Dr. Judith Curry chooses integrity over the state of climate science

judith-curryYesterday, 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.

180 thoughts on “Dr. Judith Curry chooses integrity over the state of climate science

  1. 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.

      • 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.

      • 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 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.

  2. 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

  3. 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?

  4. 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.

    • 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.

      • 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.

  5. The Trump administration should hire Mr. Curry to clean-up the relationship between the Federal Government and climate science research grants to Universities.

    • 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.

  6. 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.

  7. 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.

  8. 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.

  9. “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.

  10. 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 .

  11. 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.

      • 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.

      • 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?

      • 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.

      • 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.

  12. 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

  13. 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.

      • …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.

  14. 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.

    Question to Dr. Richard Lindzen: Is it possible for a young person today to get tenure in one of these institutions if they disagree with global warming alarmism?

    Lindzen: … NOT OPENLY.

    Climate ‘science’ is politicized science.

    By definition politicized science is not science, and is not credible.

  15. Politics on a university campus are the worst of all kinds of politics because the stakes are so small.

    • 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.”

  16. Dr. Curry is a beacon of integrity in an ocean PC spittle. I wish only the best for her and her family.

  17. 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 …

  18. Mike Monce: “As a member of the APS for over 20 years, this is about as low as I’ve seen this once great organization sink. I’ve been noticing the smell of PC-ness over the last few years in the APS Bulletin and some have commented on the political nature of some of the articles, but they keep coming.
    I just sent off an email to APS … but I’m not one of the big guns, so I assume it will be ignored.

    I just hope some of the bigger names in APS … chime in.

    [Ed. Hal Lewis did … Here is his letter of resignation to Curtis G. Callan Jr, Princeton University, President of the American Physical Society. …

    “Dear Curt: When I first joined the American Physical Society sixty-seven years ago it was much smaller, much gentler, and as yet uncorrupted by the money flood … I want no part of it, so please accept my resignation. APS no longer represents me, but I hope we are still friends. Hal …

    (https://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/10/16/hal-lewis-my-resignation-from-the-american-physical-society/ ).]

    (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.

  19. All climate science research must be done outside in the real thing.

    No fire for heat
    No air conditioning for cool

    Do it like the old ones of Chaco Canyon

    Climate Change Fraud
    Worlds Largest Most Dangerous Lie

  20. Dr Judith Curry has really made a big impact on my understanding of climate science. Thank you Dr Curry, and best wishes for your less formal career outside GT. You will surely prosper in all your new activities.

    I have been inside academia for seven years, but have now been exiled for not conforming to the required profile of an obedient peer-reviewed publisher of State-financed (read taxpayer) and rewarded consensus CAGW papers in obscure but approved journals. For the financial benefit of the university, you understand, don’t you? After all, we do pay you!

    My erstwhile and younger colleagues in the Ivory Tower are mostly insecure, overworked, fearful of the Dean’s disapproval, desperate to hold onto their jobs because they have young families and home bonds to pay, and they are under huge pressure to PUBLISH.

    So they do exactly what is expected of them, and what better way than to start with a reference to the IPCC Summary for Policymakers to set the scene?

    From this IPCC alarming scenario you can confidently research the impact of climate change on agriculture, malaria, coffee and tourism, the latter in all its wonderful guises. The result is a flood of academically acceptable, financially rewarding, but totally meaningless and inconsequential publications that are touted by the universities as their contribution to the progress and well-being of humankind.

    I particularly like the impact of climate change on craft beer tourism (I kid you not!) and if you look deeply enough you will find a number of these aforesaid government-subsidized academic publications on this topic in peer-reviewed journals.

    Cheers!

  21. She built the GT EAS department from scratch. Her last major paper was Lewis and Curry 2014 on observational ECS. She published MicroPhysics of Clouds. Her reward was to be removed as EAS chair because of her evolving views on CAGW. She is better off advancing weather and seasonal climate forecasting at CFAN, where the harsh peer review is from customers. Lets hope she continues with Climate Etc as a complementary forum to WUWT.

  22. John Holdren will soon be exiting Stage Left (pun intended) so President Trump will need a new Director for the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP).

    I have no clue what political leanings Dr Curry may have, nor do I care. The fact that she dared to take the right positions rather than cave into the political orthodoxy so pervasive in her scientific discipline illustrates to me that she would be perfect as the President’s science advisor.

    • You may be right, Dr. Dave, but how do you arrange for the new President’s staff to get to know this fact and then act on it?

    • If appointed as such, the fact that she was once a true believer who saw the light is something that will MLHE (Make Liberal Heads Explode).

      I have a sneaky hunch the timing of her departure was more than just coincidence (certainly she could see the next 4 years would bring a vastly different mindset to the reigning administration).

      We’ll just wait and see (and hope).

  23. It’s too bad more skeptics didn’t take on her positions..she needed more allies..

    Instead she got sky dragons.

      • The “Sky Dragon Slayers” are well-meaning group of genuine deniers. They attempted to recruit me for their second e-book after my first post here at WUWT, regarding the differences between Antarctic ice cores and plant stomata as sources of pre-industrial atmopsheric CO2. Rather than questioning the validity of the alarmist position, they deny the existence of an atmospheric greenhouse effect. I purchased and read most of their first e-book and was relieved to see the second book never get off the ground,

      • The sky dragons aren’t all wrong, some of what they contend is just wrong, contending that if you reflect light back to a lightbulb you wont heat the filament defies conservation of energy. But the position that increasing CO2 partial pressure should Increase the absolute number of photons to space increasing overall cooling is probably correct. The View that a column of air heated from the bottom and cooled from the top in a gravity well will have a natural temperature gradient due to the conversion of kinetic to potential energy as the gas rises is probably also correct.

        30 years ago I was a technician repairing electronic typewriters, when we couldn’t find a fault I remember joking with the cleaner who just pointed at something randomly, that set off a new line of thought in me that ended up repairing the typewriter.

        One should never exclude views different or “inferior” to ones own as there are always interesting insights to be had.

      • Of scourges;

        So are skeptics who ignore or minimize the AGW movements basic politically route from inception and view it largely as a “science” debate when it at moments like this reveal it was and is something completely different.

        It was largely the wuss skeptics (dishonest frankly, skeptic) that enabled the AGW movement every step of the way. Many of whom can’t face the globalist/central planning monster that the AGW belief system always harbored. Instead it was trivia contest that empowered/protected the very paid climate science lobby while claiming various degrees of often obscure dissent.

        For those celebrating the recent AGW policy trend reversal as a victory of science reason only shows how delusional the internal skeptic forces remain. It was Trump who capitalized on the public’s common sense on the politics underlying AGW/Greenshirt intensions not the phony history of lonely science skeptics battling with spaghetti charts or recent converts like Dr. Curry’s “epiphany” a tad 40 years too late in my opinion.

        Dr. Lindzen called it right, the person on the street called AGW bs while the would-be elite waffled around all sides of the green argument for decades. No one cares about Sky Dragons either way. Until skeptics get the basics of the AGW/Greenshirt culture straight in their heads at least back to Earthday 1 then we are never going to be safe from a revival or another scam metamorphosis with another obscure science laced theme in the future. AGW was an enormous central planning success that is far from dead and the basic opposition of many skeptics remains delusional.

    • Blog lizards need to be reminded that, unlike politics, sound science doesn’t rely upon alliances. It’s not miscomprehending “sky dragons” who dragged Curry off her academic perch; it was the polemics of grant-seeking oligarchs and of “lukewarm” carpetbaggers with their agenda-adjusted data that pushed the idea of objective inquiry into disrepute.

  24. I tried to thank Dr. Curry on her web site but being the original technodinosaur couldn’t do so.
    So, Dr. Curry, thank you, and keep up the good work.

  25. It’s difficult to be an honest person in an environment of total corruption. Most people just go with the flow until they become corrupted themselves – corruption becomes the standard.

    Dr. Curry you have more courage and fortitude than anyone invested in persecuting you can ever know.

    I wish you all the best.

  26. Very unfortunate because of the strong model of climate science integrity that Dr. Curry represented. She was one of the most important and credible scientists that exposed the massive politicalization of climate science brought upon us by that idiot Obama and his dishonest and deceitful followers.

    Obama’s politicalization of all science through massive federal funding toward serving only government policy objectives with a compliant liberal press cheering all the way has been a disaster for our country.

    The magnitude of the government swamp that President elect Trump and Republican Congress must clean up is simply “huge”.

    But this effort however difficult and frustrating must be undertaken with full purpose and discipline not withstanding the effort of ideologically driven Democrats who will utilize every deception and distortion possible to disrupt this critically important government science cleanup process.

    Obama and his Democratic supporters – what a bunch of scumbags.

  27. Trump should appoint a ad hoc climate science advisory committee to the President. Curry, Christy, Spencer, Lindzen, Soon and others. Heads would explode—and that’s a good thing.

    • I think heads would IMplode, since they have already reached maximum radius of fabrication (MRF, for short).

      There’s a black hole joke in there somewhere, or a collapsed star joke, or something. I’m too lazy to figure it out at the moment.

    • It’s a bit of an insult to include Curry on that list. The others were far more consistent for far longer.

      I refuse to give the hero’s welcome to calculated defectors or include them in the same category as a Dr. Lindzen.

      She was way late, still with a false political minimization narrative to this day.

    • Dr. Judith Curry, U.S. Senate Testimony, December, 2015

      (youtube)

      She looked them straight in the eye, took careful aim….. and

      BLAM! ….. BLAM! ….. BLAM!

      This concludes my testimony.”

      • All well and good Janice, trouble is, every observation that developed from 2009 was well known in the 1980’s if not long before as the IPCC was incubated for a generation with a foregone conclusion before the first paper was reviewed. She only alludes to the underlying core political motives that were found then (as her career started in fact) and now.

        So in it’s own way Dr. Curry is walking, talking disinformation to the greater event of the AGW orthodoxy and WHY it exists in the first place. Sure, you want them all to renounce. Clinging to the “uncertainty” talking point while ignoring the obvious politics inflicted long before 2009 is a bit pathetic.

        Just imagine someone defecting from the Soviet over noticing abuses from the early 1980’s in say 1988? Hmmm…let’s just skip millions of dead in Soviet history from inception, no problems there. Yeah…lets go with the “I didn’t notice until around my point of defection” line??

        I’m glad she defected, the rest of the narrative is pure self white washing bordering on obscenity. After 40+years of leftist science corruption and standards we’re going to have to accept the belated contrition of former AGW operatives, like Dr. Curry, and her version in the history books as well?? Her story is a fairytale at best. She didn’t notice the blood lust global regulatory/wealth distribution culture while supporting the IPCC until 2009? She didn’t notice dissent being labeled Holocaust Deniers until that point?

        I’m sorry, it’s all too obtuse to accept. She worked the AGW fraud gains as long as was politically and personally tenable and then she defected fully as it met her needs. Now comes the book deal or worse reading this board some job in the new administration with far better skeptics then her. It’s a travesty.

  28. Such is the toxic world of policy-based ‘evidence’. Dr Curry is well rid of the institutional burden. Her light can now shine all the more brightly.

  29. What a great scientist, brilliant and ethics driven.

    Dr. Curry has always embraced the consequences of her actions, including this year one.
    No whimpering about ‘glass ceilings’, blaming Donald Trump or the Ruskis.

    I expect to hear and read great things.

    • Pat, she should be treated like a captured Nazi rocket scientist in 1945. She can exist and maybe serve a positive purpose in the future but spare me and many the blathering about her “ethics”.

      She is 30 years late in her conversion at best, her narrative is obtuse (even evil) to the price actual dissenting scientists paid over a similar time frame.

      You can never tell how much or how little people know on a blog board, some of this is so ill informed and misguided. One thing the Greens had going for them was a weak minded opposition that remains clear.

  30. I’ve been a true believer more then a few times in my life about enviro/ climate change(warm to cold ice age to warm again)/ozone/acid rain,,,, and it was all BS(bad science).,
    I was made a fool and then decided to take the red pill(do some research) and now have become a pariah ,its cost me a lot, friendships, family.. a marriage,
    Dr. Curry I appreciate your candour and respect your choice, but we need the expertise and level headed thinking you have brought to the debate.

  31. Anthony’s closing in the lead post: “As 2017 begins change is in the air.”

    You better believe it! Make Science Great Again!

    I don’t think we have seen the last of Dr. Curry. This may be first of the free/unleashed Dr. Curry. I certainly hope so.

  32. https://judithcurry.com/2017/01/03/jc-in-transition/
    Dr. Judith Curry, in her own words:
    “Stepping back from all this, I reminded myself that I was a tenured faculty member – in principle I could do whatever I wanted. The intellectual pursuits that now interest me are:

    Assessment of climate science in a manner that is relevant for policy, with full account of uncertainty
    Explore philosophy of science issues as related to epistemology of climate models, reasoning about uncertain complex issues
    Decision making under deep uncertainty
    Sociology of science and experimenting with social media”

    WR: ‘Climate science’ still on ‘one’.

    No one ever can take away the status she earned herself. In the future she will feel free, and some words of her can / will make the difference. She will speak, freed from any double role. I am happy for her and I am sure that in her new ‘free’ position the climate world will experience that her role will not be diminished.

    On the contrary.

  33. That is truly heartbreaking and extremely unfortunate. To make matters worse, this is viewed as a “victory” by the liberal left and enemies that have completely and absolutely corrupted our universities. They are simply completely blind to their evil and misguided nature and agenda. America wasn’t made great by supporting junk scientists and pouring trillions of dollars down nonsensical uncompetitive liberal boondoggles. Just walk down the hall of any Social Science Department to witness the unbelievably and overtly hostility and hatred towards Conservatives. They don’t even try to pretend that it isn’t a hostile work environment, they flaunt it. No “Women’s” Organization will celebrate here, no “Scientific” organization will run to her defense. The corruption of the liberals is complete and absolute. I only hope Donald Trump hears of this and hires here to clean up the liberal cesspools that our universities have become. Here is a humorous response to an event here at OSU when a target of the Global Warming Gestapo took to the airwaves.

    • They are simply completely blind to their evil and misguided nature and agenda.

      BUT, they have their “safe space.”

  34. I’ve read and understand he reasoning for her resignation.
    Yet, somehow I’m still saddened.
    I feel like she will be less “in the fray.” Less effective.
    However, I hope I’m wrong and wish her all the best!

    • I have the feeling that she will be even more influential with her new freedom. She can still testify in front of congress with her extensive background. Judith, I wish you the best on your new venture…(adventure)…

  35. A person of integrity has no business being in climate science — it’s practically unethical of her! ;)

  36. She has now more to offer to Climate Science community!
    I think it could be the beginning of a new era. We all, who believe in scientific ethics and integrity are looking forward to that. She can lead all of us in that direction. All the story of our sufferings need to be heard and appropriate measures should be taken. We should make a collective recommendation to Trump administration to place her in an appropriate role. She could be the most suitable person to rescue the climate science from that standstill situation. We need her to lead climate science in the true direction.

  37. “Dr. Curry appears in CFACT’s documentary film Climate Hustle”

    A little off-topic, but does anybody know if this DVD is shipping to Australia yet?
    The website seems to suggest USA only.

  38. Hooray for Dr. Curry. I hope she can moderate the extreme craziness about this issue. The new administration may lower the temperature here. As far as the rest of Mr. Trump’s agenda good luck.

  39. Well done Judith – don’t have a suitable account to hand to leave a message on yer blog.

    But yes, in the end what has happened to science forces one to look at the deeper issues of philosophy of science and the like, to understand why one is so disturbed by the politicisation of science.

  40. “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.”

    Not very far, indeed. Good luck, Dr. Curry. You must feel like you’re getting out of jail.

  41. I too was once a true believer. There is nothing wrong with that. Intellectual death, however, comes when one stops thinking independently and one stops questioning even that which is considered true and not controversial. A true scientist will always be skeptical even of his or her own work and theories. This is Georgia Tech’s loss and the rest of the world’s gain. Long life and many successes in her endeavors are my sincere wishes for Dr. Curry.

  42. God Speed to you Dr. Curry. May the best be in your future.
    The loss will be greatest among the students that needed your clarion voice!

  43. All the best Dr. Curry. I fear however, the vacuum of reason you leave will be filled with more pliable people. The scam will continue.

  44. When “Gavin” retires after Trump in inaugurated, maybe Dr. Curry can take over his job.
    She’d slowly eliminate it anyway.

  45. It is quite sad that Professor Curry a person with such integrity can be the subject of attacks by reptilian type creatures such as Mann.

  46. I completely understand. But I wimped out at the very start of research while pursuing my Masters. I completed my research and published one research article. But the wrangling that occurred surrounding one simple basic research endeavor and one article soured me so much I left the hallowed halls of institutional research a one-hit wonder, committed to not ever pursuing a Ph.D., though my research committee said the piece was worthy of it had I been in a Ph.D. program.

    It isn’t just in Climate Science that political wrangling rules the lab.

  47. I love that Mann tweeted a personal attack to say that he didn’t like her because of her personal attacks.

    Well, she started it!

    Did too!

    He’ll tell mom, he will!

  48. The consensus in the Climate Science Industry seems to be that a preponderant % of funding for Climate Research goes to the CO2/Alarmist cartel, with predictable results — “He who pays the Piper, calls the tune!” We pay; You deliver; We’ll pay again …… A self-fertilizing, anti-Scientific monster is thus created which assumes a life unto its own … a Frankenstein called “AGW Alarmism”, no less.
    Since governments are major funding agencies for Climate Research, and since — for any incoming new government — it should axiomatically be of prime importance to represent the interests of *all* voters by levelling the playing-field.
    I suggest Trump promulgate an Act requiring Gov’t Agencies (definition, please) to split funding 50/50 with Research Institutions dedicated to Climate Change for all non-AGW attributions. Get Dr. Judith Curry to head-up a faculty specifically dedicated to same? Get many of her gagged colleagues out into *honest* and unbiased research into Climate Change?

  49. It would be apposite if Present Elect Trump were to hear of Judith Curry’s resignation & take her into his new government.

  50. It’s no secret that the corrupt Obama Administration, NSF etc have been controlling scientific grant money to academia to favor their political agenda. But now with a non socialist Potus…the times… they are a changing.

  51. Georgia Tech’s loss is our gain. Hoping to see sanity brought back to the Climate debate by Dr Curry’s writing online

  52. This is a shocking page, filled with dishonest attacks on the honest scientists who have studied climate change and published their research. Where is the research from the dozens of talking heads in this thread? None of them say anything scientific about climate change. Instead it is the kind of dishonest reputation-attacking nonsense that comes from a fringe that has no evidence to back its point of view. The likeliest explanation for this is a flood of money from the oil industry to pay for these shills, especially the ones who have earned an honest PhD and decided to sell it for a whack of cash to the oil cartel. What a disgusting display of academic corruption.

    • The same “honest scientists” ensnared in ClimateGate”?
      The same “honest scientists” who have pulled every trick in the book to disparage, marginalize and silence other Scientists — Intellectually Honest Scientists — who have challenged *your* guys?
      Anyway, you have nothing substantive to adduce, and your entire post is dismissive by anyone with 1/2 a brain, and worthy of nothing but the Trash Bin.

    • As to errors in your rant, I shd additionally point-out that “None” is singular, and therefore your text shd. read: “None of them says …”

    • “The likeliest explanation for this is a flood of money from the oil industry to pay for these shills”

      Really?

      I presume you have solid evidence, and know from where these funds are disbursed.

      Can you have a word with ‘Accounts’ and ask them what has happened to my cheque?

      Only, I haven’t had a penny yet, and to the best of my knowledge nor have any of the other WUWT contributors, and I’ve been debunking the CAGW scam for way over a decade now.

      Thanks in advance!

  53. Sadly hearing of Dr. Judith Curry’s resignment.

    ‘(although I am a few years shy of 65)’
    ____________________________________________

    Hans:

    well I’m a built 1953. And last year my job wandered to Plzen Czechia.

    So this 2017 I am shy 1 year of retirement.
    ____________________________________________

    Judith Curry:

    Technically, my resignation is a retirement event, since I am on the Georgia State Teachers Retirement System, and I need to retire from Georgia Tech to get my pension (although I am a few years shy of 65). I have requested Emeritus status.
    ____________________________________________

    Hans:

    leaves: 1 year left of unemployment.

    My Answer:

  54. And thanx for all the diminished women all ’round the wearld:

    ‘ts going betta all the time:

    • wearld:

      here we go again: that’s

      u’wer alt

      – meaning Not specified where.

      – but differentiated to ‘alti’tude. Higher. Elevated.

      since Uver = Ober = not this elevation.

      Cause Uber stems of Über which leads to UTOPIA –

      ‘kein bekannter Ort’.

Comments are closed.