Climate Craziness of the Week: 'feminist glaciology' in the climate change context

I’ll probably be labeled a misogynist pig for even bringing this paper to the attention of our readers, but there are just some things that just deserve to be called “crazy”. When I first saw this, I thought it might be a parody, or an old April Fools joke. Sadly, no. The abstract from this publication Progress in Human Geography reads:

Glaciers, gender, and science: A feminist glaciology framework for global environmental change research


Glaciers are key icons of climate change and global environmental change. However, the relationships among gender, science, and glaciers – particularly related to epistemological questions about the production of glaciological knowledge – remain understudied. This paper thus proposes a feminist glaciology framework with four key components: 1) knowledge producers; (2) gendered science and knowledge; (3) systems of scientific domination; and (4) alternative representations of glaciers. Merging feminist postcolonial science studies and feminist political ecology, the feminist glaciology framework generates robust analysis of gender, power, and epistemologies in dynamic social-ecological systems, thereby leading to more just and equitable science and human-ice interactions.


h/t to Richard Saumarez

Like me, you are probably wondering what a “feminist glaciology framework” is

Through a review and synthesis of a multi-disciplinary and wide-ranging literature on human-ice relations, this paper proposes a feminist glaciology framework to analyze human-glacier dynamics, glacier narratives and discourse, and claims to credibility and authority of glaciological knowledge through the lens of feminist studies. As a point of departure, we use ‘glaciology’ in an encompassing sense that exceeds the immediate scientific meanings of the label, much as feminist critiques of geography, for example, have expanded what it is that ‘geography’ might mean vis-a`-vis geographic knowledge (Domosh, 1991; Rose, 1993). As such, feminist glaciology has four aspects: (1) knowledge producers, to decipher how gender affects the individuals producing glacierrelated knowledges; (2) gendered science and knowledge, to address how glacier science, perceptions, and claims to credibility are gendered; (3) systems of scientific domination, to analyze how power, domination, colonialism, and control – undergirded by and coincident with masculinist ideologies – have shaped glacier-related sciences and knowledges over time; and (4) alternative representations, to illustrate diverse methods and ways – beyond the natural sciences and including what we refer to as ‘folk glaciologies’ – to portray glaciers and integrate counter-narratives into broader conceptions of the cryosphere. These four components of feminist glaciology not only help to critically uncover the under-examined history of glaciological knowledge and glacier-related sciences prominent in today’s climate change discussions. The framework also has important implications for understanding vulnerability, adaptation, and resilience – all central themes in global environmental change research and decision-making that have lacked such robust analysis of epistemologies and knowledge production (Conway et al., 2014; Castree et al., 2014).


The funding source didn’t surprise me:

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work is based upon work supported by the US National Science Foundation under grant #1253779.

So, the gist of this paper can be summed up in this statement:

Most existing glaciological research – and hence discourse and discussions about cryospheric change – stems from information produced by men, about men, with manly characteristics, and within masculinist discourses. These characteristics apply to scientific disciplines beyond glaciology; there is an explicit need to uncover the role of women in the history of science and technology, while also exposing processes for excluding women from science and technology.

Those darn manly men with their masculinist discourses! But, I digress.

It would seem to me that given a choice of going to a remote and bitterly cold place, where you have to live in harsh minimalist conditions, with little human contact for months, just doesn’t appeal to many women, hence creating this perceived “bias” or lack of “feminine glaciology”. After all, millions of husbands and wives battle over the home thermostat setting daily. However, if somebody wants to break through the “ice ceiling” of glaciology, I nominate my Internet stalker Miriam O’Brien, aka “Sou”/Hotwhopper who could be a groundbreaking icebreaking leader by going to live on a glacier for a year so she can study it. I might actually pay to see that.


newest oldest most voted
Notify of

Feminist claptrap with a climate change theme – absolutely bound to be published!! Expect the LGBT activists to do something similar very soon??



phil cartier

Trans-glaciology might be the study of liquid water flowing in streams and the causes that make it turn into ice?


phil, Only if the water self-identifies as ice.


This is all about Ice Queens, the ladies who are married to very old rich men who can’t do much to muss these dame’s fake hair pieces while pawing at them.

Please take your offensive views elsewhere. I am trans-glacial; a glacier born into a human’s body and you will never understand the pain I am in. I have a burning desire to melt due to climate change but this darn human vessel I’ve been forced to live my life in won’t let me. My transition involves drinking 20 litres of water a day and sitting in the cold. I am sad all the time. All I want is a little happiness but people keep heating their homes to stop themselves from some made up thing called “freezing to death”.


While everyone else, commenting on this blog post, seems to think that the proposed “merging [of] feminist post-colonial and feminist political ecology” so as to achieve an urgently needed “feminist glaciology framework” that will, in turn, engender “robust analysis of gender, power, and epistemologies in dynamic social-ecological systems, thereby leading to a more just and equitable science and human-ice interactions” to be some sort of big-joke, PC-booger self-parody, I for one have a different take-a-way.
Namely, I find that the post’s article serves to utterly discredit, root and branch, the whole of that male-normative, “masculinist ideology”, that we term “climate science”, and that has been foisted on humanity by a tiny, privileged-white-boy, dork elite–a so-called “science” that the “lens of feminist studies” has thankfully exposed in all its colonial, power and control, scientific-domination villainy, along with its bogus claims to credibility that we now know to be hopelessly mired in a misogynistic, sexist-pig, “gendered” bias. And I mean, like, the article discredits the whole she-bang–the hyped scare-mongering; the brazen-hypocrite, carbon-piggie eco-confabs; the tenured-troughs; the climate models; the Gaia-freak blogs (and just which “physics” are you referring to ATTP, in your blog-title?–beta-weenie, good-ol’-boy, no-girls-allowed-treehouse physics, maybe? (I think so, wotts/Anders.)), and all the make-a-greenwashed-buck/gulag, carbon-phobe scams. Who knew it could be so simple to take down the hive-bozos?
So anyway, let me conclude that I, for one, will reject out of hand, any of the hive’s agit-prop “scholarship”, past, present, and future, and encourage others to do likewise, unless such ivory-tower flim-flam can be shown to be methodologically free of the slightest “masculinist ideology”–which should pretty much shut down the the whole useless-eater, academic-parasite contribution to the “global-warming” hustle. That, and allow me to also register my delight in the goldmine of cant-goodies, contained in the post’s article that, I recommend, can be mined, until the end of time, for boomerang-zingers with which to plague those poor-soul, dead-ender hive-heros, who, with one foot in the dustbin of history, are still puttin’ up a last-stand, lost-cause, good-comrade fight.

You forgot the ‘Sarc’ tag.

Either STOP the intravenous Red Bull/ROCK Star or get some Adderal my man….because those colorful-yet-inane run on sentences are killing me. Please? 🙂 With sugar cubes laced with sedatives on top?


Yeah, I know what you mean–more or less. But all I can think of that might help is to, you know, maybe, like, conceive of the whole untidy, logorrhea-attack mess as a sort of self-indulgent, Proust-wannabe, “Where’s Waldo” word-picture embroidery, derived from the “Teachings of Don Juan”, that is strictly intended to push hive-bozo buttons. I mean, like, the good-comrades are such literal-minded, humorless, party-line stiffs, that I’ve found this sort of thing really screws with their Pavlovian-reflexes–which, again, is the whole point of the drill.

Chip Javert

Yup. Three sentences & 88 words; you’re on the road to recovery.


@ Javert
Hmmm…I see Chip that you’ve used versions of that word-count, booger-flick zinger of yours on me twice now. First time–just a light-hearted, good-fun ribbing, we all understand. You know, the sort of regular-guy needle, you’d expect between a coupla, cut-up, rough-house ol’ buddies, and all. Twice though? And with that Javert “handle” of yours? So, Chip, let me ask: are you actively conducting some sort of “Nurse Ratched” stalker-pursuit of moi, in half-baked imitation of your famous namesake? Hmmm?….time will tell, I guess.
And let’s also consider, Chip, that you goin’ through my comments and actually countin’ the number of words and sentences on two occasions holds the hint of a possible, obsessive weirdness creepin’ into your little, pot-shot drive-bys, over time, I’m thinkin’–you know what I mean, there, Chip?
But look, Chip, I like a good game of tit-for-tat, as well as the next dude. So please be reassured that I’m happy to match my “tats” to your “tits” any day–lookin’ forward to it, in fact, if that’s where we’re headed (and if the moderator will allow it, of course).


Like, go Mike!


This is what you get when there is too much funding. Total horse sh!t. Join bandwagon due to MONEY? Oh nooooooooooooooooooo Jimbo. We don’t care about money, we care about tomorrow’s ‘climate change’ (weather) BS. Climate change and the weather were ever thus. (I have more examples like the ones below)

Climatic Change As A Topic In The Classical Greek And Roman Literature
A search was made of the classical Greek and Roman literature for references to climatic change, irrespective whether facts of observation or views. It was found that several scholars/scientists of the classical antiquity made pronouncements on the subject and their statements are either summarized or quoted verbatim in this paper. From the Greek literature we quote Plato, Aristotle and Theophrastus; Herodotus is also quoted for an indirect reference to the topic. From the Roman literature we cite…
Thomas Jefferson on climate change

Greg Cavanagh

Would I be right in saying:
“The world will be too hot for human habitation by 400AD”
“It’s worse than we thought”
“It’s happening faster than we thought”
“We need a single Earth government to solve the problem”

John Harmsworth

Those guys couldn’t get published now, which just exposes the inherent societal bias against dead people. Especially dead women! Grants for dead women! Repeat after me……

Female hurricanes are deadlier than male hurricanes


You are mistaken, those are feminine. Where are your PC gendered manners?

Paul Mackey

“human-ice relationship”????

Bloke down the pub

Feminism obviously wasn’t providing sufficient grant opportunities, so they decided to double dip into the climate pool.

Barbara Skolaut

“Feminism obviously wasn’t providing sufficient grant opportunities”
You misspelled “graft.”

+1 or more. Witty and brief.

Two Labs

That’s exactly what happened here.


Bloke, you nailed it.
Fields like astronomy have a problem jumping on the bandwagon. I wonder if a proposal titled “The Effect of Climate Change on the Distribution of White Dwarf Stars in the Galactic Halo” would work.

Tom Graves

Cinderella and the Seven White Dwarfs

Not all are men. My daughter-in-law is a glaciologist in Greenland…


If female science and facts in the field of glaciology are different from that of males in the same field, then I submit they’re not really dealing will facts in the first place, only conjecture.


All the MEN inside the Global Warming Scare Movement are all sissies so of course, the Sisters must save them via feminist charges against cruel men (and some of us females!) who are telling them, they are NOT roasting to death when it is slightly warmer than tepid tea at a party in the shade in summer in Britain while watching someone play croquet.

David A

“As a point of departure, we use ‘glaciology’ in an encompassing sense that exceeds the immediate scientific meanings of the label,”
Man-o-man, I agree with that, departed and left science long ago.


Wow. Replace the word “feminist” with “eskimo” or “nigerian”, and it gets to be a funny read…


DARN!!! You let the secret out, its the latest Nigerian scam.


Darn ! Goatguy !!!
You have uncovered the latest Nigerian scam.


Darn11 Goatguy.
How did you know it was the latest Nigerian scam?

NW sage

You haven’t got your phone call yet?


I did not have relations with that glacier
– Bill C

“… It had relations with me”
I think that’s what slick Willy said ( of Monica)


Wrong. He was married to a glacier that didn’t melt.


His wife IS a feminist. Perhaps he longed for something warmer to hug, like a glacier or something.


There’s usually sand and grit and rocks mixed in with glaciers.

John W. Garrett

…just when I thought I’d heard and seen it all.


Personally I trace all this misogyny that so infects the study of glaciers to that “Turney of Antarctica” dude–Chris Turney–who, you might well remember, got his patriarchal posterior and those of the trusting morons, who joined his little, PR-stunt jaunt, stuck in a bunch of Antarctic ice, that all the Gaia-con models (models conspicuously suffering from unjust and inequitable, male-normative, sexist-pig biases, I might add) and who then took not the slightest care to see that the rescue of his sorry ass and that of the privileged-white myn and wymyn idiots, who trusted the guy and even paid Turney money to join his little expedition fiasco, was PC-sensitive, but rather ol’ clueless Chris acquiesced–compounding his initial, bumbling incompetence a zillion-fold–to a life-saving evolution that presented a world-wide audience with nothing less than an obscene, counter-narrative, manly, heroic spectacle, that showcased the very worst in masculinist power, domination, and control, and which essentially zeroed-out decades of work by the hive’s best-and-brightest, empowered man-haters, in the area of post-colonial human-ice perspectives and feminist, emergency-responder, butt-saving technique and technology epistemologies.


A coupla corrections:
Should be, “that all the Gaia-con models (models conspicuously suffering from unjust and inequitable, male-normative, sexist-pig biases, I might add) predicted would not be there…”, and “not only trusted the guy, as previously noted, but even paid Turney money…”
Also, thank you Jack for your comment in reply to Goldrider’s query. I wrongly assumed, I now realize, that the Turney fiasco, so firmly planted in my memory, was a memory shared by everyone else. In that regard, Goldrider, you might want to look up the WUWT, December 30, 2013 blog-post “The Antarctic research fiasco”. Some good fun was had by all with that blog-post.

Chip Javert

We’ve talked about this before – 3 sentences and 191 words (unknown number of complete thoughts).

Christopher Paino

You folks really can’t deal with sentences longer than five to ten words can you? What happened? Didn’t get much further than Dr. Seuss? Stay away from Kerouac! Yer head’s will spin around and explode!


Seriously. Whiskey–Tango–FOXTROT?


Turney was the dingbat that took a ship to the Antarctic to prove it was melting. The ship became icebound and he screeched in most feminist way to be rescued. After great expense, they were.

Ian Magness

Fantastic post! Thank you very much. Made my day reading this pseudo intellectual twaddle. The UK satirical magazine Private Eye does (or did) public sentences from this sort of nonsense in a section called “Pseud’s corner”. They’d need to publish the entire article in this case. “Feminist post-colonial science studies” does it for me. Hilarious!

Reed Coray

“I’d rather hear about “Feminist postcoital science studies.”

David Smith

“pseud’s corner” is still going strong.
I’m an avid private eye reader. It’s superb


Sorry, I do not understand these feminist glaciology. What do these women mean? Are the glaciers move slower or faster, when the looked at by feminist women?
[The mods are wondering if they thaw faster, or freeze more solid, when looked at by non-feminist women? .mod]

Glaciers are much more sensitive and emotional than those ignoramus males give them credit for.


…Like most feminists, the glaciers are…Frigid !


Looked at the video, and at the end came across another with the same title. By great happenstance, the bloke was trying to chat up a bird at the fish counter, right next to the label “Snow Crab Legs”. Query, do snow crabs live on glaciers? Or are they a reference to femininist researchers on gender afflicted glaciers?
And, Chip Javert, I copied Mike’s effusion into word and used “Tools/Word Count” to assess the passage. 191 words right, but only ONE full stop! Number of sentences depends on whether or not you accept an exclamation mark as the terminator of a sentence. If you do, there were four. If not there were two. Multiple exclamation marks don’t count. And, BTW, I used “Tools” in the Word for Windows grammatical sense, not in the sense relating to the strictly non-feminist appendage.

John Harmsworth

My ex wife’s frozen rear end had advanced the width of a king sized bed from 1980 to 2000 when I had to flee the region due to “instabilities”. Just my contribution to the histerical record.


” I’m probably be label as misogynist pig for even bringing this paper to the attention of our readers, but ”
Anthony, should that be ” I’ll ” not ” I’m ” ????


There’s that old joke about “His” and “Hers” thermostats. The “His” thermostat looks like the standard, wall-mounted, round thermostat, and is marked off in increments 50, 55, 60, 65, 70, 75, 80. The “Hers” thermostat looks the same, but is marked in two increments, ‘Too Hot’ and ‘Too Cold’.

True story. My second job was helping a friend of mine in his HVAC business. One of our clients had a Carrier computerized system. The temperature in each room was controlled by the computer. But the thermostat was programmed to lie to people. The ladies in the office were always adjusting the temperature. So when they adjusted the thermostat down, for instance, the thermostat would slowly show a lower temperature than what the room actually was. The computer kept the room at the temperature the administration wanted it, but the thermostat would tell people the temperature was what they wanted it at. The ladies never knew.

A true story from when I used to work, back in the stone age:
One year many decades ago I got a very large manager size cubicle.
Nothing fancy but it had a thermostat on one wall.
My office was surrounded by about 60 engineers in small cubicles.
Every morning a female engineer from one of the cubicles would come to my office and ask if she could turn up the thermostat. Of course I let her.
Every afternoon after lunch a male engineer would come in and ask if he could turn down the thermostat. Of course I let him.
I let them in because I was new in that area and didn’t want to argue with anyone.
After a week I called an HVAC engineer and asked him to move the thermostat somewhere else.
He told me the thermostat was only used as a temperature monitor for that portion of the office building.
The knob to change the temperature had been disconnected when the building was built in the 1950s !
The temperature was actually controlled from another building a half mile away in the product development campus.
He told me he’d install a cover — it took at least a month before a polycarbonate shield was installed over the thermostat.
After that, male engineers were pulling their hair out after lunch when they found out they had no control over the “climate”.
One male engineer tried to pick the lock with a paper clip.
One female engineer seemed like she was about to cry one morning when she asked to raise the temperature and then found that plastic shield blocking the “temperature control”.
This was in the 1980s. There are still 1,000 engineers in that building and I wonder if the “climate” issue is still a problem.
I’m not sure if there was any lesson here, but I have never told the story online.

[This is guaranteed to get me in trouble. Ladies, please skip to the next
comment block, these are not the comments you are looking for!]
(4) alternative representations of glaciers
I was looking at the growth/retreat rates of alpine glaciers a few years ago at . I was surprised at how much that varied between glaciers, but now that I’ve learned glaciers are feminine, I see it’s just that glaciers are having trouble making up their minds.
Sometimes glaciers experience a surge in their rate of travel. I propose we call that event a hot flash.


..OMG !! My screen is now covered in beer ! Thanks for that..I don’t care about the screen, but I really wanted that beer !! LOL


How typically male!. Huh!!


Male and Irish !! Double Huh ! LOL


I’m male and Welsh…..I feel your pain bro…..

Gunga Din

Perhaps if they asked a man for directions they’d know which way to go?

Gary Pearse

Ask as feminist for directions and she’ll tell you where to go.

As glaciers get older the more they go downhill. ( you can make of that what you want).


“Ask as feminist for directions and she’ll tell you where to go.”
Yeah, but she has the map upside down!

“Ask as feminist for directions and she’ll tell you where to go.”
“Yeah, but she has the map upside down!”
Nope. A feminist would never use a map created in a male dominated paradigm in which odds are the cartographer was male, the designer was male, the paper it was printed on was owned by men, and it was distributed through male dominated businesses. A feminist would tell you where to go, but then assume that you were too stupid/inept to get there yourself, so she’d create a banner, print shirts, declare a movement, and then trailblaze the way there in front of you with press coverage the entire way. 🙂


Unexplained changes in glacier flow rates could be so much easier to explain from the feminist perspective – they are simply arguing about the route to take to the sea! Or trying to read the map.

M Courtney

“a feminist glaciology framework to analyze human-glacier dynamics”
Human-glacier dynamics are simple.
They are giving us the cold-shoulder.
And relations are changing at a proverbially slow rate.

Looked up the NSF grant. $413K to reseach how societal forces shape Earth Science: glaciology (paraphrase). Amazing how little $413k buys at the University of Oregon.

Gary Pearse

Don’t they now have to pay $100/kWh in Oregon?

NW sage

That starts tomorrow – the Legislature just adjourned!


This needs to be forwarded to Donald Trump, with context. Seriously. This is the kind of crap that needs to have its funding killed YESTERDAY the minute O. leaves office.

There is a real sociology of science. It is possible to do real research in that area and learn things you never suspected. What I suspect is that this “research” will simply regurgitate the “narrative” and “knowledges” that the post-modernists doing it already know, whatever the facts say. I think most WUWT readers would agree that social forces *are* very strongly shaping at least the climate “science” part of the earth sciences, worse luck. What odds do you give that this “research” will actually identify the dominant forces in the area? Or even that the “researchers” would see any point in trying to?
I wasn’t going to comment until I saw that $413k figure. How come they rake in money for trash while I can’t afford new glasses? Too honest, that’s my problem. If someone offered me $413k, I’d feel obliged to do $413k worth of honest work.


“(3) systems of scientific domination, to analyze how power, domination, colonialism, and control – undergirded by and coincident with masculinist ideologies” – 50 shades of sooty ice?

Coeur de Lion

Wot is LGBT?


Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender…..


…Personally, I have a slightly different name for it, but, alas, I would be SNIPPED !


And you would be sent to the end of the line.


well if you were snipped you could then claim to be a member of the LBGT community 😀


“… I would be SNIPPED !”
OT, but…
Speaking of snipped, why is it that when females are circumcised, it is rightly seen as a human rights travesty, but many people have no problem with the butchering of the genitalia of male infants?
Stop the carnage…leave those kids alone!


Glaciers are female. They calve. Only females calve. End story.


..Are you calling feminists ” cows ” ?..


…Or whales ?


Take you pick.

Heehee! 🙂


mkelly, why do you want to insult cows and whales ?

TImo Soren

I believe this is an abridged but pretty good list of animals that ‘calve’:
Antelope, Bison, Cows, Dolphins and Porpoises, Camels, Giraffes and Elephants, Oxen (many types), Hippos and Moose, Reindee and Rhinos, All whales and of course the Yak.

Jeff Alberts

When they say “gender” they actually mean “sex”. Originally, gender referred to behavior, mostly in grammatical constructs, differentiating between masculine, feminine, and neuter; not the same as male and female. In recent decades it’s become more common to replace the word “sex” (male and female), with the word “gender”, which only serves to blur the actual meanings. Sad.


“Meanings?” “Meaning” is an outdated concept. The notion of so-called meaning delimits a corpus of utterance tokens upon which conformity has been defined by the familiar “paired utterance test.”[1] However, this assumption is not correct, since the theory of syntactic features developed earlier is unspecified with respect to a stipulation to place the constructions into these various categories. To provide a constituent structure for T(Z,K), this analysis of a formative as a pair of sets of features does not affect the structure of the levels of acceptability from fairly high (eg (99a)) to virtual gibberish (eg (98d)). Thus an important property of these three types of EC is necessary to impose an interpretation on a parasitic gap construction. To characterize a linguistic level L, any associated supporting element does not readily tolerate the requirement that branching is not tolerated within the dominance scope of a complex symbol. We don’t need no steenkin’ meanings!
[1] See


A certain W A Mozart produced a musical version of the Chomskybot. He wrote numerous either two bar or four bar bits, gave them numbers, and you could produce your own authentic Mozart piece – previously never known or played – by throwing dice to select the numbers and sticking the relevant pieces together. Referenced in “Scientific American” before it went mad.

I was labelled “mysoginistic” (sic) by ATTP for making fun of this paper.


“Physics” has more than one meaning.

Jim Hodgen

This is truly groundbreaking. Elizabeth Warren will soon be claiming to be 1/6th glacier – you can tell by the high cheekbones – in order to get another post at Harvard… the Law school is so passe’ now.

NW sage

She will obviously be applying for the Glaciology post!

Robert Ballard

Before any coring may be undertaken the ice must consent; this consent may be withdrawn at any time. Only under this regime will human interactions with ice be respectful of maintaining a safe place for today’s and tomorrow’s frozen post colonial feminists.


..Does the drill have to wear a condom ??


FETAG Feminists for the Ethical Treatment of Alpine Glaciers.
Glaciers have rights.


“Glaciers have rights”…..
Well, feelings anyway.


I thought they were..frigid !


There ought to be laws against molesting glaciers.

“There ought to be laws against molesting glaciers.”
Most glaciers I know are above the age of consent


The driller must be sure to continually ask for permission to keep drilling.


Especially if they are a dentist!

Feminism has infested every facet of Western society. The net result isn’t good.

Gunga Din

Here in the US, about the same time women got the vote, Prohibition became the law of the land. That was followed by The Great Depression which was followed by WW2 which ended in the ultimate PMS, the atom bomb. And now Congress can’t balance it’s checkbook. 😎
(Apologies in advance to the lovely ladies that frequent this site. That was a joke.)

I find Fempocalypse!! by karen straughan , , considerably more insightful .

Reed Coray

Theorem 1: Climate scientists are scraping the underside of the barrel for things to study.
Theorem 2: The NSF is more interested in political correctness than science.
If this paper doesn’t prove the first theorem and NSF’s funding of this paper doesn’t prove the second theorem, then proofs of these theorems don’t exist

Smokey (can't do much about wildfires)

@ Reed,
There are so many legitimate scientific mysteries out there to study (the climate realm included) that Theorem 1 must be considered falsified a priori, that is, before it can even be seriously examined. However, I would certainly allow that this paper stands in strong support of Theorem 2.
The NSF does nothing if not support the views of its governmental masters. As Goebbels knew well, even the most obvious propaganda can have the effect of making what might otherwise be thought of as “extreme” instead sound like a reasonable viewpoint.
This study is nothing more than a “boundary-stretcher” designed to make otherwise lunatic proclamations sound more like reasonable ideas. We must stop trying to defeat the malarkey with facts, because the malarkey is ALREADY clearly false; to even waste the time on it grants it the legitimacy it so desperately seeks. Instead, let it stand as the self-evident sewage that it is, and instead address the source: a government which is engaged in a war to win the public’s mind and willing support.
The fact that the current U.S. presidential front-runners are a known criminal and a TV game show host should NOT have been the first clue that the war isn’t going well for those opposed.

Reed Coray

I agree with your assessment of the Presidential candidates and the implication that although it is a clear clue that things aren’t going well for those opposed, it isn’t the first clue. When the two major political parties in this country nominate a clown and a scumbag things couldn’t be much worse.

I guess my point of view is a little different. When I see candidates who are part and parcel of the government’s ruling class (ex-Cabinet officers, a commie senator, etc., I see the same people who have made a terrible mess of things. Where does the buck stop?
Given that, how much worse would it be to elect a non-gov’t candidate?
As ‘Maxine‘ often says, “Can’t hurt. Might help.”
Or maybe you like this. Or this

Chip Javert

If you think the current candidates are bad (they are), wait till you look at the last couple of incumbents.


@dbstealey: In line with your second cartoon, I always thought of electing politicians is like choosing the best floater in your septic tank. I’d like to see an attitude of serving reluctantly, and leaving office to return to the real world. That is, having regular people serve a term in office and leave politics. No career politicians…..

Stephen Richards

The bull $hit is strong with climate people


Cow $hit please.


Bovine scat… Let’s be politically correct😄


I demand equal time for felgercarb!


When the cylons attack, felgercarb can have its time. Until then, frack it.


Does female science top male science- Do the numbers/measurements/data turn out different with a feminist scientist, would Mr Einstein’s theory be different if Mrs Einstein could have calculated the theory of relativity, would still be relevant?
Let’s give a grant and jump in a time machine to find out.
Watch for Bovine scat as you step out of the time machine!


The theory of Relativity by Mrs. Einstein: If one relative at a family dinner begins arguing about politics, another one will join and and both will be throwing food at each other in a rage within a stated time versus distance. E (Uncle Elmer)= m (mom) c (the youngest child) squared (where the pudding ends up on the floor after the child throws it while the uncles duke it out).


All the bulls–excuse me, self-identified male bovine quadrupedal herbivorous ungulates–seem to getting the “green grass runs” nowadays. Must be all that extra CO2.
You heard it here first: Global Warming causes more bullshi–excuse me, self-identified male bovine quadrupedal herbivorous ungulate fecal matter.

There are several words, commonly used in philosophy, that I’ve never seemed to learn properly. Epistemology is one, the definition is simple enough:
Google offers:

the theory of knowledge, especially with regard to its methods, validity, and scope. Epistemology is the investigation of what distinguishes justified belief from opinion.

Well that seems simple enough. Not worth getting into in a discussion over lunch, but hey, we talk about Donald Trump, anything else would be better than him.
Then I read something like:

all central themes in global environmental change research and decision-making that have lacked such robust analysis of epistemologies and knowledge production

(I’ve hated “robust” ever since it invaded Computer Science in the 1970s. Unfortunately, I haven’t found a better term.)
Given the definition, now I have to understand how it can be plural. I suppose if batteries can have multiple chemistries, there can be multiple ways of distinguishing belief from opinion.
I wonder if there’s an epistemology that catches fire and destroys itself.
I’ll never make it as a philosopher….

I’ll never make it as a philosopher….
Probably for the best …

“Philosophy consists very largely of one philosopher arguing that all others are jackasses. He usually proves it, and I should add that he also usually proves that he is one himself.”
― H.L. Mencken

phil cartier

anyone who tortures philosophy in this way doesn’t rate that title. Odisopher, or hater of knowledge would be more appropriate. In this case, the jackasses are proving themselves jennys.


Now, now, I’M “robust” and I’m a-callin’ you-all out for discrimination!!!

NW sage

‘Robust’ and ‘Comprehensive’ are interchangeable. Both should be used often in any pseudo scientific doublespeak article such as being discussed here.

John Harmsworth

Seems to me to be saying that the principal themes of climate change have not been subjected to epistological analysis to separate opinion from belief. I can agree with that but I’m pretty sure that’s not what they mean. What they do mean is that false and twisted knowledge is fine as long as it reflects gender balance. Or perhaps that women are forced to the shallow end of the science pool by nasty, nasty men.

I love this comment…


Strangely, this doesn’t sound at all strange to me. I’m used to hearing this kind of thing. Some of my best friends are third wave feminists. Sigh.
Having said the above … It’s worthwhile to study the workings of science and scientists. Most of us are painfully aware that scientists are not the dispassionate godlike creatures that some folks make them out to be. In light of that, I would like to suggest a really excellent CBC radio series How to Think about Science.


Godlike, no. But I’ve met three or four that should have been preserved at the Natural Bureau of Standards under a bell jar as definitive of “a gentleman.” There are scores, perhaps hundreds, of Climatasters who could be preserved as its antithesis.


The things you have to listen to in order to get laid…

Gary Hladik

Thanks for the laugh, Anthony.

Sean Peake

She can take comfort knowing that some glaciers are merely retreating to their safe spaces

Phil R

Does that mean that the advancing ones are aggressive bullies?

And I thought the Marxists were ludicrous when I was in school! Apparently they know the proper buzz words to use for the grant-writers.


From the article (bold mine):

However, the relationships among gender, science, and glaciers – particularly related to epistemological questions about the production of glaciological knowledge – remain understudied.

Could the reason be that (in my best Sam Kenison voice) NOBODY CARES?!!?!!

Tom in Florida

I suppose now we can never ask how much a glacier weights.

Gunga Din

“Does this snow cap make me look fat?”

Phil R

Can’t ask how old it is either.

Mary Catherine

Or how old it is.

My friends, come visit San Francisco for a weekend. Walk around and observe. It will become clear that we live among people who are transfixed in a very different reality, far removed from the scientific achievement of this age. It’s an unbelievable situation but it’s real.


Same in New York–which on weekends could pass for Solla Sollew.

Gunga Din

Some time ago someone put a link that went would produce a “paper” by randomly put together phrases.
Perhaps these ladies found that link?

Gunga Din

“Feminist political ecology” might be an example randomly linking words and/or phrases together….


You know what they say about leaving a monkey in the computer chair long enough . . . !


The link to the Postmodern Generator itself seems to be kaput. Try the chomskybot, instead:


After reading the abstract, I immediately thought of this:
“SCIgen is a program that generates random Computer Science research papers, including graphs, figures, and citations. It uses a hand-written context-free grammar to form all elements of the papers.”

The next glaciolgy study should be from the perspective of those using zimmer frames and coping with microaggression. Got to be all inclusive ya know.


Where is Alan Sokal when we need him. His classic spoof of deconstructionism, “Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity” had deconstructionist fools such as this paper’s author screaming like stuck pigs for years. We need a similar effort based on climate science.


Sokal [See ‘the Sokal Hoax’] left the deconstructionists hoist by their own petard, looking like total fools, wearing the emperor’s new clothes.
I still have a lingering suspicion that the MIT group that produced the “Climate Roulette Wheel” were spoofing Climate “science.” At the time, I enquired whether it were a joke, but received no reply from MIT.

R Shearer

Glacial melt periods are quite unpleasant.


So, does this mean glaciers are going to start burning their bras (do glaciers wear bras)? Are they going to go on birth control to prevent unwanted calving? What would a sexual revolution among glaciers look like? Are the female glaciers going to apply to Gaia for an Equal Rights Amendment? How do you tell the difference between a male and female glacier?

Gunga Din

Just look at how they’re made up.


So what’s the difference between boy and girl glaciers and how they’re made up?

David Schofield

Females calve?


verb: calve; 3rd person present: calves; past tense: calved; past participle: calved; gerund or present participle: calving
1. (of cows and certain other large animals) give birth to a calf.
* (of a person) help (a cow) give birth to a calf.
2. (of an iceberg or glacier) split and shed (a smaller mass of ice).

Alan Robertson


‘…gendered science and knowledge’…???
Surely ‘neutered science and knowledge;
with the first word now a verb, not an adjective?


Please, please, please tell me this is a parody that got through, much like the Sokol affair (, or perhaps something generated from a paper generator that uses random text. If not, the decline of (Western) civilization and the rise of the post-scientific era have all progressed further along than I had thought …
Having said that, I see a problem going forward for the authors of this paper. Since a common insult thrown against a trans-gendered person from hard-core feminists is to call such a person a “colonizer”, how will the field of post-colonial trans-gendered glaciology be allowed to develop? Just asking …


Godzilla facepalm? Perfect.

Quote: So, the gist of this paper can be summed up in this statement:
The very idea of a man summing up a feminist work just shows how oppressive men can be. Violent acts of compressing a large number of words into smaller numbers of words have been a tool of suppression by the patriarchy for hundreds of years.
Seriously, this drivel isn’t hard to write. The tricky part is turning it into money.

Not hard at all if we taxpayer suckers allow the feds to hand it out like candy to. . . babes?

Gary Pearse

Disclaimer: my mother was a strong woman who directed most things in our family and my sister was a true genius. But I’m afraid the western world has had an overdose of feminist hysterics on all fronts, although, interestingly, they turn away from such things in the “diversity sphere” as feminine genital mutilation and other freedom aspects of their new sisters). I’ve noted, apparently politically incorrectly in recent posts, that in the twilight of post normal climate science of the past few years, female authors have become quite prominent in taking up the torch from falling hands of the old guard. They already enjoy another layer of PC – how can you turn down grants for feminist science.
Please, I really love you women, but enough, nurture and nannying of society for awhile. The biggest surprise for feminists about 50 years ago was how much of a pushover men really were. I believe women were pi55ed how easy it was. My mother didn’t even know there was a difference. Hillary, could you also let this election pass and come back maybe next time after we’ve healed
from a bad experiment in politics that I was quite hopeful, supportive and excited about at the time. I liked Margaret Thatcher but she wasn’t the nannying kind and her likes and the likes of Golda Meir, Cleopatra, Queen Victoria and the two Elizabeths are hard to find these days.
The geography of feminists is a new one on me and the specific feminist glaciologist scared me a little. Am I correct in thinking that the difference that feminist glaciologist will find with glaciers is the reversal of their ‘robust’ tumescence of late? That there will be a major shrinking of the glaciers under the feminist glacial paradigm? Okay Mods- have at it if you will.


Um, Queen Victoria hid out on her little island and ignored nearly everything in England which she disliked.
Queen Elizabeth the II has done very little except produce some of the world’s most obnoxious children who are now global warmists running around screaming about it being too hot in between hunting foxes and going to bed with astonishingly ugly nosed mistresses.

Smart Rock

Yeah, but Queen Elizabeth I did some really good stuff, like (a) not starting any wars, which was pretty radical in those days, (b) listening to Thomas Gresham (good money drives out bad) and (c) getting the fossil fuel business started on what passed for an industrial scale in the 16th century. When I have time I want to research this last topic and maybe write a book about it. Well, maybe a paper. Well, perhaps a post at WUWT.
And a lot more besides. Probably the best ruler England ever had, and nowhere is it recorded that she called herself a feminist.

Gary Pearse

“.,.I nominate my Internet stalker Miriam O’Brien, aka “Sou”/Hotwhopper who could be a groundbreaking icebreaking leader by going to live on a glacier for a year..”
I didn’t realize she was a very large lady.


Wow! Sure this wasn’t written by those monkeys with a typewriter. Whoops, probably can’t say that.

David Chappell

At least two of the paper’s authors are men – Carey and Antonello (both are historians), Rushing is female and an undergrad at the time. M Jackson is genderless doctoral student in forestry.


So, two men, a girl and a eunuch went to this bar together and..

Jerilynn “M” Jackson is a geography doctoral student. Her interests are Climate change, glaciology, human geography, the Arctic, Iceland. I have no idea what human geography is, but I think I’d get in more trouble if I explored that.comment image

Oh, Google tells me “human geography” is the branch of geography dealing with how human activity affects or is influenced by the earth’s surface. Whew, I thought it required consenting adults.

Mike Macray

Great Entertainment Anthony… and comments! You really placed a pork pie on the prayer mat with that one!
Keep up the good work.


Excellent reason to disestablish the National Science Foundation.
No ha ha

Mickey Reno

Masculine glacier narrative: Oh baby, I love the curve of your U-shaped valley, the soft mounds of your terminal moraine, the allure of your sleek crevices…
Poor science. It doesn’t deserve this.


Mickey Reno…you ghost write for Pachauri don’t you? 🙂


Hahaha and you are under arrest!

David Chappell

Incidentally one paper co-authored by Carey is entitled “Give it a tug and feel it grow”.

I’m confused. Should I file this under Republican war on women, or Republican war on glaciers ??

Gunga Din

File it under “Ice isn’t the only that floats”.

stan stendera

[snip – over the top -mod]

“However, the relationships among gender, science, and glaciers – particularly related to epistemological questions about the production of glaciological knowledge – remain understudied.”
Is this not the funniest thing man woman or beast has ever read?