Dr. Spencer’s essay below reminds me of this famous cartoon:
Over at Lucia’s she wrote a post saying I had banged the Godwin’s Law “gong” by comparing the PNAS skeptic list paper as “stasi-esque”. For people that don’t know, the Stasi were the secret police of East Germany, post WWII, and post Nazism. So Stasi-esque doesn’t qualify for Godwins Law. They were famous for making lists of people and their associations, to use later for what could only be described as nefarious purposes. Their list making (like the skeptic list used for the PNAS paper) is what is the parallel here.
As for yellow badges, here’s what I’d like to see all skeptics wear. Maybe somebody can come up with a theme variation specific to climate skeptics.
We don’t need the negativism that is being fostered elsewhere.
Dr. Spencer has some interesting comments in his post below. – Anthony
===================================================
The Global Warming Inquisition Has Begun
by Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.
A new “study” has been published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) which has examined the credentials and publication records of climate scientists who are global warming skeptics versus those who accept the “tenets of anthropogenic climate change”.
Not surprisingly, the study finds that the skeptical scientists have fewer publications or are less credentialed than the marching army of scientists who have been paid hundreds of millions of dollars over the last 20 years to find every potential connection between fossil fuel use and changes in nature.
After all, nature does not cause change by itself, you know.
The study lends a pseudo-scientific air of respectability to what amounts to a black list of the minority of scientists who do not accept the premise that global warming is mostly the result of you driving your SUV and using incandescent light bulbs.
There is no question that there are very many more scientific papers which accept the mainstream view of global warming being caused by humans. And that might account for something if those papers actually independently investigated alternative, natural mechanisms that might explain most global warming in the last 30 to 50 years, and found that those natural mechanisms could not.
As just one of many alternative explanations, most of the warming we have measured in the last 30 years could have been caused by a natural, 2% decrease in cloud cover. Unfortunately, our measurements of global cloud cover over that time are nowhere near accurate enough to document such a change.
But those scientific studies did not address all of the alternative explanations. They couldn’t, because we do not have the data to investigate them. The vast majority of them simply assumed global warming was manmade.
I’m sorry, but in science a presupposition is not “evidence”.
Instead, anthropogenic climate change has become a scientific faith. The fact that the very first sentence in the PNAS article uses the phrase “tenets of anthropogenic climate change” hints at this, since the term “tenet” is most often used when referring to religious doctrine, or beliefs which cannot be proved to be true.
So, since we have no other evidence to go on, let’s pin the rap on humanity. It just so happens that’s the position politicians want, which is why politics played such a key role in the formation of the IPCC two decades ago.
The growing backlash against us skeptics makes me think of the Roman Catholic Inquisition, which started in the 12th Century. Of course, no one (I hope no one) will be tried and executed for not believing in anthropogenic climate change. But the fact that one of the five keywords or phrases attached to the new PNAS study is “climate denier” means that such divisive rhetoric is now considered to be part of our mainstream scientific lexicon by our country’s premier scientific organization, the National Academy of Sciences.
Surely, equating a belief in natural climate change to the belief that the Holocaust slaughter of millions of Jews and others by the Nazis never occurred is a new low for science as a discipline.
The new paper also implicitly adds most of the public to the black list, since surveys have shown dwindling public belief in the consensus view of climate change.
At least I have lots of company.
old construction worker says:
June 22, 2010 at 6:51 pm
“As just one of many alternative explanations, most of the warming we have measured in the last 30 years could have been caused by a natural, 2% decrease in cloud cover. Unfortunately, our measurements of global cloud cover over that time are nowhere near accurate enough to document such a change.”
Do you mean to say that the lack of cloud cover could warm the planet. That’s crazy talk. (SIC)
This afternoon, the inhabitants of Monterrey faced the effect that Dr. Spencer is mentioning in his report; regarding cloud cover. The temperature around 3 PM was 37 °C (98.6 F). Suddenly, a wide group of clouds coming from the southwest covered the whole sky above the heads for almost 30 minutes. The temperature dropped to 32 °C (89.6 F). Then the sky got cleared again and the temperature went up to 35 °C (95 F). One hour later, the temperature increased to 38 °C (100.4 F). Of course the latter temperature was not caused by the lack of clouds, but by the direct incident sunbeams upon the surface. Nevertheless, the presence of dense clouds covering the whole visible dome of the atmosphere made the local temperature decreased by 5 °C. By the way, the temperature of the asphalt was 65.7 °C (150.26 F).
Thank you, thank you, Dr. Spencer, for finally letting us see the real tap root of the Climategate scandal:
The US National Academy of Sciences (NAS)
I have suspected this some time – because that would explain why unexpected data on Earth’s heat source (The Sun) have been ignored for decades – but it took Climategate to reveal NAS’s deep involvement in the misuse of science as a tool of propaganda.
With kind regards,
Oliver K. Manuel
Roy
At least your in good company with Galileo. In science it only takes one fact to disprove a theory. The ratio of Aristotelians vs Galileo was even greater than Anderegg et al. find. Yet Galileo’s theory won over the Aristotelians’ appeals to authority. So keep probing.
“At least I have lots of company.”
Sure do. Pull up a chair and have a 90 minute IPA.
Walter Schneider says:
June 22, 2010 at 8:06 pm
I thought that all rather self evident, but I like the train of thought. There are some, that apparently, don’t recognize the dangers of recent events. While it is always fun to pick on national socialists, we should all remember that socialism is a base tenet of aforementioned. It was easy for the Stazi to form and be effective because it was a small step to move from national socialism to global socialism. All one has to do is give up national identity and succumb to global identity. And, in that, one gains totalitarianism. A, here’s the :-).
Given the 500 “published and cited” scientists that question the CAGW assertion, and given the embracing of such a theory(we call it a consensus) and given the already observable harm done to mankind, I believe there are people who wish mankind harm. I believe there are people who think only certain few should be privy to knowledge and those certain few should control the rest of society. I, further, believe Eric Arthur Blair was only wrong in his time frame. But, I also believe we as a society can overcome the totalitarian attempt at control of this globe and co-exist as a loose coalition of peoples of this world. Each society to be able to rise and fall as to its own value until freedom is key and not control. Then, and only then, can the loose coalition become tighter.
“If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face — forever.
—Part III, Chapter III, Nineteen Eighty-Four”————- but it doesn’t have to be so. All it takes is for a few good quiet men to become loud.
🙂
The difference between the Inquisition then and now is the American First and Second Amendments.
@ur momisugly Theo Goodwin says:
Right is unchanging. It is the right that creates the might. Be it meaning correct or meaning privilege by birth of all mankind, right makes might. My nation’s history is a great example. Every war we won, is because we possessed right. Be it a birthright or being correct, it was because we possessed “right”. Every war we didn’t win, is because we didn’t possess “right”. The U.S. didn’t have might to create “right”. It had “right” that created might. The same is true with many nations of this world. I find it odd that many can’t see this assertion.
“As for yellow badges, here’s what I’d like to see all skeptics wear. Maybe somebody can come up with a theme variation specific to climate skeptics.”
I like the smiley badge idea. Maybe we could make it specific to sceptics by making the mouth into a question mark 😕
Kind of asking the question and blowing a raspberry at the same time.
rbateman says: “It’s summer in the N. Hemisphere, and the Warmist Inquisition is feeling its oats…”
I had to get my fleece lined jacket out again this month. If it’s summer here, you can’t prove it by me.
pat says:
Pat Moffitt says:
June 22, 2010 at 8:37 pm
The question no one will answer—— WHAT IS CLIMATE CHANGE?
A heretofore observed natural sucession of climate events that has been labeled heresy.
The implied supposition is that the climate never changes, nor has it changed since the dawn of civilization.
Beats me why anyone would want to think that, or that only man can change climate.
The skeptical view is that man’s contribution is swamped by natural causes.
My own personal view is that it takes a lifetime to experience enough of the change to recognize the demarcations between cold and warm climate periods. I was born in the middle of cold period, watched as the world went to warming, and now see the world once again growing colder.
Billions of people on the Earth know it too.
So, who’s fooling whom?
jorgekafkazar says:
June 22, 2010 at 9:43 pm
I’m trying to steel myself for the winter that now looks to come early. I hold little hope for a normal summer, though it would be nice to get fooled on the pleasant side of things.
What do I have to do to get on a list! Everybody is on some list or other, except me. Whatsa matter, don’t I count? How insulting! How disempowering!
I’ve had enough of that malarky. I hereby initiate a list for listless people.
1. Mike
2. ?????
Wow–folks here sure take themselves pretty seriously. Likening the dearth of publishable articles by “skeptics” to the work of the Stasi? The Inquisition? Kristallnacht? Really?? I guess there’s nothing like a persecution complex to make one feel important. But I’m inclined to think that people who can’t draw a simple historical analogy without indulging in wild overstatements probably can’t be trusted to make discerning scientific judgments. It erodes confidence as a general matter.
You may think you’re whining to a sympathetic echo chamber here, but some of the rest of us are watching, and what we see is more than a little childish and pathetic. If you’re going to be a brave and noble happy-face-button-wearing Skeptic, do so with a little dignity, and spare us the petty histrionics.
[REPLY – Do bear in mind that we tolerate criticism. Any post that directed anything like what you have said at almost any CAGW blog would never see the light of day. ~ Evan]
We can only hope that they don’t resort to the comfy chair!
No one expects the Spanish Inquisition…
Mr Galileo, how many papers have you published? Why should we listen to you?
It seems that many are wallowing in a persecution complex. As far as real persecutions are concerned there is Senator Inhofe trying to criminalize 17 Climatologists. Also, Virginia’s Attorney General Cuccineli and his strong arm tactics against Michael Mann.
Then there are the real psychos like Lord Monckton who accuses those who believe in Global Warming of being responsible for the genocide of millions in Africa who have died from famine as well as 40 million African children who have died from Malaria. He keeps referring to AGW’s as Nazis, Fascists, Goebbelian etc. ad nauseum.
This demonization is done in the same vein as Glenn Beck’s and Rush Limbaugh’s psychotic/psychopathic rants against all who don’t bow down to them. In fact, since they rape Godwin’s Law, I might as well come out and say it. These Psychic Vampires are doing the same to those who believe in Global Warming as Hitler did to the Jews. First demonize them. Then, when convenient, start rounding them up.
Beat your chests in self righteous indignation all you want but it is the real climatologist who are getting death threats and walking around with body guards.
[REPLY – Oh, Lord. Normally, even I might delete that (for your own good)! But, since you you insist . . . #B^1 ~ Evan]
“As for yellow badges…”
http://img337.imageshack.us/img337/4608/co2uncertain.jpg
Jonas Whale says:
June 22, 2010 at 10:24 pm
[REPLY – Do bear in mind that we tolerate criticism. Any post that directed anything like what you have said at almost any CAGW blog would never see the light of day. ~ Evan]
VILLABOLO’S RESPONSE:
Strange, as I posted a criticism right after Jonas Whale posted his (10:24 pm) and I saw it simply disappear from the screen without appearing on thread to await moderation as usual.
[REPLY – Hmm. Not by me. Some posts do get deleted, of course. But we draw a wide line. Mere disagreement is freely allowed. Sometimes a post winds up in the spam filter (in which case it vanishes until/unless it is retrieved). “Code words” can cause that. However, if one of us mods feels a post is over the line it can suffer a bit of an accident. (I delete very few posts, though.) ~Evan]
[Further reply. Yeah, you are currently in spam. It’ll be reviewed and either allowed or dumped. ~ Evan]
Lucia said:
“As for yellow badges, here’s what I’d like to see all skeptics wear. Maybe somebody can come up with a theme variation specific to climate skeptics.”
I like the smiley badge idea. Maybe we could make it specific to sceptics by making the mouth into a question mark 😕
Kind of asking the question and blowing a raspberry at the same time.
I’m not much good with artwork, but how about something like this?
http://www.tallbloke.net/img/scepticsmiley.JPG
We could get badges made in each country and put them on ebay, profits to sceptical blogs tip jars. I can get 500 2″ buttons made here for £110
Good idea?
I have a suggestion for the yellow badge. How about a humming bug, as in bah humbug? Unfortunately I have zero artistic talent. So I volunteer Willis to do the job.
Jonas Whale, I’d like to put you on my list. Please send me your real name, address, employer (if you have one), and SSN. Your bank account number would also be helpful in confirming your identity. Thank you for your cooperation.
Kafbst says:
June 22, 2010 at 6:03 pm
Kafbst, thank you.
In the “scientifically secularized” West and the “mind-raped” communist East (like in “1984” book) even Ph.D. is not powerful guardsman against common ignorance.
That’s why PNAS was able to forge the Blacklist in the Satanic Fire. The natural next step I see is the PNAS publishing proscriptive lists of AGW denialists which will guarantee them jail terms up from 5 years minimum. (Alas, I’m not joking….)
My best regards to You, Kafbst.
Jonas Whale says:
June 22, 2010 at 10:24 pm
I’m inclined to think that people who can’t draw a simple historical analogy without indulging in wild overstatements probably can’t be trusted to make discerning scientific judgments.
You mean, like James Hansen?
“If we cannot stop the building of more coal-fired power plants, those coal trains will be death trains — no less gruesome than if they were boxcars headed to crematoria, loaded with uncountable irreplaceable species.”
From the insomniac’s division of skeptics, here’s my smiley
http://tiggerstestblog.blogspot.com/2010/06/very-cold-smiley.html
@Jonas Whale says: June 22, 2010 at 10:24 pm
Take myself seriously? Not really.
What I do take seriously is people who want to introduce an extremely radical change to the way we produce the energy we need to keep civilization working. As the “solutions” on offer hardly work and as the cost will take up the majority of the GDP of the developed world, this will lead to the ruin of our society and dash the hopes of millions living in abject poverty in the third world.
And all this on the basis of pseudo science, dodgy computer simulations, cherry picked and extensively massaged data and a bunch of scary fairy stories put up by a bunch of eco-fascists. Eagerly adopted by cynical and scientifically incompetent politicians desperate to find new ways of taxing the pants off us. And crooked carbon traders out to make their next billion, now the sub-prime mortgage scam has been exposed.
Don’t know if all those guys and gals take themselves seriously.
I do.
They are dangerous. If they had a few more brain cells connected up, they’d be really dangerous.
As for stupid trolls who hide behind silly nicknames? Grow up!