I wish to add my congratulations to the chorus of them. Steve has been an inspiration to many climate skeptics, yours truly included. I’m honored to call him a friend. – Anthony
A man for all (climate) seasons? Source: UK Telegraph
by James Delingpole
Stephen McIntyre: total bloody hero.
Steve McIntyre has been named one of the 50 People Who Matter by the left-wing journal New Statesman. He comes in at number 32. (Below a motley crew including Osama Bin Laden, Hugo Chavez, David Cameron, Julian Assange, Barack Obama, and the like). (H/T Roddy Campbell)
When the mining expert Stephen McIntyre challenged the basis of climate science on his blog, he became a figurehead for many climate-change sceptics.
His subsequent involvement in the 2009 “Climategate” controversy at the University of East Anglia (he was referred to in the hacked emails over 100 times) emboldened the sceptics further and changed global opinion: the number of people who believe man is responsible for global warming has fallen.
The influence might not be positive, but there’s no doubt he has shaped the debate.
But what’s much more interesting than the entry – because, let’s be honest, who really gives a toss what some dreary, ailing left-wing rag thinks – is the response to that stupid, priggish suggestion at the end that “the influence might not be positive.”
I hope the moron who wrote it is now squirming with embarrassment. He/she/it certainly should be after reading the thoroughly disgusted comments below.
Says the first:
“The influence might not be positive…”
So, McIntyre is wrong? May I ask for your evidence? Oh do tell. Put your money where your mouth is. Put your reputation on the line.
And the second:
If, by challenging the basis of climate change science, Stephen McIntyre has been influential in changing global opinion on the HYPOTHESIS of anthropogenic global warming, then it is a very certain positive influence. For policy makers to take drastic action based on an unproven hypothesis is absurd and Stephen has shown, by auditing or attempting to audit the climate scientists’ work, that the science is not at the level of accuracy, repeatability, and certainty required as the bases for taking such actions.
And the third:
We all owe Steve a debt of gratitude for shining some light on the obfuscations of climate science, before even more millions are wasted on what may well be a non-problem.
On and on the comments go – all of them positive. If these are regular New Statesman readers – and presumably at least some of them must be – then it affords yet another fascinating insight into how even those on the left are decreasingly convinced by the case for Man-Made Global Warming theory.
Full story at A man for all (climate) seasons?
Congratulations. And #1 on my list.
Because of people like Steve McIntyre, we (Down Under) have narrowly avoided the most economy-threatening legislation ever.
Because of people like Steve McIntyre, we have hope in the goodness of humanity.
Because of people like Steve McIntyre, we continue to fight…daily…in the hope that goodness and right “can and will triumph over might.”
Thank you Steve McIntyre! (And the people like him.)
For sensible folks, beliefs about climate do not split along a left-right political spectrum.
I am still upset one of my living heroes is a friggin Canadian.
Very refreshing read after the piece on NASA’s very own narcissist, who is, at least, not on the list.
OTOH, that list also includes Lady Gaga.
His role was pivotal and a stitch in time. To think of the damage that could have been done, had he not put his best foot forward, and called the rigged game out on the rug.
I tip my retired hard hat to you, pard. They won’t be keeping us in the dark and feeding us garbage anymore.
“a crusty old sheep dog or bedraggled, greyhaired, crusty old shepherd [that] steps out of nowhere to save a flock of wayward sheep” can also be hot, hot, hot!
Joshua Corning says:
September 28, 2010 at 5:15 pm
I am still upset one of my living heroes is a friggin Canadian.
Believe it or we will pickle you! We are fighting the good fight up here and will brook no detractors.
Hi Anthony. I just took Judith Curry to task for using the term: what the heck is a climate skeptic? At face value it’s someone who isn’t sure whether there’s something such as climate, perhaps? I don’t think Steve M qualifies, in any case, for this classification. He may be a data skeptic, or a method skeptic, or a political skeptic, but I think he would prefer data auditor.
I guess his site, “climate audit”, isn’t quite named right either. He doesn’t audit climate, he audits those who presume to audit climate…
Socrates lives!
I would agree that comparing Steve with Martin Luther is an appropriate one. It may seem a little extreme, but I think history could mark his work as being the major “tipping point” not only in climate science, but also science in general.
He is not a climatologist and yet probably knows more about this topic than many self described experts and has successfully held his own. Probably the most important lesson to learn here is not to be intimidated by experts that don’t have answers to uncomfortable questions. KEEP PRESSING FOR ANSWERS!
One of the best mining experts I ever met was a Canuck, one Mike Henrick.
Learned a lot, but like all good things, the time was shorter than I knew.
I suspect the good Mr McIntyre does will outlive that done by Lady Gaga!
(Nice to see the boss in at number 15 though)
In the not-so-distant future, the lexicon will change.
Whenever a malfeasant group is exposed by diligent and unerring analysis, they will find themselves to have been “McIntyred”.
Steve McIntyre should be knighted.
As he did for E.M. Smith, Steve McIntyre lighted my way to WUWT. I was already a mild skeptic, but reading (or rather, attempting to decipher) his articles in the Financial Post was like a gulping a glass of water after crossing a desert. I’m a huge fan of his stoic and unwavering quest for scientific truth, and will forever cherish his discovery of the Enchanted Larch of Yamal, the Upside Down Graph, and other treasures unearthed from the netherworld of CAGW. Forget the Nobel – a new prize should be created to honour him – perhaps a “Galileo Prize” for perseverance in keeping science honest in the face of adversity.
Us mere mortal sceptics will never know the difficulties Mr Mac has been, and is, going through.
Books will be written about him once the dust settles.
I hope he has a long long healthy life to see the fruits of his labours, though I suspect he doesn’t care about that. I for one will surely get great satisfaction in seeing his vindication and elevation to global hero status.
McIntyre is irrelivant in the grand scheme of things in the world.
LOL at him having even an iota of influence approaching that of our Lady Gaga.
He is worshiped by a small minority of people who inhabit obscure blogs on the internet.
Just dust in the wind.
Now as to why he was nominated for this distinction, is more due to his association with influential think tanks in the U.S. who probably had *cough* some input into his being placed on the list 🙂
Why he matters,
Stephen McIntyre, B.Sc. Mathematics, University of Toronto (1969), Graduate Scholarship, Mathematical Economics, MIT (1970), PPE, Oxford University (1971)
Corrections to the Mann et al (1998) Proxy Data Base and Northern Hemisphere Average Temperature Series (PDF)
(Energy & Environment, Volume 14, Number 6, pp. 751-771, November 2003)
– Stephen McIntyre, Ross McKitrick
The M&M Critique of the MBH98 Northern Hemisphere Climate Index: Update and Implications (PDF)
(Energy & Environment, Volume 16, Number 1, pp. 69-100, January 2005)
– Stephen McIntyre, Ross McKitrick
Hockey sticks, principal components, and spurious significance (PDF)
(Geophysical Research Letters, Volume 32, Issue 3, February 2005)
– Stephen McIntyre, Ross McKitrick
Proxy inconsistency and other problems in millennial paleoclimate reconstructions (PDF)
(Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Volume 106, Number 6, February 2009)
– Stephen McIntyre, Ross McKitrick
I’ve met Steve three times (twice in London, once in Toronto). He’s an old math nerd who wants to find out for himself how climate science is done. And it turns out to be worse than previously thought.
Steve wouldn’t have had nearly the impact that he had if his opponents had been competent or ethical.
I’m not sure about the Nobel Prize, but recognition by mathematicians and especially statisticians is overdue.
I remember when I first heard of the McIntyre and Mckitrick paper. Steve has come far since then. Truly a great man standing out amongst us regular men. He has always been very humble, and amazingly persistent.
He has really raised the Skeptical movement up.
Thank You Steve.
In fact I think if you graphed the population of the skeptical movement it would be a hockey stick.
With the blade of the stick happening right after Steve came on the scene.
I’m not sure I understand the focus on temperature reconstructions. It seems like it was always a relatively minor part of the evidence supposedly supporting AGW. If you really want to take down AGW, you need to do a lot more than fixate on tree ring data. For example, find another explanation for the warming that has occurred in the historical record since the 70s.
“Cliff says:
September 29, 2010 at 12:49 am
I’m not sure I understand the focus on temperature reconstructions. It seems like it was always a relatively minor part of the evidence supposedly supporting AGW. If you really want to take down AGW, you need to do a lot more than fixate on tree ring data. For example, find another explanation for the warming that has occurred in the historical record since the 70s.”
How about perfectly natural variation for starters? You know, the stuff that’s been happening since the earth had weather and causes such things as ice ages and interglacial warm periods that were warmer than the 20th century ones (Roman, medieval etc)