If you want to know why Bishop Hill is one of my favourite bloggers just now, you need look no further than this delightful posting today, which I now reproduce in its entirety:
There’s a lovely anecdote doing the rounds of climate sceptic blogs about Sir David King, the climate alarmist and former chief scientific adviser to the British government.
It seems that President Putin asked some of his leading scientists to meet Sir David when he went to Moscow as part of the entourage of the foreign secretary. King apparently launched into his standard spiel about how we’re all going to fry, but was a bit taken aback when the assembled scientists told him he was talking rubbish. When they had the temerity to list all the scientific evidence which refuted his claims of impending armageddon, our man was left looking a bit of a ninny and turned on his heels and stormed out of the room.
The story is doubly interesting because it’s related by someone called RCE Wyndham in a letter in which he tells Robin Butler, the master of University College, Oxford, that the college can expect no donations from him this year because the appointment of King to head Oxford’s Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment.
The letter can be read here.
Fascinating. But then I googled Sir-David-King-Putin, and came across this, from about two months ago (you need to scroll down a bit):
Sir David King, who as the Government’s Chief Scientist played a key role in the investigation into Litvinenko’s murder, has accused the Russian president of masterminding the murder of nearly 300 of his own people in the Moscow apartment bombings in 1999, which Putin blamed on Chechen terrorists.
“I can tell you that Putin was responsible for the bombings,” Sir David claimed to Mandrake at the Morgan Stanley Great Britons Awards. “I’ve seen the evidence. There is no way that Putin would have won the election if it wasn’t for the bombings. Before them he was getting 10 per cent approval ratings. After, they shot up to 80 per cent.”
I am not sure which came first, the mass murder accusation or the environmental ambush. I think it was the ambush that began all this. But either way, they really don’t like each other, do they?
It might make a rather good play. It’s always best when appalling people fail to get on. Imagine what the world would be like if they were all on the same side. I know, I know, not that different.
“Dear President Putin,”
“Despite the lies of our government, none of us are gullible enough to believe you were responsible for the m/u/r/d/e/r/ death of the late Mr. Litvinienko.”
“Our scepticism would also extend to any similar misfortune that might befall Sir David King.”
“Yours Sincerely, etc.”
This is just the sort of stuff that thick buggers like me need to see. Something that I can understand.
Regards John Gibson
Russian skeptical in 2006. FWIW.
Cheers
One of the features of authoritarianism is that purveyors see each other as threats to be battled. It is by nature forever divided against itself.
Who is this RCE Wyndham? He writes a hell of a letter.
The odd thing is that King is right about Putin and Putin is right about King.
I have no doubt that the Moscow apartment bombings were classic black propaganda designed to get this nasty Chekist elected. A few hundred innocent people died? He’s the sort who would have gladly obeyed an order to kill a million if Beria had given it.
Well, there is an “RCE Wyndham” who was Secretary of the Board for The Sage Group, who are a fairly big supplier of business software. I cannot be sure it is him/her, but there cannot be that many people with those initials and surname.
So we have two authoritarian turds duking it out? Somebody pass the popcorn!