Yesterday, I was saddened to learn that Dr. Judith Curry had resigned her position at Georgia Tech. At the same time, I was impressed by her reasoning, and with her candor. I’m certain that she’ll still make some wonderful contributions in her new role. I thought this part of her post was very germane:
Once you detach from the academic mindset, publishing on the internet makes much more sense, and the peer review you can get on a technical blog is much more extensive. But peer review is not really the point; provoking people to think in new ways about something is really the point. In other words, science as process, rather than a collection of decreed ‘truths.’
I left this comment on her blog:
Dear Judith,
It is my wish that you find satisfaction, happiness, and effect as you travel down the new road. You’ve previously made a detour in 2010 to follow the “road less traveled” and along the way, you’ve made enemies, as well as many new friends. That took exceptional courage, and we are all better for it. Now, you can choose the road you like.
Best wishes, and kindest regards, with respect.
Anthony Watts
Her husband, Peter Webster, left this note:
A PERSONAL NOTE:
Judy and I have been together for many years and partners in many endeavors. I would like to make a number of personal observations relative to her post.
I have never met another person with higher integrity, honesty and forthrightness. When you ask Judy for an opinion, one expects her to be honest. There is no flim flam! I have been the recipient of advice in many joint areas of our lives and when I pick myself off the floor, bruised ego and all, one finds her advice has been sound.
She is an eloquent spokesperson for the integrity of science and stands apart from many academics that, for their own survival, have been forced along paths that allows a lack of questioning we would hope would exist in all areas of science. In my opinion she has challenged the “oligarchs of conformity” on either side of the climate discussion. But I think you may have noticed these characteristics within her blog.
Let me say a few things about her scientific career of which many of many of you may be less aware. Judy ranks extremely highly in many areas of science ranging from radiation theory, cloud physics, thermodynamics and arctic climate. Besides modeling and theoretical work she has organized field experiences in hazardous parts of the world. Of late, she has major contributions in extended prediction that have been discussed on the blog. She has published nearly 200 papers in the standard peer reviewed literature and two major scientific text books as well. Given her extremely high citations and scientific influence, one has to wonder (but not very far) why she has not received the accolades she clearly deserves. She has been nominated for awards and prizes many times. But, simply put, there are no prizes or awards for those not in lock-step with the conformity of the field. However, Judy’s awards and distinctions have come from her efforts from other towards the sanctity of science. I think Judy would agree to that.
Her service to academia has been stellar. She took over a struggling department at Georgia Tech and now, 15 years later after 24 hires it ranks in the top echelon of earth and atmospheric schools globally. I would dearly love to say that the present high-level administrators of Tech appreciate her efforts but they are more concerned with being in “lock-step” with consensus positions as well. God forbid that a prominent GT faculty member may question consensus science! Judy, thus, is correct in her assessment of the state of higher education beyond Georgia Tech.
Finally, Judy in retirement! I think it is the correct move for her at this stage of her career. Note that I said “at this stage” as I have no doubt that she will continue to be a strong voice promoting scientific integrity. I am equally sure she will excel in business as well.
Judy, thanks for our exciting ride and to all those things you have given me and our field in general. Ethics have risen and dogma has suffered through your efforts! Academia is merely a stepping stone!
Peter W
(submitted without permission or review!)
CFACT writes via email. (link here)
Dr. Judith Curry, a respected climate scientist, has announced her resignation from her tenured position at Georgia Tech.
She’s had enough of the politics and propaganda that beset climate science.
Dr. Curry explained,
“the deeper reasons have to do with my growing disenchantment with universities, the academic field of climate science and scientists… I no longer know what to say to students and postdocs regarding how to navigate the CRAZINESS in the field of climate science. Research and other professional activities are professionally rewarded only if they are channeled in certain directions approved by a politicized academic establishment — funding, ease of getting your papers published, getting hired in prestigious positions, appointments to prestigious committees and boards, professional recognition, etc.”
“How young scientists are to navigate all this is beyond me, and it often becomes a battle of scientific integrity versus career suicide.”
More on her blog here
Dr. Curry appears in CFACT’s documentary film Climate Hustle which touches upon her journey from member of the climate establishment to principled dissenter, after being shocked by what was revealed in the “Climategate” emails.
Restoring integrity to climate science and making it once again a welcoming field for researchers like Dr. Curry won’t be easy.
Renowned atmospheric scientist Richard Lindzen of MIT has called for severe measures.
“They should probably cut the funding by 80 to 90 percent until the field cleans up,” he said. “Climate science has been set back two generations, and they have destroyed its intellectual foundations.”
As 2017 begins change is in the air.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Well I am disappointed at my alma mater for not supporting her more. EAS was not even a real major option while I was there. It was more of a backwater department and some courses one took to pad the ol’ transcript with sciencey courses.
One of the things I liked about my education at Ma Tech was that all professors there challenged us to think for our own. We learned to solve problems, no matter what your major. I hope they haven’t lost that primary objective – to give the world a helluvan engineer.
It’s a shame that she did not stick it out for another year. I think the ‘climate’ in climate science is going to change a lot in the near future as wind of fear of a new administration, which will be a lot less tolerant of abusive practices, takes over.
I have always enjoyed a very direct and honest interaction with Dr Curry in personal communications. I know I can just say what I think without having to flounce around with diplomatic fluff. She is always terse and to the point and appreciative of critical comments that she cannot counter. That is the way truth-seeking science should work.
I’m sure that we’ll be hearing a lot more from J.C. in the future.
If Mr. Trump has the smarts I think he does, he will appoint Dr. Curry to an appropriate post.
Prof Curry has stated that her goal was to get away from politics. I doubt she would be interested in a political appointment.
…and yet the current “science of climate” is purely political. I would argue that she can be most effective in battling the stupidity and criminality that “Climate Change” has become by allying herself with a president that will truly be transformational–rejecting Obama’s abject aberration and turning us back to real science where truth is never controlled by politics.
Pop,
I was thinking that very same thing. Perhaps the Secretary of Official Climate Science
I believe Trump’s NOAA Administrator position has not been filled.
Perhaps he will make a new post, ‘science advisor at large’ or whatever, that requires/encourages no political allegiances at all . . and no spacial restrictions ; )
I anticipate some “push-back” to Dr. Curry’s reproach, in the above blog-post, “I no longer know what to say to students and postdocs regarding how to navigate the CRAZINESS in the field of climate science. Research and other professional activities are only professionally rewarded if they are channeled in certain directions approved by a politicized academic academic establishment…”
Curiously, then, we can thank Sou (Hotwhopper) of all people, for providing aid and comfort to Dr. Curry’s principled critique of the heavy-handed group-think that currently abuses the field of climate science.
In a comment attached to the Stoat 31st December 2016 blog-post, “MIT Climate Scientist Dr. Richard Lindzen urges Trump:…” Sou (again, a. k.a. Hotwhopper), obviously groovin’ on the vibe of yet another of her famous, chronic, dotty, chatterbox losses of impulse control, from outta nowhere, goes on an ageist, macro-agression roll (which, given photos, kickin’ around the blogosphere, that purport to be of Hotwhopper, herself, can, perhaps, best be described as senescent self-loathing, in character):
-“It is often commented that [d-words] are usually a bunch of old retired disgruntled scientists-for-hire…Political lobby groups keep trotting out the same old crowd of decrepit people [TRIGGER WARNING!!!: note Hotwhopper’s mocking ridicule of those who have overcome the infirmities of age to remain productive, contributing members of society] that were there in the 1990s…Does anyone know any up-and-coming science [d-words] who have a science background?”
Sou/Hotwhopper’s query being answered by a certain “magma” (TRIGGER WARNING!!! that very same magma, in an earlier comment, and for the mere sake of a tasteless, offensive, cheap shot “big joke”, that would, frankly, be out of place in even the raunchiest of locker-rooms, makes a cruel, insensitive mockery of those brave souls, of the “dwarfism” community who have not only made for themselves happy, fulfilled lives, even in the face of the sort of demeaning taunts and gibes, so often directed their way by the likes of “magma” and other such lefty-puke, social-reject, malignant dorks, but have even found a triumphant “pride” in their community’s defining condition) as follows:
“I also know some graduate students who have absorbed their thesis supervisors’ contrarian/skeptical/[d-word] viewpoints…they are young, few in number, and unlikely to have much of a research career unless they can start to think for themselves.”
Hmmm….very interesting to learn from magma that the phrase “think for themselves” is now the hive’s latest, Orwellian, Lysenkoist, dog-whistle, agit-prop euphemism for “get with the party-line, when it comes to the Gaia-hustle’s Orthodoxy, or be sure that the Ivory Tower’s neo-chekist hit-squad will make of you one less counter-revolutionary, bourgeois-sentimentalist thought-criminal, for the good-comrades to have to share their troughs with.” And Sou/Hotwhopper wonders that she has such a difficulty finding “up-and-coming science [d-words], who have a science background.”
And when I compare trashy hive-tools like magma and Sou/Hotwhopper to Dr. Judith Curry–a model of courage; high-minded and honorable, independent thought; and dignified, good-humored disdain for the pesterings of her many petty detractors–I am reminded just how grateful I am for her myriad, noble, sacrificial contributions to the preservation of ethical science. My respects, Dr. Curry.
I am thankful the cause of Truth has had the likes of Judith standing up for It. What would we have done, without the courageous voices, the past twenty years? May God bless her and protect her future pathway, but I can’t say I blame her for being a bit exasperated with some of her contemporaries.
President Trump should create a new “Office of Scientific Integrity” and see if Judith wants to run it for him.
At the higher public figure level in CS you’re only going to get paid if you support the consensus. Dr. Curry towed plenty of line along the way in that regard.
The actual science is pretty ambiguous by it’s nature. Long on theory and short on tangibility or “truth”. It’s only due to a largely poorly educated population that the sham of CAGW (related carbon mitigation agendas/taxes etc.) could ever have been sold to the public with the assistance of similarly willful academic and media arm of the Green agenda variety.
There are people theorizing string theory, blackhole formations, dark matter without even going into all abstractions of humanity “sciences” like human behavioral studies, phycology etc. Weather and climate are constantly sold like Newtonian Physics or a multiple choice test with a particular correct answer. I’m not saying any of these things shouldn’t be funded but the idea that this peer review factory of climate studies carry serious long-term intellectual weight is a joke. The whole operation is a loss leader for government expansion rationalizations over carbon producing industry. Junk science motives from the start.
You can’t expect people who devote themselves to abstract study to admit it. Most climate people are dedicated or very sympathetic to Green cultural values and certainly Dr. Curry falls into that category. Should we take her at her word she wants to move away from “politics”? The timing of all this conclusiveness is curious. She is exactly the sort of middle of the road fence straddler who finds there way into higher government all the time. I don’t think she needed to resign for such a role.
As for Trump he should have a list of people who have been called Holocaust Deniers for at least the past 10 years. Those are the people who deserve real admiration. Frankly, Dr. Curry’s epiphany is half baked and she should never be trusted in a Trump administration. She is exactly the sort of “middle” poser that could add another 40 years of climate fraud incubation if she has a seat at the table. She only started to have doubts since 2009? That’s like renouncing Soviet Communism in late 89′, better then nothing but not by all that much. Not exactly the keenest observation skills if you are paid warming tool for 30+ years as peoples lives and careers were routinely destroyed all over your tiny science universe for decades before.
CWON14, personally, I think your opinions about Dr. Curry are a big load of codswallop. And, quite frankly, I’m tired of hearing about it multiple times.
You’ve made your point, based on hiding behind a fake name “cwon14” where Dr. Curry put her opinion and her reputation on the line with her name. Few other people in climate science have had such courage. You certainly don’t, otherwise you put your full name to your opinions.
Now kindly cease, your point has been made. Stop cluttering the thread.
Well said, Anthony.
Well they have to keep funding the football team; we can’t have sloppy football coming out of GT.
I consider myself to have been extremely fortunate for having gotten out of Academia very early, and into industry, where a physicist/mathematician is not supposed to find success. For 2017, I started my 56th year out of academia earning an honest living, and now at an all time high remuneration.
The sheer fun I have had, puts the pale to any financial rewards.
And I left the cloisters not for any negative reasons, but for the opportunity to do more.
For former Professor Curry, I can only say; “Way to go Dr. Curry !”
And I would commend the immortal words of Satchel Paige to you.
” Never look back; something may be gaining on you ! ”
George
Georgia Tech Football is not funded by the University. It funds the the University… Not to mention that sports is the one place where winners and losers aren’t determined by feelings…
Well I can’t reply to Mat so I’ll have to stick it here.
Just to clarify – GT is not a university. It’s part of the University System of Georgia, but it is an Institute. We alumni take great pride in that distinction.
“Once you detach from the academic mindset, publishing on the internet makes much more sense, and the peer review you can get on a technical blog is much more extensive. But peer review is not really the point; provoking people to think in new ways about something is really the point. In other words, science as process, rather than a collection of decreed ‘truths.’”
: )
Dr. Curry just hatched from an academic crysalisis into a Butterfly.
It’s about time.
Best Regards to Dr. Curry,
J McClure
The change Dr Curry (I think) strives for its to rid science of the narrow minded gatekeepers that constitute peer review, which in climate & probably other fields is more aptly named ‘pal review’, and clearly suffers political interference. The scientific journals will therefore also need to change status, from controlling the release of selected scientific enquiry for $$ to reporting what the wider unrestrained public review picks up and runs with. The final piece is of course reducing what Dr Lindzen refers to, the very high level of government funding of science that now strives to buy results to support policy.
We need many more Dr Currys to accelerate that process.
I always felt the “truth” was what mattered. If I turned out to be wrong, then “so be it”. Problem was, if others turned out to be wrong, some fought to extremes to deny it. Thus, I always hoped the wrong person would be me, so that we could agree and get on with business.
I applaud Curry’s “stand” on truth in Science.
The Left thinks that the concept of Truth is Sexist and Racist. (seriously; I wish I was making that up but I am not)
@wws…”The Left thinks that the concept of Truth is Sexist and Racist. (seriously; I wish I was making that up but I am not).”
A bit different… The ‘left’ throws accusations of sexism and racism to shut up and shut down the truth tellers.
‘Telling truth’ is of secondary importance in academia. I learned, too late, that it is most important to simply be ‘telling something’. Climate science is, by definition, a very difficult topic in which to ‘tell truth’ because it will probably be decades before you might be proven right or wrong. However, it means you can always revert to the standard line of ‘telling something’ by predicting doom and gloom. And the media/funding agencies will lap it up. As such, it seems like the modern field could have been purposely designed to attract people who want to do just that: i.e. activists, not scientists.
Michael,
“In a world of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.” George Orwell
At least she got to publish. Others have been held back well before retirement years because they did not conform to state-sponsored thought pogroms.
“state-sponsored thought pogroms.”
Wow, dude! You mean state sponsored thought riots directed against semitic folks?
“Pogrom” is Russian in origin and refers to any violent riot or action against an ethnic group, not exclusively Semitic.
My bad. Just couldn’t resist joking about a typo.
Damn! I am so sorry she is leaving now, just when a new administration may initiate (through the purse strings) a change toward more open scientific research and publication on climate change.
Respect !!
Why didn’t she choose “integrity” 10-20 years ago?
Sorry, she doesn’t hold a candle to Lindzen and others took the brunt of being called “Holocaust deniers” etc.
Do you think no new evidence has been acquired in the last 10-20 years or that Judith Curry should have made her mind up before additional evidence was obtained?
Roy,
That buys into the premise of “it’s about science” that by its very nature is too variable and abstract to be conclusive. Then or now or likely ever.
It was always politically motivated from inception. Failure to accept this is how (in major part) the AGW movement gained traction.
One of the many ways skeptics are divided as well in the basic climate narrative.
+1000
Maybe she can take a role with the incoming administration? EPA should try to snatch her.
+100
She would be great for NOAA etc.
Bring some science to the festering swamp mess.
If she manages a job in the Trump administration it will only confirm her cynical history. Others have been in Holocaust denier category for decades, those are the people to choose from.
Dr. Curry is the equivalent of mid level Soviet administrator after a 40 year career deciding to defect in 1989. Sorry, this isn’t a profile of courage to me.
The rise of the AGW zealots is as much a reflection of spineless skeptics who praise blindly as much as the fanatical left who cared for a nurtured Dr. Curry for decades. Any defection, if actual and complete which this isn’t is welcome. Most annoying is the discussion of events and negative conditions as “recent” when the horrid AGW cabal was there when her career started. Go ask Dr.Lindzen on that point.
cwon14 I do not agree with your assessment of Dr. Curry. The Climategate e-mails is what really opened her eyes to the sham and collusion of climate change. Horrified by her lack of seeing the truth 20 years ago I have watched her over the last 10 years make a deep personal study of confirmation bias and her own susceptibility to it. I believe that she has that integrity and after exhaustive self study has concluded that resigning is her only path to being true to herself.
We will have to wait and see where she goes from here. To say she is late is to dismiss the wrath that she has endured. I don’t think she is late. To come out after Jan 20, 17 is to jump in late.
[snip]
To be honest, the world – not just the US – needs Donald Trump.
Lets pray that he does defund the United Nations from where this craziness has emerged.
Cheers
Roger
http://www.thedemiseofchristchurch.com
Donald Trump needs Judith Curry
+1
Well, actually, Judith Curry needs Judith Curry. Not all of life is in lockstep with other lives. Be patient and let her grow some more.
The Trump administration should hire Mr. Curry to clean-up the relationship between the Federal Government and climate science research grants to Universities.
Ya think?
Careful, that cleanup will need an experienced RICO prosecutor. La cosa nostra didn’t die out when the major organizations were brought down, they just found opportunities to fleece the people under the color of law.
Dr. Curry’s departure is mentioned on number of websites including American Thinker
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2017/01/dr_judith_curry_a_climate_science_champion.html
She may perceive that climate funding is in for a major cutback. She is ahead of the crowd who will be forced to leave if Trump follows through on reducing climate funding by several billion dollars.
to make any sense of all this insanity will have to be told in the future. Humanity has witnessed such blind obedience in the past. My hope is that the future is not far off.
She is more likely to respect the limits of the scientific domain than other mainstream scientists.
It disgusts me that someone of her caliber is made to feel that they can no longer survive in the academic environment, what has this world come to, we use to celebrate the individual and the free thinkers and use them as roll models? Its time to hit the reset button on the university system.
^ This. Much of academia has become a joke which needs to be nuked from orbit – only way to be sure.
“consensus science” – I’m having a George Carlin moment on that one.
Well let’s see what could Judy do in retirement to keep herself from going stir crazy? Well there is a new president soon who may need someone technical to sort through a whole pile of science and scientific integrity issues. Hmmm. Hello Donald, I think we have someone you may want to talk to. Someone this qualified and honest just won’t come available very often.
Academia used to teach people to think and question not cower and comply . Georgia Tech now apparently falls into the later group but they aren’t alone . Why spend $ 50- $100 grand + for adult day care ?
When universities are so bullied they won’t support the scientific method science students should get a full refund for being ripped off .
Best wishes to Dr. Curry .
Dr. Curry hasn’t retired from doing more impressive work on understanding climate. According to her blog post she will be even more fully engaged with building her company’s capacity to do better weather and climate prediction. I prefer to think leaving Georgia Tech as more of a graduation than retirement. There’s nothing left there for her to learn.
She is only exemplifying the those who can – DO.
(Those who can’t find harbor in their tenure.)
If it weren’t for Dr. Curry’s tenure she wouldn’t have been able to say the things she did and still stay employed.
Sorry CB, I said it wrong again.
I was drawing off the saying “Those who can- do. Those who can’t- teach.”
Screwed it up with a missing “-“.
Those who teach for their entire careers find “harbor” in their tenure. I have witnessed this as a staff member of a university.
To be concise, Dr. Curry is a Can-doer and is confidently shedding her comfortable tenure, although I guess there might be a state university pension due her by this time.
I’d say the best tribute to Dr. Curry is that she could “Do” and “Teach” simultaneously.
There’s always more to learn. There may be nothing more that she can learn at Ga Tech.
“There’s nothing left there for her to learn.” I hope that was tongue-in-cheek.
The position of Science advisor to the President will be coming open
Curry is safe, President Kitty Snatcher won’t go after an oldie like her. He like them young and skinny.
-1
President “Kitty Snatcher” was replaced by GWB.
Explain the five women P.E. Trump has in his cabinet so far: Nikki Haley, Bitsy DeVos, Linda Macmahon, Elaine Cho and Kellyanne Conway?
Oh, that is right. You cannot. Just running with the premise instilled into your head by the mainstream media. The same ones fabricating stories. Remember Jayson Blair?
President “Kitty Snatcher” just called those who voted against his wife “angry white men”. I wonder how many of those folks came from Arkansas?
http://www.270towin.com/maps/Zk7pe
Ha Ha! …. The Left always resort to their true selves of nastiness when they’re no longer able to con others through their lies.
The more I think about this resignation, the more it feels to me like a star MVP for an NFL team announcing that he is going to be a Free Agent next year.
She’s got way too much talent for Trump to leave her on the sidelines. He knows it, and I’m betting she knows it too.
What would posses you to make such a venal post Sketchley? I don’t care if you like Trump or not. I’m making a serious proposition: the White House Science advisor is a position that is going to be available in sixteen days.
CREEP.
Tasteless, Keith.
Keith
How young and skinny are you?
I’m sure the POTUS will be an equal opportunity snatcher.
All that’s needed is that “they let you” – the part of the entrapment tape the liberal MSM always ignored.
The end is the beginning. Here’s to you, O Bold Truthteller, Dr. Curry, to you and to your best friend and partner for life, Peter, as you set out, together, on a new voyage, facing the dawn with a smile as you sail into a wonderful new adventure!
**************************************************************
“A Piece of Sky”
(youtube — “Yentl”)
What’s wrong with wanting more?
If you can fly, then, soar!
With — all — there — is.
Why settle for…….
just a piece of sky.
…
Papa, watch me — FLY!
***************************************************************
With admiration and gratitude,
Janice
Pity you had to choose Streisand. Her ‘Foundation’ is part of the ‘glitterati useful idiot department’
and supports the Union of Concerned Scientists among others.
http://www.realclearscience.com/articles/2013/11/21/union_of_concerned_scientists_are_charlatans_108371.html#!
I realize what poor judgment Ms. Streisand has. I do not agree with her on many things.
I was hoping that the fine singing, the excellent staging and cinematography, and, most of all, the lyrics to that song would be what people would focus on. I was wrong.
Thanks for taking the time to tell me I messed up. Always good to know.
Janice, don’t worry, most of us realize that one’s creative talent is separate from one’s political stand. Most of the fellow musicians I know are very leftist. They think with their hearts, but their thought process is not steady and critical- it sways with their emotions. They are more talented often than me, but have a harder time in life.
Thanks, Pop. Much appreciated!
Beautiful clip, Janice! and most of us have always known that a great performance stands on its own merits.
Thanks, wws! 🙂
+1000
Aw, Stan. 🙂
This is how I picture the issue. … Left pic is how it should be. … Right pic is how it seems to have been.
A simple visual, perhaps. … If I revised it, then it would have a more organic look, with a many-headed monster as the fundamental pictorial form, instead of a triangle.
… inspired by John Christy’s university talk that I watched on a video posted in another thread at WUWT.
Somebody mentioned that Christy’s presentation of the political and moral aspects of the issue weakened the science aspect and that he would have been better to focus ONLY on the science. … I strongly disagree, since science exists neither in a political nor ethical vacuum, and science only becomes functional to civilization through civilization’s politics and ethics.
When politics and ethics can misrepresent science by skewing the proportions of scientific input, then the science is being MISused, and the functionality of science is being faked.
This move by Judith Curry, then, moves things one tiny step closer to the pic on the left.
The ethics triangle on the right is way too big.
…it shouldn’t be there at all. And the science triangle should be so small there’s no way to read it.
The ethics triangle is so big because it is inflated by false science by the hot air of the overblown politics. Seriously, that’s why I made it that big. I didn’t say the ethics were pristine, only that their magnitude, however achieved, was out of proportion to the science that should be guiding the politics that legalizes them.
And, yeah, I was being generous with the size of the “science” area. (^_^)
I’m with you on the ethics but there might be a way to illustrate the “politically correct ethics” effect with a separate demarcation to give perspective as opposed to actual ethics.
I see her point but sad because there are so few skeptic professors, and almost all of those are older. Curry herself started out as an alarmist. So that would be a way to do it: feign being an alarmist and then switch. But that would be a long and tedious process.
Climate ‘science’ is politicized science.
By definition politicized science is not science, and is not credible.
One way or another, Judith, if you are reading this, continue on with the good fight. By all means.
Politics on a university campus are the worst of all kinds of politics because the stakes are so small.
…so small while appearing so large.
Clark Kerr, at one time the chancellor of the Univ. of California, is well known for his pithy quotes. Here are three that seem apropos. Sadly, the third one is not even honored in the breach.
“The university is a series of individual entrepreneurs held together by a common grievance about parking.”
“I find that the three major administrative problems on a campus are sex for the students, athletics for the alumni and parking for the faculty.”
“The purpose of the university is to make students safe for ideas – not ideas safe for students.”
Dr. Curry is a beacon of integrity in an ocean PC spittle. I wish only the best for her and her family.
After a decade of public/web waffling and lukewarm hairsplitting Dr. Curry officially “turns”.
Sure, it’s progress but consider the price Dr. Lindzen, Pielke and others paid through the same timeframe?
I’m sorry, she’ll always be former Greenshirt operative which while better then a current tool but it should be remembered. The greatest threat to the eradication of the AGW scam will be “moderates” such as Curry and others offering a variety of soft exits for climate change fanaticism….”precautionary principles ” etc.
Well, its like this, do you recall reading THIS part: “I no longer know what to say to students and postdocs regarding how to navigate the CRAZINESS in the field of climate science.”
I think she was considering the influence she had on others than just herself in all this. Tell the truth and torpedo any and all students/postdocs potential future careers …
(Monce Comment here: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/07/19/american-physical-society-and-monckton-at-odds-over-paper/#comment-26089 )
****************************************
Dr. Curry is one of the “big guns.” She was heard.