandowsky, who is a leading abuser of climate skeptics here in Australia. He is a psychologist who researches “The effects of time on memory; dynamic models of short-term and working memory; individual differences in categorization.” Eg he studies how people’s brains work.

    We need some adjuncts to those old maxims such as “a psychiatrist treats their own problems in other people”, “a shoemaker’s children go barefoot” etc.

  4. Senex Bibax says:

    I wish to nominate Dalton McGuinty, Premier of the Province of Ontario, Canada, for his absurd Green Energy Program, paying rent-seeking wind energy companies (with ties to his own Liberal Party) massive premiums for their “clean” electricity, not to mention the thousands of ficticious “green” jobs this was supposed to create.

  5. Heggs says:

    Oh come on Pointman, it’s very hard to pick which one is the biggest prat in that list!

  6. Peter Crawford says:

    I think it may be too early to eliminate Michael Mann from the list. He may be the one who makes the last ditch bid for glory if his profoundly prattish lawsuit against NRO/ Mark Steyn goes ahead before the year is out. He may yet achieve the mother of all prat-falls. Let’s hope so.
    By the way, here in Old North Wales we have certainly heard of Tim Flannery. I often show the clip of him urging humans to ” evolve a sort of hive mind” while his eyeballs vibrate and smoke comes out of his ears to friends. ‘Who is this f***ing prat ?’ they ask and I gently explain.

  7. siliggy says:

    Is it politically correct to pick on the environmentally challenged like this? It may be possible to rehabilitate some of them from this enviromental disorder. Who knows their silly actons and statements may save us all from lining up to have our teeth pulled out to stop tooth enamel from causing global cooling. Now that enviromental illnes is easier to diagnose.

  8. trucker bob says:

    Gleick’s fraud and then exoneration tops my list for gold, the rest can all share the silver equally.

  9. ian Hilliar says:

    Really, you people should not poke fun at Professor Flannery,: he has only this year been inducted as a fellow of the Australian Academy of Scientists. As a matter of fact , theRoyal Society has this year inducted Paul Ehrlich as a Fellow. Garth Paltridge discussed what government money had done to the scientific bodies in his delightful book in 2009. they must be pilloried and parodied, as the one thing self important people cannot stomach is ridicule.

  10. G. Combs says:

    Boy what a hard choice, but I think my choice narrow to between Peter Gleick and Tim Flannery however the yanking teeth from the dead edges out Peter Gleick’s idocy regarding Heartland.

    Pointman
    May I suggest you let those at WUWT know about this vote?

    BTW I really love the polar bear photo.

    • trucker bob says:

      “however the yanking teeth from the dead edges out Peter Gleick’s idocy regarding Heartland.”

      A point well made🙂

      • Blackswan says:

        Bob, Flim Flammery was keen to point out that the “yanking” could be done with a pair of $2 pliers. Good that he has an eye for keeping expenses down. After all, we wouldn’t want to waste taxpayer funding would we?

  11. Ilma630 says:

    How on earth did Bill McKibben of 350.org fail to make the list?

  12. Chuck Nolan says:

    Martin Clark says:
    August 31, 2012 at 1:41 pm
    ————–
    Martin, although I agree in principle on Hansen I believe he should be held over for the “lifetime achievement award” in a few years.
    cn

  13. Streetcred says:

    Glieck must surely be the ‘All American’ Prat of the Year … maybe for years to come … http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/09/01/peter-gleick-makes-a-complete-fool-of-himself-again/

    • gregole says:

      With this move Gleick is pulling ahead of the pack – and I thought he was laying low.

    • Streetcred says:

      … and then completely out of left field comes this Lewandowsky prat … what are we to do ?

    • Pointman says:

      They’re all prats, which is what makes picking out a King Prat so difficult. Lewandowsky’s cockup is impressive, but I don’t think it’s good enough to let him into the voting via the blinder option.

      Pointman

      • NoFixedAddress says:

        Ahhhh….come on Pointman….

        Lewandowsky at least deserves a chance….

        If you look at it from the point of view that it will reinforce his “research” we should at least get him up to contender for the 2013 awards…

      • Pointman says:

        Okay NoFixedAddress, by virtue of the blinder prat option Lewandowsky replaces Bono, who hasn’t attracted many votes lately. This does of course mean getting Harry to make the change, so don’t hold your breath.

        Pointman

  14. Mindert Eiting says:

    Regarding the prize, I think about the first British novel published in the eighteenth or seventeenth century. I have forgotten the name of the subject but it is something like ‘Phil Jones, his life and his opinions’. Perhaps someone knows the correct title.

  15. Pointman says:

    Hello and welcome Martin Clark, Senex Bibax, siliggy, trucker bob, ian Hilliar, Ilma630, Seele, Chuck Nolan, Adam Gallon and Streetcred. Enjoy yourselves here.

    Pointman

  16. Skiphil says:

    Heh heh…. I had to vote for Jula Gillard, because with her policies and as a head of state, she has to be considered more significant in a sad perverse way. Still, all are (un)worthy contenders, Gleick is unredeemed scum and Lewandowsky is coming on strong.

    I have proposed at Bishop Hill some regular award named for Lewandowsky, to be based upon some concept of “Lewandowsky Complex” or “Lewandowsky Effect” i.e., I think a distinction sould be made for those combining especially virulent self-importance, grandiosity, and utter inability to fairly consider criticism or other points of view.

    For sure that applies to so many in the climate policy worlds, but I think that Lewandowsky is proving worthy of some special acknowledgement…. particularly since he is supposed to be in psychology yet displays such abysmal insight and self knowledge….. I know academic psychologists are among the most ignorant about actual psychology but still….

  17. zbcustom says:

    How come Lewandowskly has gone from 526 votes on Monday down to 91 votes today. He certainly deserves to be on the podium.
    Today’s voting totals with Monday’s in parenthesis
    Gleick 710 (205)
    Flannery 555 (508)
    Gillard 517 (697)
    Hansen 220 (86)
    Oreskes 195 (192)
    Lewandowsky 91 (526)

    • Pointman says:

      Hello zbcustom. See update 4 on the original announcement piece. Voting irregularities over the weekend, I’m afraid.

      Pointman

      • Hector Pascal says:

        Dodgy statistics. A gamed poll. There could be a paper in this. Have you thought about writing it up? Nature, or Psychology Now! would be certain to publish, as long as you come up with the correct conclusions.

      • Pointman says:

        I’m strongly tempted Hector. Should I decide to write a monograph, would you mind if I refer them them to you as a referee? It appeals to the devil in me.

        Pointman

      • NoFixedAddress says:

        PratGate.

        This is just like ‘science’.

        All we need now is a consensus from 97% of voters.

        Hockey sticks falling over everywhere.

  18. Heggs says:

    Joke I found on the ‘net, thought you might get a giggle.

    Polar Bear family hanging out on an ice flow after dinner.
    Young Bear to sister: Am I a Polar Bear?
    Sister: Of course you are silly!
    Young bear to mother: Ma, am I a Polar Bear?
    Mother bear: Yes son you are, just like your dad!
    Young bear to father: Dad am I a polar bear?
    Father bear: What type of question is that, of course you’re a polar bear. Why all the questions?
    Young Bear: Because I’m Fu@king freezing!

  19. DP111 says:

    Professor Flannery – Organismic and Evolutionary Biology.

    Richard Dawkins – evolutionary biologist.

    Why do evolutionary biologists evolve to prats? Or is that they start life as prats, grow up to become EBs, then back to prats.

  20. Annabelle says:

    Stephan Lewandowsky really deserves a few more votes. The staggering incompetence and uselessness of his research combined with his planet-saving self-righteousness is a winner IMO.

    • Ilma says:

      I don’t know about ‘Hickey Stick’ Mann being quiet, he’s just made an enormous prat of himself with his now provenly false claim of being a Nobel prize winner on a court document.

    • Pointman says:

      Mann has played the blinder prat option brilliantly. He’s back in the running !

      Pointman

  21. Mrmethane says:

    National prat lists anyone? I think the nomination form should encapsulate some background including bio and the prat-tle that serves as their most poignant quote. Should be a point-form (Pointman, can you help?) checklist or maybe even 1-5 points in each category of prattishness, such as hubris, arrogance, ignorance, factual error and dishonesty. Glieck would probably still be up there, no?

  22. gnomish says:

    Far from civilization, deep in the swamps, the epic pratfall doth resound.
    The freight train roar of a cat 5 storm is dwarfed and muted by the sound.
    Tis the Prat of Ages, the Messiah of Manniacal Eponymy.
    Whose shadow is so long it darkens the dawn.
    The epitome of intellectual economy
    His name commands a silent hush of awe in every nation.
    The very Archetype of Parkinson’s Law, severe and profound, his reputation.
    In all recorded history there can be but one with such a stature.
    What a piece of work is Mann! – a mytery; a trick of nature.

  23. Chuck Nolan says:

    Prat decisions.
    Honestly, I was liking Gleik but, wisely I believe, withheld my vote, not wishing to go off half cocked or with half a load of ammo. I am now glad I waited. It seems Dr Mann has stepped forward with more pratishness than I’ve seen in some time. At least Gleik admitted he acted wrongly. I can now vote for My Man Mann as the Man Who Can.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: