I was invited to attend this debate and to participate by Noha El-Sayed of Al Jazeeera, but the notice was too short, and arranging travel from California to England was impossibly expensive at the last minute, requiring me to defer. Maybe next time.
Bishop Hill writes:
The Lindzen debate at the Oxford Union was, I think, a rather significant moment in the climate debate. One in which sceptic views got a fair hearing in an open debate. Lindzen was to be accompanied by a panel of invited experts consisting of David Rose, Mark Lynas and Myles Allen. Part 1 was an interview of Lindzen with interjections from the panel, while part 2 opened up the debate to the floor.
A few of us sceptics – Josh, Tallbloke, David Holland and others had met up beforehand and I think it’s fair to say that we all expected little from the evening. Mehdi Hasan, the left-wing journalist who was to compere the event had been using the d-word a couple of evenings ago and had said he wasn’t a neutral. This didn’t bode well. In the event he ran through the gamut of “questions you ask sceptics” – denialism, big oil funding and do on – and in a way that was quite aggressive (but not unfairly so), but I think it fair to say that didn’t go the way he expected. I should add that Hasan’s handling of the Q&A was exemplary.
Read his entire account here
Josh livetooned the event, and you can see his work here
While the event was not livestreamed, it was recorded, and word has it that it will be made available online in about a week. When/if that happens, I’ll make it available here.
In related news….
Warmist bummed out by the results of the Lindzen debate: “The aim was to shame the sceptic, but we just gave him a stage”
http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2013/03/warmist-bummed-out-by-results-of.html
Adding fuel to out-of-date scepticism. | Tara’s Eco Science Blog[Warmist on the Lindzen debate] Ward expressed his anger, via Twitter, that we were giving air time to a person who is now completely irrelevant to science and research in climate change…The aim was to shame the sceptic, but we just gave him a stage.
Cliff Kincaid — Al Gore’s Al Jazeera Deal Now a Major Scandal
While the lawsuit over the sale of Al Gore’s Current TV to Al Jazeera is making headlines, a close reading of the legal complaint provides additional evidence that a congressional investigation into the curious transaction is urgently needed and necessary.
The media executive who claims to have arranged the sale says the idea was to make the Terror TV channel “palatable to U.S. lawmakers,” a formulation that suggests foreign lobbying on Capitol Hill in order to protect the $500 million payoff to Gore and other owners and investors in Current TV.
http://www.newswithviews.com/Kincaid/cliff702.htm
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I just posted a comment to Tara’s blog about her misinformation about Dr. Lindzen but do not know if she will approve it, so I am posting it here as well,
Tara, you are confusing papers and dates and stating incorrect information.
Dr. Lindzen’s did successfully publish his Iris hypothesis in a peer-reviewed science journal, “Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society” in 2001,
Does the Earth Have an Adaptive Infrared Iris?
(Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, Volume 82, Issue 3, pp. 417-432, March 2001)
– Richard S. Lindzen, Ming-Dah Chou, Arthur Y. Hou
The NYT article you link to cites a comment on this paper but fails to include Dr. Lindzen’s rebuttal,
* Comment on “No Evidence for Iris”
(Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, Volume 83, Issue 9, pp. 1345–1349, September 2002)
– Richard S. Lindzen, Ming-Dah Chou, Arthur Y. Hou
You are confusing this with a later paper the NYT’s article also discusses, which again was published in a peer-reviewed science journal, “Geophysical Research Letters” in 2009,
On the determination of climate feedbacks from ERBE data
(Geophysical Research Letters, Volume 36, Number 16, August 2009)
– Richard S. Lindzen, Yong-Sang Choi
This is the recent paper the NYT’s article is discussing that was criticized to which Dr. Lindzen addressed all such criticisms and again published an updated version of the paper in a peer-reviewed science journal, “Asia-Pacific Journal of Atmospheric Sciences” in 2011.
On the Observational Determination of Climate Sensitivity and Its Implications
(Asia-Pacific Journal of Atmospheric Sciences, Volume 47, Number 4, pp. 377-390, August 2011)
– Richard S. Lindzen, Yong-Sang Choi
Thompson Reuters (ISI) Science Citation Index lists the Asia-Pacific Journal of Atmospheric Sciences as a peer-reviewed science journal,
http://ip-science.thomsonreuters.com/cgi-bin/jrnlst/jlresults.cgi?PC=MASTER&ISSN=1976-7633
Before being so sarcastic in the future please get your facts straight.
“Lew Skannen says: “The aim was to shame the sceptic,..”
So they have given up all hope of ever refuting the sceptic argument in logical debate then.”
This has been their tactic for some time now and is getting more shrill the worse they lose any debate. I’ve seen it repeatedly, just when you are sure they lost the argument they go into a full court press of smear, no lie left unsaid.
Gods… some of you think you’ll get the truth from Russia Today? Wake up.
I see no comments at Tara’s Eco Science Blog – I guess they have not been approved…
Cliff Kindaid’s Al Jazerra posting is both hysteria and bigotry and posting the term “Terror TV channel” from his screed on this website dengrates its excellent quality. While Al Jazerra’s editorial page tends to be an embarassing melange of western leftist fellow travelers and its coverage of Israel ridiculously one sided, Al Jazerra provides the most comprehensive coverage of news across the globe of any news organization in the world (including the BBC). Americans deserve the global perspective Al Jazerra offers and I trust that people can filter out the leftist nonesense and take away a greater understanding of the world.
” richard Verney says:”
March 9, 2013 at 7:38 am
“Regrettably, here in the UK, because of the BBC (Biased Broadcasting Corporation), to get some balance on world events, or to see another view point on issues, I frquently watch Russia Today, (which carries quite a few good documentaries and current affairs programmes, in particular Cross Talk is often very good) and less often CCTC (Chinese news channel) and even occassionally Al Jazeera.”
“The state of MSM is very depressing, especially since more than ever governments could really do with being held to account by MSM failing which they will ride rough shod over their citizens..”
This observation is unbeleivably telling!
The Western population is sleepwalkin into and abys.
Every single one of those organisations and the society’s they represent will turn on the west the minute they smell the opportunity of weakness. Which is on it’s way, BTW.
Has anyone thought of Wind Farms and Solar panles? surely they’d be good idea?, and would save us lots of money, and save the planet as well.
Most of the Western population has turned into “Useful idiots” Look it up, might scarer the pants of a few.
“Its a bummer Man.”, The Dude.
The Observer yesterday had an interesting interview with Mark Lynas where he explains his change of mind on GM and other matters, which he says was brought about by studying the science. He is not at all complimentary about his former fellow travellers who regard him as a turncoat. Hopefully he may look at the ‘science’ behind global warming.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/mar/09/mark-lynas-truth-treachery-gm