Rebuttal to the attack on Dr. Don Easterbrook

[author’s note: this article was originally submitted as a “letter to the editor” to the Bellingham Herald, a newspaper that published an attack on Dr. Don Easterbrook. The Herald refused to publish my rebuttal. The executive editor, July Shirley (julie.shirley@bellinghamherald.com) explained “We only print letters from residents of Whatcom County. We are not publishing your letter.”]

Letter to the Editor by Dr. David Deming

I write in rebuttal to the March 31 letter by WWU geology faculty criticizing Dr. Don Easterbrook. I have a Ph.D in geophysics and have published research papers on climate change in the peer-reviewed scientific literature. In 2006 I testified before the US Senate on global warming. Additionally, I am the author of a three-volume history of science.

I have never met Don Easterbrook. I write not so much to defend him as to expose the ignorance exhibited in the letter authored by WWU geology faculty. Their attack on Dr. Easterbrook is the most egregious example of pedantic buffoonery since the Pigeon League conspired against Galileo in the seventeenth century. Skepticism is essential to science. But the goal of the geology faculty at WWU seems to be to suppress critical inquiry and insist on dogmatic adherence to ideology.

The WWU faculty never defined the term “global warming” but described it as “very real,” as if it were possible for something to be more real than real. They claimed that the evidence in support of this “very real” global warming was “overwhelming.” Yet they could not find space in their letter to cite a single specific fact that supports their thesis.

There is significant evidence that would tend to falsify global warming. The mean global air temperature has not risen for the last fifteen years. At the end of March the global extent of sea ice was above the long-term average and higher than it was in March of 1980. Last December, snow cover in the northern hemisphere was at the highest level since record keeping began in 1966. The UK just experienced the coldest March of the last fifty years. There has been no increase in droughts or wildfires. Worldwide hurricane and cyclone activity is near a forty-year low.

One might think that the foregoing facts would raise doubts in scientists interested in pursuing objective truth. But global warming is not so much a scientific theory subject to empirical falsification as it is a political ideology that must be fiercely defended in defiance of every fact to the contrary. In the past few years we have been told that not only hot weather but cold weather is caused by global warming. The blizzards that struck the east coast of the US in 2010 were attributed to global warming. Every weather event–hot, cold, wet or dry–is said to be caused by global warming. The theory that explains everything explains nothing.

Among the gems in the endless litany of nonsense we are subjected to are claims that global warming causes earthquakes, tsunamis and volcanic eruptions. Last year we were warned that global warming would turn us all into hobbits, the mythical creatures from J. R. R. Tolkien’s novels. I am not aware of any member of the WWU geology faculty criticizing these ridiculous claims. Their vehemence seems to be reserved for honest skeptics like Dr. Easterbrook who advance science by asking hard questions.

At the heart of the WWU geology faculty criticisms was the claim that peer review creates objective and reliable knowledge. Nonsense. Peer review produces opinions. Scientists, like other people, have political beliefs, ideological orientations, and personal views that strain their scientific objectivity. One of the most disgusting things to emerge from the 2009 Climategate emails was the revelation of an attempt to subvert the peer-review process by suppressing the publication of work that was scientifically sound but contrary to the reviewer’s personal views.

The infamous phrase “hide the decline” refers to an instance where a global warming alarmist omitted data that contradicted his personal belief that the world was warming. This sort of bias is not limited but pervasive. Neither is science a foolproof method for producing absolute truth. Scientific knowledge is always tentative and subject to revision. The entire history of science is littered with discarded theories once thought to be incontrovertible truths.

The WWU geology faculty letter asserted that technological advances arise from application of the scientific method. They claimed that airplanes were invented by scientists. But the Wright brothers were bicycle mechanics–not scientists. The modern age of personal computing began in a suburban California garage in 1976. The most significant technological advance in human history was the Industrial Revolution in Britain that occurred from 1760 through 1830. When Adam Smith toured factories and inquired as to who had invented the new machinery, the answer was always the same: the common workman. Antibiotics were not discovered through the rigorous application of scientific methodology but serendipitously when Fleming noticed in 1928 that mold suppressed bacterial growth.

Dr. Easterbrook’s contributions have furthered the advance of scientific knowledge and the progress of the human race. It matters not if a multitude of professors oppose him. As Galileo explained, it is “certain that the number of those who reason well in difficult matters is much smaller than the number of those who reason badly….reasoning is like running and not like carrying, and one Arab steed will outrun a hundred jackasses.”

David Deming

Professor of Arts & Sciences

University of Oklahoma

email: ddeming [at] ou.edu

==============================================================

A list of Dr. Easterbrook’s credentials are listed here:

http://myweb.wwu.edu/dbunny/dje_cv.html

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
0 0 votes
Article Rating
129 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
JeffC
April 8, 2013 6:38 am

your mistake is trying to reason with people that have come to their beliefs thru faith and not thru reason …

Mike Bromley the Canucklehead in Switzerland
April 8, 2013 6:48 am

Apparently Whatcom County has all of what it needs. A gossipy klatsch of nonsensologists and a compliant gatekeeper over at the newspaper. A nonsensus.

Madman2001
April 8, 2013 6:50 am

Masterful !!
When I respond to these sort of “the science is settled” arguments, I also ask “What would, in your opinion, falsify the theory of anthropogenic global warming?” I have yet to receive an answer from any commenter.

Josh C
April 8, 2013 6:53 am

Last year I lived in Bellingham. When I sat down to some coffee with a very nice young woman who worked for the Herald, I asked her point blank “How does it feel to work in a dying industry?”
The Herald building is mostly empty, and for rent. The Herald may move out per rumors, after a good near 100 year run, and almost 90 in that building. It is owned and ran by the McClatchy corporation out of Sacramento, CA. The paper is currently printed in the county south of the Herald, which is a tad more conservative, and hence, profitable. When I had a event where there was a 1.2 million gallon water leak in my front yard the Herald wrote 3/4 of the article about how our drinking water could damage the local fish in the creek, and not one word about the local property damage, (over a local small block of water leakage, a rather large hole in the ground, etc.) the excellent response by the Whatcom Water Department, (my yard was fixed and replaced with new seed within 12 hours of fixing the leak) or anything.
The Herald is a biased paper in a biased town which I loved, but was an outcast in. I never had the chance to meet Dr. Don Easterbrook, but I wish I had.

geran
April 8, 2013 7:03 am

What a great letter Dr. Deming!
The Herald response—“We only print letters from residents of Whatcom County. We are not publishing your letter”—prompted two thoughts:
1) What ever happened to “we’re all on the same planet”?
2) This is more of “circle the wagons”.

ChootemLiz
April 8, 2013 7:06 am

“We only print letters from residents of Whatcom County. We are not publishing your letter.”
Shifty Shirley must be regretting writing that in an email. She’s probably drawing up a list of caveats as we speak.

jc
April 8, 2013 7:07 am

A good letter. With the right mix of facts and tone of passionate contempt. This is the sort of communication needed. A dry exposition based on the traditional expectation that people will pause and consider is no longer relevant to this “debate”. Certain facts are readily apparent; a reluctance to meet them can only engender contempt.
Time to stop pretending that the promoters and zealots in this, with their compliant media, are doing anything other than maintaining and advancing their interests by whatever means they can.

Peter Stroud
April 8, 2013 7:12 am

I find it incredible that the AGW alarmists still retain any credence when they ignore the increasing wealth of Internationally accepted empirical data, and continue to spout their mantras. It can only be a couple of years ago when even the most faithful CAGW fanatic dismissed out of hand, that AGW resulted in increases in exceptional weather. Now every unpleasant weather pattern is down to mankind’s use of carbon.

Louis Hooffstetter
April 8, 2013 7:13 am

In their letter, the authors say: “…people of the state of Washington need to understand that Easterbrook’s ideas on anthropogenic global warming have not passed through rigorous peer review in the scientific literature.”
Complete BS: A 15 page list of Dr. Easterbrook’s publications can be found here:
http://myweb.wwu.edu/dbunny/pdfs/dje_publications.pdf
The truth is that the theory of anthropogenic global warming has simply not passed the test of time.
As a geologist, I am ashamed of the twelve Ph.D geologists who signed this letter.

Mike McMillan
April 8, 2013 7:18 am

While we’re on the subject of attacks, the Wikipedia page on Joe Bastardi has some inappropriate paragraphs that someone stuck in:
According to Media Matters,
“Bastardi is a weather forecaster, not a climate researcher, has made inaccurate claims about climate science on multiple occasions and is not seen by experts as a credible source of climate information.”[17]
Bastardi has repeatedly misinformed Fox News’s viewers with claims that are “completely wrong, scientifically incorrect, and nonsense.”[18]

I’m not Wki-savvy enough to try correcting this, but I’m sure others here know what to do.

hum
April 8, 2013 7:29 am

Dr. Deming, you need to follow this up and send it to WWU Admin and Geology department.

Ufb
April 8, 2013 7:30 am

I want to be a hobbit

JT
April 8, 2013 7:43 am

Mike Bromley, “A nonsensus”. Thank you for a fine new word which I shall treasure in my vocabulary!

cd
April 8, 2013 7:45 am

Dr DD
I loved this piece. I read the WWU statement and was shocked by how many of Easterbrook’s colleagues were willing to sign what amounted to a declaration of absolute truth. As far as I remember, when reading the statement, I could not find one point that actually challenged Easterbrook with argument. In short the statement was based on dogma.
I feel for him if this the sort of unfounded derision he faces everyday.

April 8, 2013 7:45 am

“We only print letters from residents of Whatcom County. We are not publishing your letter.”
I’ll bet that the statement isn’t even true. Someone should check. It would probably takes minutes to prove her to be a liar. I would check myself, but I don’t have the credentials of our esteemed editor.
REPLY: I already did, scanning the letters to the editor section for the last month. It seems they adhere to that policy – Anthony

Psalmon
April 8, 2013 7:46 am

Sad all these WWU doctorates of this and that masquerading as scientists when they really are just political activists now reverting to schoolyard bullying, trying to silence everyone, scrambling to save their crumbling religion. What a waste of talent.

Steve Keohane
April 8, 2013 7:47 am

WWU’s integrity is on the same curve as Marcott’s Holocene graph.

kim
April 8, 2013 7:50 am

Poor thing. She buys squid ink by the barrel and regrets electrons running loose if not free.
==================

Thom
April 8, 2013 7:50 am

I will steal this line Mr. Deming: “The theory that explains everything explains nothing.”

Chris B
April 8, 2013 7:51 am

“……and one Arab steed will outrun a hundred jackasses.”
Too bad he hadn’t said 97. LOL

Caleb
April 8, 2013 7:53 am

Well written. Well thought out. And well aimed.
These gatekeeper editors need to be embarrassed. Not just once, but over and over again. Often it is not a single blow that cracks a foundation of falsehood, but rather a steady tap-tap-tapping of truth.

Skiphil
April 8, 2013 7:53 am

Re: ” “We only print letters from residents of Whatcom County. We are not publishing your letter.”]
Someone might want to review past letters in that paper to see if the claim of locals-only is true or not. Many local papers give priority to local writers and issues, but is there really a policy that they will not print a letter from outside the county, no matter how momentous the issue? If Al Gore or Jimmy Carter sent them a letter would they really decline to publish it? (I realize that comparison introduces further issues of the estimated eminence of a letter writer, but I’d be surprised if they’d really had this policy in the past.)

Dodgy Geezer
April 8, 2013 7:56 am

…They claimed that airplanes were invented by scientists. But the Wright brothers were bicycle mechanics–not scientists….
Um. Aeroplanes WERE invented by scientists. In particular by Sir George Cayley (1773-1857). He developed all the principles, both of flight and control, and built the first man-carrying heavier-than-air aircraft. Many later builds were by engineers and mechanics – gifted, certainly, and their craft were much more practical. But the principles were Cayley’s…
I’m not sure where this paragraph is going. The scientific method IS a major means of understanding the world. The two points to make about it are:
1 – ANYONE can apply the scientific method. When they do, they are being ‘scientists’. While training obviously helps, there is no such thing as a restricted class of people who are ‘allowed’ to be scientists.
2 – The Climate Warmists are NOT applying the scientific method, and therefore cannot claim to be ‘scientists’ – no matter what their qualifications are…

provoter
April 8, 2013 7:59 am

A well written rebuttal, but with one caveat: the global sea ice extent graph linked to in the letter shows a moderate decline since about 2001/2002, and the modest uptick of the moment is as of now just that – a modest (and potentially brief) uptick. I think that to say, “At the end of March the global extent of sea ice was above the long-term average and higher than it was in March of 1980,” is incautious in a way that provides an opening, however narrow, for those who would seek to discredit (no shortage there, I’m sure we can all agree) views such as those expressed in the letter. They can use such an opening to use this one flaw (and it is a flaw) as a springboard to characterize the entire letter as mendacious. Had the letter actually been published, the rebuttals to the rebuttal would have had a field day over this one little item, painting all non-alarmists as charlatans desperate to hang their hat on anything. This is how the game is played; I don’t think anyone here needs this explained.
A less bold characterization of the graph (the alternatives are many) would carry all the same positives, but without the negatives. The facts are not on the side of the hysteria-mongers. Why give ’em freebies?

provoter
April 8, 2013 8:00 am

Should’ve posted the link to the global sea ice extent graph…
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/global.daily.ice.area.withtrend.jpg

1 2 3 6