By Steve Goddard and Anthony Watts
They are mad, maybe not the crazy kind of mad scientist, but mad nonetheless. When people are mad, sometimes good judgment goes out the window.
The Guardian published a fascinating “open letter” from AAAS, signed by 250 biologists, anthropologists, neuroscientists, etc. in defence of climate science.
So far, it has not gone over too well. Even Andy Revkin at the NYT Dot Earth blog points out that:
“The letter has a defensive tone that hasn’t served scientists particularly well in the past…”
Revkin also notes the fact that even the AAAS deputy editor himself tried to tone it down in a companion editorial:
The scientific community must recognize that the recent attacks stem in part from its culture and scientists’ behavior.
Of course, we, the great unwashed public, can’t read either the original letter nor the editorial at AAAS, since both are hidden behind the great paywall of science. We have to rely on the Guardian and NYT to give us mere mortals snippets of wisdom issued from on high. What a great way to “get the word out” to people you are condemning. Yes, “we’ll make them pay”.
In addition to the condescending tone, the use of the d-word, and the lack of open access to an “open letter” and companion editorial, the letter was so poorly written, that we thought we would pitch in and lend them a hand. Italics are their writing. Plain text interspersed are our suggestions.
We are deeply disturbed by the recent escalation of political assaults on scientists in general and on climate scientists in particular. All citizens should understand some basic scientific facts.
A better way to word this would be : “We apologize for the bad behaviour of our colleagues, and recognize that the public is well educated and aware.
Scientific conclusions derive from an understanding of basic laws supported by laboratory experiments, observations of nature, and mathematical and computer modelling. Like all human beings, scientists make mistakes, but the scientific process is designed to find and correct them.
Should read : “We recognize that the process is broken, and we appreciate the help of the public in correcting our errors.”
And then there’s this howler.
When errors are pointed out, they are corrected.
Should read: “We recognize that a few treemometers in Yamal, and particularly tree YAD061, aren’t really representative of the global climate for the past millennium and therefore a solid basis to overturn whole economies. We’ll fix that right away.”
For instance, there is compelling scientific evidence that our planet is about 4.5bn years old (the theory of the origin of Earth), that our universe was born from a single event about 14bn years ago (the Big Bang theory), and that today’s organisms evolved from ones living in the past (the theory of evolution).
That paragraph should be cut completely. Implying that anyone who criticizes you is a “flat earther creationist” is not going to win any converts. Insulting the customer is a really poor idea.
Many recent assaults on climate science and, more disturbingly, on climate scientists by climate change deniers, are typically driven by special interests or dogma, not by an honest effort to provide an alternative theory that credibly satisfies the evidence.
Very bad idea to compare the customers, aka the referenced “all citizens”, to holocaust deniers. That is a total non-starter.
Natural causes always play a role in changing Earth’s climate, but are now being overwhelmed by human-induced changes.
Should read : “Few, if any, of us are climate scientists, but some of us did see Al Gore’s film. We talked about it over lunch.”
The planet is warming due to increased concentrations of heat-trapping gases in our atmosphere. A snowy winter in Washington does not alter this fact.
Should read : “Wow, none of knew that it was the snowiest decade on record in the Northern Hemisphere, until we read it on WUWT.”
We also call for an end to McCarthy- like threats of criminal prosecution against our colleagues based on innuendo and guilt by association, the harassment of scientists by politicians seeking distractions to avoid taking action, and the outright lies being spread about them.
Should read : “We promise to see the doctor about our paranoid delusions.”
All in all, this letter is a PR train wreck. Then there’s the signatories.
Since it is common to see the “but he/she is not a climate scientist” argument used against people that offer views differing to “the consensus”, here are the impeccable climate science credentials of the first 20 signatories :
Robert McC. Adams – Division of Social Sciences, UCSD
Richard M Amasino – Biochemist, UW Madison
Edward Anders – Geologist, University of Chicago
David J. Anderson – Biologist, Cal Tech
Luc Anselin – Geographer, ASU
Mary Kalin Arroyo – Biologist, University of Chile
Dr. Berhane Asfaw – Palaeoanthropologist, Rift Valley Research Service
FRANCISCO J. AYALA – Professor of Biological Sciences, UC Irvine
Dr. Ad Bax – Physics, NIH
Anthony Bebbington – Professor of Nature, University of Manchester
Gordon Bell – Computer Pioneer
MICHAEL VANDER LAAN BENNETT – Neuroscientist, Albert Einstein College of Medicine
Jeffrey Bennetzen – Geneticist, University of Washington
May R. Berenbaum – Entomologist, UIUC
Overton Brent Berlin – Anthropologist, University of Georgia
Pamela Bjorkman – Biologist, Cal tech
Dr. Elizabeth Blackburn – Biologist, UCSF
Jacques Blamont – Astrophysicist
Michael Botchan – Biochemistry, Berkeley
John S. Boyer – Marine Biosciences, University of Delaware
After the first 20 names, they are batting 0.000. If anyone cares to go through the rest of the list and report, please pitch in.
Again, you’re wrong. Ever get tired of this?
Actually, skepticism was wrongly characterized as a ruthless political disinformation campaign. Your claim otherwise is unsupportable and wrong. Just… wrong.
Shub Niggurath says:
May 7, 2010 at 10:59 am
istockphoto are hosting this fake polar bear picture to be used by global warming propagandists – nothing wrong in that. They couldn’t come up with a convincing real picture – as effective as the fake one – presumably because the polar bears were having animal sex and multiplying, or in other words elsewhere and busy.
What happened to the editor of the letter section, Jennifer Sills? Couldn’t she have spotted that Science was pushing the use of a fake photo to support a letter on the ‘integrity’ of science?
“To use this in a journalism piece (i.e. a magazine cover as one other member suggested) is absolutely unethical. When photos and facts are altered to suit an agenda, it is not journalism. It is propaganda and I hope no one working in in that field tries to pass this off as a legitimate image.”
What happened to due diligence, at Science Magazine?
As you say, tehre’s nothing wrong with Photoshop creative work, provided you don’t sell it as truth.
If used in Science, then it is more like fraud, or at least malice, although they will say it’s nothing but graphic design.
Some scientists may think that an area is theirs to do with as they wish. But when the area really matters, it doesn’t work that way. Medical researchers don’t get to do the work any old way they feel like it, because lives are at stake. They are required to use professional statisticians and double-blind experiments, whether they like it or not. All work must be kept, whether they like it or not. Publicly-funded scientists are required to respond to public questions, whether they like it or not. The laws of libel and slander treat public figures different from other folks, because their doings and sayings are now part of the public discussion. If we couldn’t talk about those, for fear of libel suits, we couldn’t discuss public policy.
When the area really matters, the rules change. Whether you like it or not.
mikael pihlström says:
May 7, 2010 at 12:08 pm
kcom says:
May 7, 2010 at 11:32 am
“wanted to express support for climate scientists”
It’s not their job to “express support”. It’s their job to do science. One is not the other. One is a political act. The other is science.
—
They are scientists and citizens. I am sure they do their job.
As citizens they have every right to protest against an unfair
political attack on the science.
—
Or unfair scientific attacks on politics.
Citizens protesting is politics. Consensus is politics. Your arguments are political.
@ur momisugly mikeal pihl
“The US deficit is 12 trillion dollars, caused by wars, tax cuts for the wealthy, the
Financial crisis .”
Tax cuts period. I hesitate to suggest more tax, but it may be necessary. I understand that 50% of Americans pay no Federal income tax at all. And entitlements still are increasing, the siren call of something for nothing is pulling them into the same whirlpool as Greece is in. Also, if there was more tax on automotive fuel, as in Europe, even a carbon tax, people would reduce the miles they drove, and they wouldn’t need to import so much, possibly a net gain to the economy.
The B’s:
– Boyle, Ed A, Massachusetts Institute of Technology – Professor of Ocean Geochemistry
– Branton, Daniel, Harvard University – Higgins Professor of Biology, Emeritus
– Briggs, Steven P, University of California, San Diego – Professor, Biological Sciences, Cancer Genes and Genome Program
– Briggs, Winslow R, Carnegie Institution of Washington – Stanford University (apparently biochemist)
– Brill, Winston J, Winston J. Brill and Associates – “the most outstanding microbiologist and immunologist, under age of 40, in the U.S. and Canada”
– Britten, Roy J, California Institute of Technology – Apparently molecular geneticist
– Broecker, Wallace S, Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory and Columbia University – Newberry Professor of Geology, “the Grandfather of Climate Science”
– Brown, James H, University of New Mexico – Interdisciplinary Biology, Community Ecology, Biogeography, Allometry – Distinguished Professor
– Brown, Patrick O, MD, Stanford University School of Medicine – Professor of Biochemistry
– Brunger, Axel T, Stanford University – Axel Brunger’s goal is to understand the molecular mechanism of synaptic neurotransmitter release. Dr. Brunger is also Professor of Molecular and Cellular Physiology, of Neurology and Neurological Sciences, and of Photon Science at Stanford University.
Enneagram says:
May 7, 2010 at 11:41 am
Yes, probably as bad as that! The worst of them are rotten and though they sport different titles, they are all “political scientists.”
Gcb: “That’s actually kind of ironic – he’s invoking plate tectonics, when the authors of that theory, much like AGW skeptics these days, had to put up with a lot of contemporary criticism and ridicule when they proposed the idea.”
Both plate tectonics and AGW were new theories, so in that important sense are similar. And both also generated “a lot of contemporary criticism and ridicule when they proposed the idea”.
The real irony here is the failure to see these similarities.
REPLY: and just because plate tectonics turns out to be correct, doesn’t mean AGW is.
The C’s:
– Cairns, Jr John, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University – Cairns retired as both Director, University Center for Environmental and Hazardous Materials Studies, and University Distinguished Professor of Environmental Biology
– Canfield, Donald E, University of Southern Denmark – “In the broadest terms my research focuses on the chemistry and microbial ecology of marine sediments from both modern seas and over geologic time.”
– Carpenter, Stephen R, University of Wisconsin – Professor of Limnology – Carpenter’s research addresses food web processes in lakes, eutrophication, long-term ecological change, and aspects of ecological economics and resilience in social-ecological systems.
– Carrington, James C, Oregon State University – Director, Center for Genome Research and Biocomputing – Stewart Professor, Botany and Plant Pathology
– Cashmore, Anthony R, University of Pennsylvania – Robert I. Williams Professor of Biology – My research interests concern the mechanism by which plants respond to light.
– Castilla, Juan Carlos, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile – “Castilla’s original human exclusion research is still bearing fruit two decades later.” “Besides this research, Castilla also is actively studying linkages between the ocean’s water column and the rocky intertidal and benthic subtidal zones, for example, how marine larvae rely on the column for transport from one zone to another”
– Cazenave, Anny, Centre National d’ Etudes Spatiales – Geophysics.
– Chapin, III F, Stuart, University of Alaska – (Nickname Terry) Professor of Ecology – Department of Biology and Wildlife. Institute of Arctic Biology
– Ciechanover, Aaron J, Technion-Israel Institute of Technology – Prof. Aaron J. Ciechanover is a 2004 Nobel Laureate for Chemistry, a Distinguished Research Professor in the Faculty of Medicine of the Technion Israel Institute of Technology in Haifa and a Member of the Advisory Board of the International Peace Foundation.
– Clapham, David E, Harvard Medical School – Professor of Neurobiology and Pediatrics; Aldo R. Castaneda Professor of Cardiovascular Research Children’s Hospital; Investigator, Howard Hughes Medical Institute; The Clapham laboratory studies ion channels and calcium signaling.
– Clark, William C, Harvard University – Harvey Brooks Professor of International Science, Public Policy and Human Development. Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs. Center for International Development. “Trained as an ecologist, his research focuses on the interactions of environment, development and security concerns in international affairs, with a special emphasis on the role of science and technology in shaping those interactions.”
– Clayton, Robert N, University of Chicago – Enrico Fermi Distinguished Service Professor Emeritus. “Our research centers on the application of stable isotope abundance measurements to geochemical and cosmochemical problems.”
– Coe, Michael D, Yale University – Charles J. MacCurdy Professor of Anthropology Emeritus at Yale University, whose main concentration has been on the Maya and the Olmec.
– Conwell, Esther M, University of Rochester – Research Professor. Professor Conwell and her group have been studying transport of excess electrons and holes along the base stack in DNA.
– Cowling, Ellis B, North Carolina State University – Distinguished Professor of Forestry and Plant Pathology. Interests: […] man-induced changes in the chemical climate and their effects on terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems; role of scientists in public decision making.
– Cowling, Richard M, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University – Research Professor. 2000: Research Professor, Botany Department and Terrestrial Ecological Research Unit, University of Port Elizabeth. 2000: Honorary Professor in Botany, UCT. 2001: Adjunct Professor, School of Environmental Biology, Curtin University, Perth
– Cox, Charles S, University of California, San Diego – “Dr. Charles S. Cox, Jr., is the Children’s Fund, Inc. Distinguished Professor of Pediatric Surgery and directs the Pediatric Surgical Translational Laboratories and Pediatric Program in Regenerative Medicine at The University of Texas Medical School at Houston. He directs the Pediatric Trauma Program at the University of Texas-Houston/Children’s Memorial Hermann Hospital in the Texas Medical Center.”
– Croteau, Rodney B, Washington State University – Our research deals broadly with the origin, metabolism and function of terpenoids in plants, and more specifically with the monoterpene (C10), sesquiterpene (C15) and diterpene (C20) constituents of the essential oils and resins used in pharmaceuticals, nutraceuticals, flavors, fragrances, and as industrial raw materials.
– Crothers, Donald M, Yale University – Sterling Professor of Chemistry, Professor of Molecular Biophysics and Biochemistry, Professor of Chemical Engineering, Department of Chemistry
– Crutzen, Paul J, Max Planck Institute for Chemistry – Winner of the Nobel prize in Chemistry 1995. Ph.D. (Filosofie Licentiat), Meteorology, 1968. Stratospheric and tropospheric chemistry, and their role in the biogeochemical cycles and climate. Since November 2000: Emeritus. Interests: Global modelling of atmospheric chemical processes (2-D, 3-D) for troposphere, stratosphere and lower mesosphere
mikael pihlström says:
May 7, 2010 at 1:14 pm
You describe an ideal situation – something like that could have
happened, but history went in other direction: scepticism was captured
by a ruthless political disinformation campaign.
Unsupported political discourse. And allow me tell you, this sort of unsupported statements about “disinformation campaigns” doesn’t look good.
toby said on May 7, 2010 at 10:12 am:
Well, while I’m not sure offhand what the base is of the numbering system he uses where 100 becomes 11 base 10, I have to give him credit for leading me to this howler from Peter H. Gleick:
Social scientists, geneticists, computer programmers?
We Have Confirmation! You do not have to be a “climatologist” to understand climate science! The Appeal to Authority (namely climatologists) is now dead!
Credit to toby for leading me to this valuable information, as is fair. Good job, toby!
There is something familiar about the language and style of writing in this letter. I can’t put my finger on it but my guess would be that it was composed by a well known AGW advocate. I find it to be patronising in the extreme and entirely without merit. It is just a very badly worded ill conceived appeal to authority without a shread of evidence to support its message. Whoever agreed the style and the content of this letter has done a disservice to themselves, their cause and all the unfortunate signatories who were (no doubt) press-ganged into signing it.
BJ says:
May 7, 2010 at 10:40 am
In other words, no polar bears were harmed in the making of Global Warming.”
Speaking of which, if global warming is so terrible for them, how did they manage to survive all the previous episodes of warming, which were ALL warmer than this one?
And the D’s, and enough for today:
** Daily, Gretchen C, Stanford University – Senior Fellow, Woods Institute. Bing Professor in Environmental Science. Senior Fellow, Woods Institute for the Environment. Director-Natural Capital Project. Director, Center for Conservation Biology. “An ecologist by training, Gretchen Daily’s work spans scientific research, teaching, public education and working with leaders to advance practical approaches to environmental challenges. Her scientific research focuses on biodiversity change[…]”. “Daily is chair of the Natural Capital Project, a partnership among The Nature Conservancy, World Wildlife Fund and Stanford University, whose goal is to align economic forces with conservation. She works extensively with private landowners, economists, lawyers, business people and government agencies to incorporate environmental issues into business practice and public policy. Her efforts span fundamental research and policy-oriented demonstration projects in Africa, Asia, Europe, Latin America, North America and Oceania.”
** Dalrymple, Brent G, Oregon State University – Discipline: Marine Geology & Geophysics. Title: Professor Emeritus. Interests: Radiometric dating methods, esp. 40Ar/39Ar techniques. Geomagnetic field behavior, esp. Polarity reversals. History and timing of volcanic events. Impact history on the early Moon. Age of the Earth.
** Dangl, Jeffrey L, University of North Carolina – Dept. of biology. “Many interactions between plants and microbes begin with specific recognition. The nature of this recognition, and the interpretation of subsequent signal transduction by both plant and microbe have profound impact on the outcome of the interaction.”
** Darst, Seth A, Rockefeller University – Jack Fishman Professor, Laboratory of Molecular Biophysics. “Dr. Darst’s research explores the mechanism and regulation of transcription by determining the three-dimensional structures of RNA polymerase and other associated proteins.”
** Davies, David R, National Institutes of Health – Research Statement: Structure Analysis of Proteins and Nucleic Acids
** Davis, Margaret B, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis – Regents’ Professor Emeritus, Dept. of Ecology, Evolution, and Behavior. Conservation Biology, Ecology, Quaternary Paleoecology Minor. Interests: Quaternary paleoecology; history of forest communities; past changes in geographical distributions of forest species; effects of soil development on terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems; earth system science and past and future global change. “My research concerns long-term forest dynamics in an old-growth forest in northern Michigan. ”
** De Camilli, Pietro V, Yale University School of Medicine – Eugene Higgins Professor of Cell Biology and Neurobiology. Investigator, Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI). Director, Yale Program in Cellular Neuroscience, Neurodegeneration and Repair (CNNR). Membrane dynamics in the endocytic pathway with emphasis on endocytic and recycling membrane traffic at neuronal synapses.
** Dean, Caroline, John Innes Centre – Programme Leader, Cell & Developmental Biology. “The Dean lab is investigating the molecular control of flowering time, focusing specifically on the acceleration of flowering by prolonged cold, a process known as vernalization. Using Arabidopsis thaliana as a model system we are analysing genes conferring a vernalization requirement and are identifying and characterising genes that mediate a vernalization response.”
** DeFries, Ruth S, Columbia University – Denning Professor of Sustainable Development and Professor, Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Environmental Biology. “Ruth DeFries examines human transformation of the landscape and its consequences for climate, biogeochemical cycling, biodiversity, and other ecosystem services that make our planet habitable. […] A particular focus is tropical deforestation and its impacts on atmospheric carbon emissions. DeFries examines land use changes over broad scales through the lens of satellite observations. She is actively involved in linking scientific information into policy decisions.
** Deisenhofer, Johann, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas – Virginia and Edward Linthicum Distinguished Chair in Biomolecular Science. Ph.D. Experimental Physics. 1988 Nobel Prize in Chemistry (shared with R. Huber and H. Michel). “Current projects include: iron transporters from the outer membrane of gram-negative bacteria, HMG-CoA reductase, […]”
** Delmer, Deborah P, University of California, Davis- Professor Emeritus, Plant Biology. Research Interests: Identification of genes involved in synthesis of cellulose and callose in higher plants; mode of action of herbicide(s) which affect cellulose biosynthesis.
** DeLong, Edward F, Massachusetts Institute of Technology – Professor, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Division of Biological Engineering. Ph.D. Marine Biology 1986. “Our lab is currently engaged in applying contemporary genomic technologies to dissect complex microbial assemblages.[…]”
** DeRosier, David J, Brandeis University – Professor of Biology, Emeritus. Macromolecular Assemblies, Motors, Actin Cytoskeleton
** Diener, Theodor O, University of Maryland – Plant pathology. Distinguished University Professor Emeritus at the University of Maryland.
** Dirzo, Rodolfo, Stanford University – Ph.D.: University of Wales, Ecology (1980). Pew Scholar in Conservation, The Pew Charitable Trust (1992). Professor, Biology (School of Humanities and Sciences). “In the field of conservation biology, I am interested in studying the consequences of anthropogenic impact on the disruption of ecological processes, particularly biotic interactions.”
** Dixon, Jack E, Howard Hughes Medical Center – Jack E. Dixon, Ph.D., serves as Vice President and Chief Scientific Officer. Ph D Chemistry. His research has focused on a group of proteins called protein tyrosine phosphatases that govern a key biochemical reaction in which a phosphate group is added to another protein. Dixon continues to maintain a laboratory at UCSD, where he is also a professor of pharmacology, cellular and molecular medicine, chemistry, and biochemistry.
** Donoghue, Michael J, Yale University – G. Evelyn Hutchinson Professor Ecology and Evolutionary Biology.On-going research in the lab involves at least five areas: phylogenetic systematics, character evolution, diversification, biogeography, historical ecology. Michael has been working on the biogeography and the historical assembly of plant communities around the Northern Hemisphere.
** Doolittle, Russell F, University of California, San Diego – Research Professor, UCSD. Our group is mainly concerned with the structure and evolution of proteins. Our second major research interest is laboratory-based and deals with the invention and evolution of vertebrate blood plasma proteins, and expecially the clotting proteins.
** Dunne, Thomas, University of California, Santa Barbara – School of Environmental Science and management. Professor — Geomorphology, Hydrology. PhD, Geography, Johns Hopkins University. Conducts field and theoretical research in fluvial geomorphology and in the application of hydrology, sediment transport, and geomorphology to landscape management and hazard analysis. Since coming to the Bren School in 1996, he has studied erosion in the Andes, and hydrology, sediment transport, and floodplain sedimentation in the Amazon River basin of Brazil and Bolivia and the Central Valley of California.
So far:
91 names
1 Grand-father of Climate Science: Broecker, Wallace S. (a geologist)
2 Meteorologists: Crutzen, Paul J; Manabe, Syukuro. (Weather is not climate, or so they say)
And now I’ll be nice:
2 Geologists: Edward Anders; Dalrymple, Brent G.
2 Geophysicists: Cazenave, Anny; Melosh, Jay H. (Does geophysics count as climate science???)
7 / 91 = 7,7% of list signitaries might be “climate scientists”.
255 letter signitaries out of 2100 NAS members: 12.1% Now, combining…
I had enough for one day.
Apparently, a few too many people with advanced degrees in the fields of the sciences, the humanities, and the whatnots, appear to be wandering around the planet with the much mistaken impression that their years of study, and their sheepskin on the wall, have given them the papal gift of infallibility in any matter under the Sun, and some imaginary social status akin to that of British Royal Family or the European Elite de Elite or the Chinese Communist Party.
The problem isn’t about Global Climate Change, it appears to be all about Global Academic Pollution.
mikael pihlström says:
May 7, 2010 at 12:52 pm
“You overestimate their (CS) power by a factor of thousands. The US
deficit is 12 trillion dollars, caused by wars, tax cuts for the wealthy, the
Financial crisis . You cite Paul Craig Roberts; he is really angry about the
Wall street crisis, not climate policy. To pretend that a cap and trade
policy comes even close to the sums utterly wasted due to above
political choices is ridiculous.
Trade and cap will not shut down energy use, just provide incentives
for a gradual shift to renewables.”
This is so ignorant one hardly knows where to begin.
1] You overestimate their (CS) power by a factor of thousands.
The power of [CS] lies in providing the pretext for a global transformation of the world economic structure, which has been relentlessly pursued by the statist collectivist forces, who are the main proponents of carbon demonization, for more than a century. The deleterious consequences of such a transformation for liberty and prosperity globally cannot possibly be overestimated.
2]The US deficit is 12 trillion dollars, caused by wars, tax cuts for the wealthy, the
Financial crisis .
2a] The US deficit is 12 trillion dollars
Check this site:
http://www.usdebtclock.org/
the debt will be 13 trillion very shortly. Keep this open in a separate window we will be referring back to it.
2b] caused by wars
As per the previous, despite two active wars and more than half a century of subsidizing the national defense of our EU allies, so they could maintain the illusion that their socialist dystopias were sustainable, defense accounts for less than 20% of federal spending.
2c] tax cuts for the wealthy
Every major tax cut for the “wealthy” in my lifetime has resulted in a large INCREASE in tax revenue. What has driven the escalating deficits is out of control government spending
2d] the Financial crisis .
The latest financial crisis was created by a large number of very bad mortgage loans. The only reason most of those loans existed is because of the ill considered actions of of same flock of leftist politicians who are now in charge of creating the fix for their earlier ignorant blunders. I realize there are some who maintain the extremely fortuitous timing of the mortgage collapse for the prospects of a certain politician suggests that something other than ignorance was behind it and I have to admit they may have a point.
When you examine the cast of characters involved in creating the mortgage crisis and the list of “usual suspects” driving the carbon scam, you find the same names popping up with amazing frequency. Quite a coincidence.
The main difference between the mortgage crisis and looming collapse that will be pending if cap and trade is fully implemented is that, although there were a large number of bad mortgages involved, they actually represented a small single digit percentage of an otherwise mostly sound market. And even for the bad mortgages there was an underlying asset that still retained some intrinsic value. When the Carbon market they envision eventually implodes all the money involved will evaporate nearly instantaneously, because there is nothing of intrinsic value in any of it. Refer to the Debt Clock page above and consider the number under “Currency and Credit Derivatives”. For those who have problems with large numbers, that 653 TRILLION. Global GDP for 2009 was about $58 trillion.
3] To pretend that a cap and trade policy comes even close to the sums utterly wasted due to above political choices is ridiculous.
See 2d] above.
Also recognize that the incredible growth in prosperity over the last century was driven by the availability of cheap and abundant energy. In every reasonably developed country every addition of energy has large multiplier factor toward economic growth. Any policy that dramatically raises the cost of energy while simultaneously decreasing supplies will reduce that multiplier. Even in the unlikely chance that the reduction is only 10%, the result will be trillions of lost growth.
4] Trade and cap will not shut down energy use, just provide incentives
for a gradual shift to renewables.
Unless you are including fast breeder nuclear reactors in the category of renewables, there isn’t a single renewable source, or combination of all of them for that matter, that has the slightest prospect of providing even a significant fraction of the world’s anticipated energy requirements:
http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epm/table1_1.html
Josualdo
If geology/geophysics counts as climate science, then count me in. But I don’t think so.
Thanks much for your effort and contribution!
In essence: “We’re mad as hell, and we’re not going to take it up there anymore!”
“The Emperor has no clothes.” – possibly why there’s a few Natureists on there.
On a more serious note, it may just be that they were asked to sign a blank petition – ala Julia Stilgo from the Met Office post Climategate. In which case this letter is only a sign of naivety, rather than something a little more squalid.
What really ticks me off is this statement:
“Many recent assaults on climate science and, more disturbingly, on climate scientists by climate change deniers are typically driven by special interests or dogma, not by an honest effort to provide an alternative theory that credibly satisfies the evidence.”
The way it is written, you’d think that no one, not a single distinguished professor from an Ivy League school, or even some lowly researcher from anywhere else, has suggested an alternative hypothesis to the climate forcings parameterized in climate models that can explain observed climatic variables over the last century or few millennia.
Come on now.
Can any of these very distinguished academics tell me why sea levels were higher (by a meter or two) during the last peak interglacial than they are now? I suspect anthropogenic CO2 emissions were pretty low some 125,000 years or so ago.
I think the good professor signers need to go back to school. Perhaps (hopefully) one of their teachers might make them leave their own special interests or dogma at the door.
Has anyone found a single climatologist in the list ?
This “scientist” on the list gave me a laugh …
”
William Julius Wilson,
Director Joblessness and Urban Poverty Research Program
“
Man, that iceberg in the photos gets around.
Polar Bear – Northern hemisphere
Emperor Penguin – Southern hemisphere
Who knew?
Here are the named institutions with 3 or more signatories.
I hope someone at each institution checks up on who is discrediting their good names.
I’ll do Auckland University since I went there:
Distinguished Professor Dame Anne Salmond
DBE, CBE, FANAS, FRSNZ, FBA, FNZAH, PhD (U. Penn)
Distinguished Professor of Māori Studies and Anthropology
Department Māori Studies (Te Wānanga o Waipapa)
Research Interests Māori society; indigenous cultures and lives. [i.e. not a climatologist!]
Other institutions:
Number Institution
14 University of California
11 Stanford University
9 Harvard University
8 University of California San Diego
8 University of Washington
7 University of Wisconsin
7 Yale University
6 Massachusetts Institute of Technology
6 National Institutes of Health
6 Princeton University
6 University of California Los Angeles
5 University of Pennsylvania
4 California Institute of Technology
4 Harvard Medical School
4 University of Chicago
4 University of Georgia
3 Duke University
3 North Carolina State University
3 Oregon State University
3 Smithsonian Institution
3 Stanford University School of Medicine
3 University of California Davis
3 University of California Irvine
3 University of Michigan
3 Washington State University
3 Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
“We are deeply disturbed…”
Should leave it at that.
biologists, anthropologists, neuroscientists
I’m a bit confused about how neuroscientists relate to climate science, but the biologists and anthropologists have a much easier time of landing grants right now if the words “Global warming” are incorporated into the study.
Well, at least they aren’t taking money from the oil companies.