The Yin and Yang of Climate Science

From Climate Etc.

by Judith Curry

How the duality of yin-yang can illuminate the climate debate and enlighten transformational research.

Ok, this is something different,  I hope you will find it interesting.

A little known JC fact is that my main hobby is Tai Chi.  I am very fortunate to be studying under Master Reza Nejad, an exceptionally accomplished martial artist currently living in Reno, NV.  He is also the “Bruce Lee of Iran” [link; scroll down the page for cinema clips]

Master Nejad recommended me to the organizers of the 2022 International Taiji Science Forum.  The organizers invited me to give a talk, which rather astonished me.  I was getting ready to politely decline the invitation, when the wheels started turning in my head and I came up with an interesting idea for a talk.

I decided to use the yin-yang framework as the basis for a philosophy of science talk.

You are probably generally familiar with the concept of yin and yang.  Yin and yang is a complex relational concept in Chinese philosophy and culture that has developed over thousands of years. The meaning of yin and yang is that the universe is governed by a cosmic duality – sets of two opposing and complementing principles or cosmic energies that can be observed in nature.

Yin and yang elements come in pairs—moon and the sun, female and male, dark and bright, cold and hot, passive and active, etc. While the world is composed of many different and sometimes opposing forces, these can coexist and even complement each other. The nature of yin-yang lies in the interchange and interplay of the two components.

The yin-yang symbol consists of a circle divided into two halves by a curved line. One half of the circle is black, representing the yin side; the other is white, for the yang side. The two halves are intertwining across a spiral-like curve that splits the whole into semicircles, and the small dots represent the idea that both sides carry the seed of the other. The curvy line signifies that there are no absolute separations between the two opposites. The yin-yang symbol embodies both sides: duality, paradox, unity in diversity, change, and harmony.

My full presentation can be downloaded [taiji science curry], ppt with audio (19 minutes).

Below is the relevant text, along with illustrative diagrams.



With this context, I focus my talk on how the duality of yin-yang can illuminate the climate debate and enlighten transformational scientific research.

In the west, the concept of yin-yang has been interpreted, applied and appropriated in many different ways. My interpretation here focuses on applications of the essential duality implied by yin-yang. I propose that this duality can enrich our thinking on how to approach the process of science and creativity, towards fostering transformational research.

Two modes of thinking

At the most fundamental level of scientific research, the duality of binary modes of thinking reflects the essential yin-yang tension. These two modes of thinking have been described from the perspectives of economics, psychology and physics.  The idea of two modes of thinking has been most famously portrayed in Daniel Kahnemann’s book Thinking Fast and Slow.  System 1 is the fast, automatic multitasking mode that we usually operate in, such as when walking, chatting, looking around.  By contrast, System 2 is a more deliberate and focused mode of mindful intent.

You might think that System 2 thinking is the most important mode for scientific research.  However, Guy Claxton’s most important insight in Hair Brain, Tortoise Mind is that the leisurely tortoise mind, for all its apparent aimlessness, is just as intelligent as the more logical hare brain.

But how can the aimless tortoise brain contribute to scientific research?  Tim Palmer’s book The Primacy of Doubt provides some insights. Specifically, on the importance of the stochasticity of System 1 thinking in generating new ideas.

Role of the monkey

Palmer provides an energy-based interpretation of thinking, whereby System 2 is the high-power, intensive mode. By contrast, System 1 is a lower power mode where power is spread between many active tasks, so that power per active task is especially low.

In low power mode, the brain is susceptible to noise.  Palmer argues that this noise can be a source of random new ideas.  This can explain why ‘eureka’ moments, or flashes of insight, often occur when we are relaxing and not concentrating hard on a problem. In this relaxation mode, the presence of noise can help us jump out of a cognitive roadblock and advance our understanding.

The ‘monkey mind in Tai Chi represents brain chatter that jumps around and darts from one distraction to the other.  One objective of Tai Chi and Qigong movements are to bring the brain back to mindfulness (‘repulse the monkey’) .  Palmer’s framework suggests that there is a role for the monkey in helping generate the noise that can be the source of random new ideas.  So, we don’t want to entirely repulse the monkey, but manage the monkey while nourishing the tortoise.

So to achieve the most transformative oneness from our binary brain, the idea is to make constructive use of noise in the low-power mode. This can provide new ideas, which our more analytic, power-intensive mode is failing to provide.

Duality in science

With regards to the actual scientific process, there are many fundamental dualities, which I have presumed to categorize in terms of yin and yang.  The major dualities include

My own scientific education, many decades ago, was focused on the attributes that I have listed on the Yin side.  Over time, my research has migrated in the directions that are characterized by the Yang side.  These two opposing and complementary approaches, when appropriately integrated, can produce transformational research.


In addressing a specific scientific problem, frames shape how we conceptualize it.  Framing includes what is deemed to be relevant, what is excluded, and even what answers are considered appropriate.

A framing bias occurs when a narrow frame pre-ordains the conclusion to a much more complex problem.   On the other hand, if we frame a simple problem too broadly, finding a solution can be much more difficult.

Some problems are tame, in the sense that the appropriate boundaries are clear.  This includes problems of engineering and laboratory science for which reductionism, order and control are the appropriate guiding principles.  However, tame problems are not necessarily simple ones.  Tame problems can be complicated, with many different parts that are causally linked.

Complex problems are different from those that are merely complicated.  In the presence of feedbacks and circularity, causal mechanisms are not easily elucidated.  Problems related to the environment, such as climate change, and most problems related to human health are complex problems.  Complex problems require a much larger frame to accommodate uncertainty, ambiguity, chaos, and contradictions.  Any framing of a complex problem is provisional, requiring acknowledgement of what is outside the frame and its potential importance.

Climate change

This slide shows two different framings of climate change.  On the left, the climate change problem is framed as being caused by excess carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, which can be solved by eliminating fossil fuel emissions.  Both the problem and solution are included in a single frame.  This framing dominates the UN negotiations on climate change, most recently at the Conference of the Parties in Egypt.

The framing on the right shows two separate frames, one associated with the causes of climate change and the other associated with solutions that can help reduce vulnerability to climate change.  The larger frame on the right also includes natural causes for climate change such as the sun, volcanoes and slow circulations in the ocean. This framing is provisional, acknowledging that our understanding is incomplete and that there may be unknown processes influencing climate change.

The frame on the left is about controlling the climate, whereas the frame on the right is about understanding the climate.  Further, the framing on the right acknowledges the futility of control. Solutions on the right focus on the basic human necessities of energy, water and food. Economic development supports these necessities while reducing our vulnerability to weather and climate extremes.

My own understanding of climate change and human well being is squarely in the framing on the right.

The duality here lies in science versus policy, and these two framings reflect very different visions for how science and policy interact.

Covid 19

Using the framework of normal and postnormal science, the pandemic provides insights into how we understand and conduct science, particularly when it is relevant for urgent policy making.

Normal science is conducted by elite scientists, and ruled by consensus over the problems, concepts and model solutions that together form a paradigm. There have been some great successes for normal science during the pandemic. These include rapid identification of viral structures and pathological mechanisms, and rapid development of vaccines and antiviral drugs.

The epidemiology of the pandemic provided far greater challenges.  Early in the pandemic, scientists, at least in the west, spoke with one voice and great authority. They claimed that 2 to 3 out of every 100 infected people will die, the virus spread by droplets and surfaces, there was no immunity after infection, and all ages were equally at risk.  These claims guided early covid policy in the U.S. However, these claims did not survive further scientific scrutiny and turned out to be wrong.  Many of these early policies backfired in tragic ways, particularly for the elderly and children.

So what went wrong?  The scientists failed to acknowledge uncertainty and ignorance. An elite group of scientists manufactured a consensus in an attempt to assert authority with the objective of controlling the virus. Attempts to squash disagreement and cancel scientists who disagreed delayed resolution of these mistaken claims and perpetuated these early bad policies.

The pandemic is clearly an issue for which facts are uncertain, values are in dispute, stakes are high & decisions are urgent, which characterizes post-normal science.  Post-normal science doesn’t seek to control, but rather to manage, in a way that seeks robustness in policy strategies.  In postnormal science, management of uncertainty and evaluating knowledge quality are paramount.  Postnormal science seeks to diversify the knowledge base beyond elite scientists. This occurs in context of an extended peer community that enables broader scientific and public contributions, understanding and acceptance.

Wicked science

Wicked problems are challenges that share some commonality with postnormal science, but there are key differences.  Wicked problems are characterized by structural complexity, irreducible uncertainties and ignorance.  There are multiple problem definitions and contentious methods of understanding.  Clashing values are in play, and people don’t even agree on the attributes of desirable solutions.  There are unintended consequences associated with all proposed solutions.

Both climate change and pandemics are wicked problems.

The wickedness of wicked problems is related to the duality of science and politics.   There are two common but inappropriate ways of mixing science and politics.

The first is scientizing policy, which deals with intractable political conflict by transforming the political issues into scientific ones.  The problem is that science is not designed to answer questions about how the world ought to be, which is the domain of politics. The second is politicization of science, whereby scientific research is influenced or manipulated in support of a political agenda. We have seen both of these inappropriate ways of mixing science and politics in dealing with the pandemic and also climate change.

There’s a third way, which is known as wicked science. Wicked science is tailored to the dual scientific and political natures of wicked societal problems.   Wicked science uses approaches from complexity science and systems thinking in a context that engages with decision makers and other stakeholders.

Wicked science requires a transdisciplinary approach that treats uncertainty as of paramount importance.  Effective use of wicked science requires that policy makers acknowledge that control is limited and the future is unknown.   Effective politics provides room for dissent and disagreement about policy options, and includes a broad range of stakeholders.

Wicked science – JC’s book

As an example of wicked science, I put forward my forthcoming book Climate Uncertainty and Risk. This book encompasses my own philosophy for navigating wicked problems, and provides a slice through the wicked terrain of climate change.  The book is massively transdisciplinary, including perspectives from science, technology, politics, policy, philosophy, social psychology, uncertainty and risk.   Accomplishing the book’s objectives in 250 pages required careful framing.

The main point of this slide is to describe the duality of my binary brain in grappling with the research, framing and writing about this wicked problem.  For each topic I started in yin mode with a provisional outline.  I then switched to yang mode where for each topic I read many articles and books and took copious notes.  Of central importance was noise generation that was driven by imaginative internet searching, which helped generate ideas that took me in new directions.

For a given subsection, I might spend several weeks in this noise generation mode, with sporadic excursions into yin mode where I would slowly winnow down my notes and move things around to create linkages between ideas.  At some point the connections in my head would produce a mental model and a substantially revised outline. I would then return to Yin mode, where the writing proceeded quickly.  I often felt frustrated that I was spending so much time googling around and generating noise, but upon reflection I realized that this was an essential feature of my thinking process in context of this wicked problem.

30 years ago, I wouldn’t have been able to write this book, without near-instantaneous access to diverse resources online that are enabled by the internet.  The internet is a great enabler for the practice of wicked science.

Duality and health science

These approaches to thinking about science are relevant for Taiji and health sciences, which is the focus of this Forum.

There are several dualities here.  The most important one is the duality between the eastern and western approaches to medicine, with the western approach being reductionist and the eastern approach being more of a whole body approach.

Another duality is basic versus clinical research.  There is also the duality of curative versus preventative approaches.  The red arrows indicate feedbacks between health science and the practice of Taiji.

JC comments

Participating in this Forum was an interesting cultural experience, it had quite a CCP flavor.  The Conference was very formal and very deferential to governmental and institutional authorities.  Most of the presentations were in Chinese, with English subtitles.  I find the objective of the Forum, to integrate eastern and western ways of thinking (particularly in context of Taiji-health) to be interesting and worthwhile.

In any event, this Forum provided me with an opportunity to think in some new frameworks.  The slide above labelled “Climate” illustrates better than anything else I’ve written regarding the difference between the IPCC/UNFCCC (yin) approach and my own interpretation which has a much larger frame (yang approach).

4.3 19 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
abolition man
December 30, 2022 6:26 am

Splendid! What a fantastic way to spend my early morning as several mm of white global warming powder drift to the ground and sublimate! I look forward to the discussion here at WUWT, and I will definitely be purchasing your new book!
I have often found that the answers to thorny problems arrive when I am in a dream or fugue state. Most often it involves looking carefully at all the technical solutions, weighing the costs and benefits, and then an answer will spring almost fully formed from my forehead!

Last edited 1 month ago by abolition man
Tom Abbott
Reply to  abolition man
December 31, 2022 4:42 am

“I have often found that the answers to thorny problems arrive when I am in a dream or fugue state.”

Many times, when I’m trying to recall some thing and am having trouble with it, if I just quit trying to remember and forget about it, then the answer will miraculously appear in my mind a little later.

I think it has something to do with relaxing the mind. I think it is the same process where people do meditation, and new ideas pop into their mind. Meditation quiets a lot of the thoughts going through your mind that might be distracting.

The mind and the thinking process are very interesting subjects.

Understanding the diabolical manipulation of the mind and the thinking process by those who would do us harm, will be necessary for our free societies to survive into the future.

December 30, 2022 6:44 am

“The yin-yang symbol consists of a circle divided into two halves by a curved line. “

As one who has never been particularly attracted to esoteric or religious beliefs etc – I think George Harrison, my younger days working at Portobello Road market (the annoying Hari Krishna brigade) put me right off that stuff – I do respect those who believe. Why not? Live and let live (my philosophy of sorts).

But in these [add descriptors here] times, the one symbol that makes any real sense is that of Ouroboros. 

Be it the climate crisis, wokeism or left wing (now mainstream) thinking in general: on race (MLK was a racist, who knew?), and gender (confusion between hardware equipment and operating system glitches) etc

They don’t ever think it through. Once feminism was part and parcel of being defined as on the left, but now they are on the wrong side of history(sic); men in frocks (the new patriarchy) are the real victims and women who refuse to accept that a trans woman is a woman are now bigots and TERFs.

Ouroboros eats its tail….

Identity politics always (under the guise of cuddly multiculturalism and inclusion) pits communities against each other for finite resources. They even have an hierarchy of victimhood.

But then, I’m sure you know this.

Reply to  strativarius
December 30, 2022 7:16 pm

I prefer the Oozelum bird.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  strativarius
December 31, 2022 4:58 am

I attended a Hari Krishna gathering in Hawaii once. It was very interesting.

December 30, 2022 7:03 am

But Buhrock Obomba sez the science is settled…and under his plan….the price of FF will soar. Buhrock is accepting contributions to save his seaside mansion….just in case.

December 30, 2022 7:03 am

Excellent, Judith!. I think your yin-yang model of thinking is applicable in politics, as well. E.g., for challenging Swedish politicians as regards their allegience for Sweden versus international organizations such as WEF and the Globalists.

Jim Gorman
December 30, 2022 7:19 am

Your last comments about research and notes hit home. I have spent the last 24+ months researching statistics and how they should be applied. Copious notes have generated a book length set of references in Microsoft Onenote.

I am concerned that there are several areas that climate science has simply ignored in the haste to develop a quick and dirty set of data that shows what they believe. The ability to trend oscillating phenomena with different periods, phases, sources, etc. is complicated and any trends that are developed are probably only pertinent to the time frames that contain the data being examined. Attempting to extrapolate into the future is terribly uncertain in both the values obtained and the policies they generate.

Richard Greene
Reply to  Jim Gorman
December 30, 2022 9:39 am

You sound very intelligent, but you missed the key facts about CAGW:

CAGW is always wrong, for 50 years so far, scary prediction of climate doom

CAGW is not based on data

With no data, CAGW statistics can not exist

All predictions are based on speculation, and are almost always wrong, because what was predicted almost always turns out to have been wrong

There are no data for the future climate — just speculation.

CAGW is not an extrapolation or prior climate trends

CAGW does not exist, and never has existed (even as plain old CGW)

One can not invent data for the future climate, and then apply statistical analyses to them. That is a meaningless fantasy, not science.

Last edited 1 month ago by Richard Greene
Tim Gorman
Reply to  Richard Greene
December 30, 2022 2:40 pm

You can use historical data for forecasting but it *must* be done with the proper restrictions. You *must* weight current data more heavily than past data. You *must* take into consideration any and all cyclical processes that will have an impact. If you cannot identify and quantify all causal factors then you *must* apply an uncertainty factor that gets larger and larger as future time progresses.

Nothing about climate science meets these restrictions at all. Climate science assumes all uncertainty in observations cancel. Climate science assumes all causal factors can be parameterized or ignored. Climate science weights past data equally with current data.

If you don’t apply the proper restrictions then you may as well just assume past postal rates will forecast future temperature assuming the proper scaling factor can be used.

Richard Greene
Reply to  Tim Gorman
December 30, 2022 9:12 pm

“You can use historical data for forecasting but it *must* be done with the proper restrictions.”

DOES NOT WORK for climate trend predictions

Extrapolating a 30 toi 50 year climate trend, as a forecast for the next 30 to 50 years in the future, has repeatedly failed since 1900.

The prior trend might work better as a contrary indicator.

Or you could use a reversion to the mean prediction.

Better yet, humans should stop trying to predict the climate:
It will get warmer, unless it gets colder.
That works for me.

Steve Case
December 30, 2022 7:45 am

After reading most of the above, a favorite quote comes to mind:

     There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know.
     There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we
     know we don’t know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There
     are things we don’t know we don’t know.
                                                                                Donald Rumsfeld

Our friends on the left are sure that Climate Science when it comes to emissions of green house gas is settled. In other words, they think they know it all.

Reply to  Steve Case
December 30, 2022 8:44 am

Hence, we are being screwed up the yin yang.

Reply to  Steve Case
December 30, 2022 10:11 am

But being wrong is virtuous.

“”We have got to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic policy and environmental policy.”” – Former U.S. Senator Timothy Wirth (D-CO)

I believe La Figueres said much the same thing.

Steve Case
Reply to  strativarius
December 30, 2022 11:38 am

Here’s a  Figueres quote:

“This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting
ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time
to change the economic development model that has been reigning
for at least 150 years, since the industrial revolution.”
                                                                        Christiana Figueres

Richard Greene
December 30, 2022 9:30 am

This is long-winded claptrap
I decided today to stop visiting Climate Etc.

Curry is not intelligent enough for me to read her articles anymore. Most authors here, especially those who don’t publish on other websites, are much better: Willie E., Hansen, the very prolific Worrall, Anthony Watts … and Charles Rotten is usually a good editor, except for this claptrap articlr.

Curry believes there is a climate problem and CO2 emissions must be reduced. Her opinion is fantasy not based on data

My opinion is that the current climate is wonderful and much more CO2 in the atmosphere would be beneficial for C3 plants and for the human and animals who eat them. My conclusion is based on data.

Reply to  Richard Greene
December 30, 2022 10:20 am

“”Curry is not intelligent enough””

That’s a rather ad-hom way of saying you disagree, don’t you think?

Richard Greene
Reply to  strativarius
December 30, 2022 12:57 pm

If you believe there is a climate problem, but never explain in detail why you believe that (it is just assumed),

And you believe CO2 emissions must be reduced, but never explain why you believe that (it is just assumed),

That means you also believe long-term climate predictions are accurate, despite 100% of them having been wrong in the past century,

And in my mind, those assumptions add up to a not very intelligent person, despite degrees up the wazoo, who merely skips over the first few steps in the climate assumption ladder, and moves up from there.

Intelligent people state conclusions and try to defend them.
They don’t start with conclusions (like Curry … and the IPCC too).

Reply to  Richard Greene
December 31, 2022 12:19 am

I don’t see any climate crisis or problem as claimed

Is this the bit where I’m supposed to insult you?

Richard Greene
Reply to  strativarius
December 31, 2022 1:48 am

Why not?
I can take it.
I’ve been married for 45 years

Reply to  Richard Greene
December 30, 2022 10:44 am

Dr. Curry summarized by pointing us to her Climate Change figure. She said that she aligns with the center and right side frames. In the science part of the frame, she acknowledges that there is much we do not know and that we CANNOT control the climate. In her middle frame, she advocates economic development to reduce vulnerability (abundant energy, water and food). In other words, whether or not there is a problem with greenhouse gases, which she does not acknowledge, human flourishing is the best approach going forward. I find this to have much in common with Bjorn Lomborg’s approach.

Thirty+ years of biased climate science has nevertheless (reluctantly) had to reject the apocalyptic hypothesis and scale back the rate and magnitude of expected change. Those activist “scientists” (e.g., Mann, Dessler) who have staked their lives and livelihoods on extremism for the sake of money, power and prestige are captives and cannot back down, and they are properly the subjects of open derision. With post-COVID science in totalitarian disarray, nevertheless the elites in education, the political classes, bureaucracies, the biased media, big tech, and activist NGOs perpetuate the CAGW myth for their own ideological reasons, truth be damned. Thus, we are now told to look out the window at the weather, any and all weather, harsh or mild, and fearfully conclude – Manmade Climate Change!

The climate meme is collapsing, but not before it has abetted evil totalitarian forces to make fearsome gains, and to trumpet new and different memes and falsehoods (e.g., race [BLM], gender dysphoria, sexualizing and abusing children, DEI, ESG, sustainability).

Richard Greene
Reply to  pflashgordon
December 30, 2022 1:01 pm

“The climate meme is collapsing,”

It is?
I think the coming climate change hoax is accelerating. Many nations have Nut Zero plans and are already spending (wasting) billions of dollars to lower the reliability of their electric grids.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  pflashgordon
December 31, 2022 4:25 am

Excellent comment, pflashgordon.

Javier Vinós
Reply to  Richard Greene
December 30, 2022 11:01 am

I decided today to stop visiting Climate Etc.

Climate Etc. is better without you. Why don’t you also stop visiting WUWT?

Richard Greene
Reply to  Javier Vinós
December 30, 2022 1:01 pm

Childish character attack
Your Mother would be proud.

Tim Gorman
Reply to  Richard Greene
December 30, 2022 2:43 pm

RG: “Curry is not intelligent enough for me to read her articles anymore.”

Pot – meet kettle.

Richard Greene
Reply to  Tim Gorman
December 30, 2022 9:19 pm

I have clearly explained why IO make that statement here and in more detail in comments at the Climate Etc website. I said Curry is not intelligent enough for ME to read her articles. I did not say she lacked overall intelligence or that b no one should read her articles.
A criticism backed with an explanation is not an ad hominem statement.

Curry believes (repeatedly in her articles) there is a climate problem that must be fixed by a reduction of CO2 emissions.

She never even tries to defend those conclusions.

Unsupported conclusions are not the mark of intelligent writers.

I read over 5,000 articles in climate and energy every year. I know the difference between low quality and high quality authors.

Reply to  Richard Greene
December 31, 2022 12:20 am

Pot Kettle Black

Javier Vinós
Reply to  Richard Greene
December 31, 2022 1:38 am

How Black and White Thinking Hurts You (and What You Can Do to Change It)

Black and white thinking is the tendency to think in extremes: I am a brilliant success, or I am an utter failure. My boyfriend is an angel, or He’s the devil incarnate.

This thought pattern, which the American Psychological Association also calls dichotomous or polarized thinking, is considered a cognitive distortion because it keeps us from seeing the world as it often is: complex, nuanced, and full of all the shades in between.

An all-or-nothing mindset doesn’t allow us to find the middle ground. And let’s face it: There’s a reason most people don’t live on Everest or in the Mariana Trench. It’s hard to sustain life at those extremes.

Most of us engage in dichotomous thinking from time to time. In fact, some experts think this pattern may have its origins in human survival — our fight or flight response.

But if thinking in black and white becomes a habit, it can:

hurt your physical and mental health

sabotage your career

cause disruption in your relationships

You have a black-and-white thinking about climate, an absolute Yang position that leads you to reject anybody that doesn’t fully agree with you. You are unaware of your problem. The climate issue is also complex, nuanced, and full of all shades in between. Do yourself a favor and try to understand and empathize with the people you don’t agree with.

We do better when the Yin and the Yang work together, not when they fight each other. There’s no victory in that fight, only defeat.

Last edited 1 month ago by Javier Vinós
Richard Greene
Reply to  Javier Vinós
January 1, 2023 4:38 am

This is long winded claptrap in the Judith Curry style.

I don’t support ANY authors who state conclusions without defending them.

That becomes a meaningless conclusion for me.

This has nothing to do with black and white thinking.

I believe there is strong evidence of a greenhouse effect and evidence of at least some AGW since 1975.

I believe almost every climate prediction has been wrong, so I never make climate predictions, or listen to them.

I believe CAGW is a data-free speculation with no observations.

And most important, I believe the causes of global warming since 1975 are unknown in any detail — perhaps just a list of likely suspects.

I also believe the future climate may be warmer, or colder .– no one knows for sure.

Many of my climate beliefs are: “We don’t know that”.

If you think any of my climate beliefs are wrong, and none of them are radical beliefs unsupported by data, then say so.

Don’t lecture me on black and white thinking claptrap.

Last edited 1 month ago by Richard Greene
Reply to  Richard Greene
December 30, 2022 11:53 am

By not listening to a different viewpoint, you are limiting the data and views available for you to make your decisions.
Insulting someone for their positions is rarely productive. By giving your viewpoint and data to support your viewpoint would be much more effective.

Since emotions can influence people’s determinations as to what to believe, it is best not to come off as an ass.

Richard Greene
Reply to  Brad-DXT
December 30, 2022 1:17 pm

I listen to all viewpoints when they are defended with facts, data and logic. I do not accept data-free and/or logic free conclusions. I have never read Ms, Curry even TRY to defend her beliefs that climate is a problem, and CO2 must be reduced. She starts with those conclusions and builds on them.

Of course, Curry does not believe a climate catastrophe is coming quickly, similar to other lukewarmers. But that leaves open only one question for debate: How fast does the world have to act to reduce CO2 emissions and prevent a climate crisis?

I readwell over one dozen climate science and energy articles every day of the year. That’s well over 5.000 articles a year. I try to find one dozen good articles to recommend on my climate science and energy blog every day … with 368,000+ page views so far,

I’ve been reading all the Climate, Etc. articles. The Curry article on how climate change scaremongering is affecting children was great. A writer named Planning Engineer writes brilliant articles for Climate, Etc.. But most of Ms. Curry’s articles are disappointing.

I don’t claim to be smart, or polite.
I do claim to know the difference between a good climate science writer and a not so good climate writer.

Honest global warming chart Blog (

Reply to  Richard Greene
December 30, 2022 2:09 pm

The Curry article on how climate change scaremongering is affecting children was great.”

So you think she has some good articles?

Richard Greene
Reply to  Brad-DXT
December 30, 2022 2:36 pm

Yes. some good articles.
Often by guest writers like Planning Engineer.
. But too many Curry articles are written in an uninteresting long-winded Ph.D. style. And her articles too often are based on her assumption that CO2 is a problem and CO2 emissions must be reduced.

Those beliefs are not much different than Climate Howler beliefs. With at least three hours of climate science and energy reading every morning, I don’t have enough time for lukewarmers like Curry.

Reply to  Richard Greene
December 30, 2022 7:24 pm

It probably doesn’t make a difference at the scale that your chart is plotted, but using GISS as the basis is probably unwise, since it has been heavily corrupted with model data.

Richard Greene
Reply to  Hivemind
December 30, 2022 9:24 pm

I didn’t have a UAH chart using absolute temperatures and CO2 on the same chart.

And I don’t have software to create one.

Also the UAH data only goes back to 1979, not 1880.

An 1880 to 2022 NASA-GISS or HadCRUT absolute temperature chart in K. degrees looks exactly like a straight line

Richard Greene
Reply to  Brad-DXT
January 1, 2023 4:48 am

Thanks for the insult.
You apparently worship Ms. Curry

I pointed out that she has lukewarmer positions she never tries to defend. She believes there is a Climate problem and CO2 must be reduced.

Those beliefs color her writing, which have been more frequent recently, rather than guess authors.

An author who states conclusions but never even tries to defend them is a substandard author.

I don’t care is she is a nice person and has a

She also has a business that may REQUIRE moderate positions on climate change.

i listened to Curry’s viewpoints and read every article on her website this year. I have decided that her own articles don’t meet my standards — I read at least 5,000 climate science and energy articles every year. The Planning Engineer articles on her website are great. Her articles are not.

I criticized Curry’s work as an author, not her character as a person. I;ve saved that for you.

Reply to  Richard Greene
January 3, 2023 7:53 am

You interpret my critique of how you present yourself as an insult.
Here I am trying to bring another viewpoint to you and you accuse me of engaging in your own tactic.
How disappointing.
You occasionally come up with relatively poignant comments and now I believe you are an adherent to Alinsky’s Rules For Radicals.

Smart Rock
Reply to  Richard Greene
December 30, 2022 1:06 pm

Richard – you might want to consider the alternative possibility: that Dr. Curry is too intelligent for you to appreciate the complexities that she writes about, or the subtlety of her arguments.

She is very “academic” in the way she discusses ideas (which often tend to be a bit abstract), always presenting multiple sides of a question. And yes, she does get a bit long-winded at times. I wonder if she was schooled by Jesuits at some point.

Sometimes I want to see her get really angry about the abuses taking place in climate “science”, but that is just not her style. Not everyone is born to be a street brawler. Plus, she runs a consulting business on weather matters, and some of her prospective clients might get nervous if she starts ranting about a global conspiracy to create and disseminate apocalyptic misinformation – one that involves academia, governments at all levels, the mainstream media, social media/big tech, the school system, big business and the Roman catholic church (to name just a few).

Richard Greene
Reply to  Smart Rock
December 30, 2022 2:40 pm

“Plus, she runs a consulting business on weather matters, and some of her prospective clients might get nervous”

I believe there are financial incentives for her to be very moderate.

“Richard – you might want to consider the alternative possibility: that Dr. Curry is too intelligent for you to appreciate the complexities that she writes about, or the subtlety of her arguments.”

I have considered that, but it is not near the top of my list of possibilities. You do get an “A” for a clever, generic, character attack.

Scarecrow Repair
December 30, 2022 10:30 am

Semi-related, I and probably many others have had vaguely similar thoughts elsewhere. I long ago latched on to the idea of symmetry between accountability and responsibility: that where responsibility exceeds accountability, you have corruption; where accountability exceeds responsibility, you have scapegoatism. It did seem to be related to yin and yang, but I never looked into it, so thanks for the long dive.

Richard Greene
Reply to  Scarecrow Repair
December 30, 2022 1:18 pm

Start with a conservative, delete reason and accountability, and then you have a leftist.

Reply to  Richard Greene
December 30, 2022 5:29 pm

All right, give credit where credit is due, from As Good As It Gets

December 30, 2022 10:49 am

Yin Yang? Meh. I think I get why she went there, but until there is a reckoning over the ChiCom pandemic, I would be very reluctant to fraternize with Chinese Communist “science.”

abolition man
Reply to  pflashgordon
December 30, 2022 12:36 pm

Don’t throw out the baby with the bath water! The CCP is to the Chinese people is as a lamprey attached to a large salmon; they add nothing positive to the mix, and decrease the survival potential of the fish.
A melding of Eastern and Western thought could yield phenomenal results, especially in areas where our Western leaders have succumbed to tunnel vision, like climate science and medicine! I, for one, would welcome a medical profession that was a bit more than a pill mill and body shop; and some realistic debate in climate science would shock the world!
Science and art should not necessarily be considered two separate areas of knowledge! Many great artists have had quite a bit of scientific expertise as a foundation, and there have been many scientists who were quite artistic; Leonardo comes to mind, da Vinci, NOT DiCaprio! Learning and experience CAN lead to wisdom, but I believe that outcome is more likely when one develops multiple talents across a wide range of disciplines in addition to a specialization.

December 30, 2022 1:07 pm

Joey Biden knows how to deal with “Deniers”…he learned it from his friend Xi Jinping….you re-educate them…put them in camps and keep them there until they get the message. Joey took care of that character Corn Pop and he’ll take care of these Deniers too.

Chris Hanley
December 30, 2022 1:15 pm

… framings of climate change. On the left, the climate change problem is framed as being caused by excess carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, which can be solved by eliminating fossil fuel emissions. Both the problem and solution are included in a single frame. This framing dominates the UN negotiations on climate change …

That seems an accurate summary of the IPCC’s apparent purpose as stated in the 1988 UN resolution 43/53.
Framing CO2 in the informal sense of of constructing a case based on false evidence is apt, that there is “excess carbon dioxide in the atmosphere” on its face is an absurd assertion.
In the past thirty-four years of the IPCC’s existence no evidence has emerged that the increasing atmospheric concentration of CO2 from 350 ppm to 415 ppm whatever the source(s) has caused any net material harm let alone been “disastrous for mankind” as claimed in that UN resolution.

December 30, 2022 1:27 pm

JC says:”…it had quite a CCP flavor.”

Then you favor the idea of integrating East and West ways of thinking.

My years of tracking Soviet subs may have biased my reading of this but I find it troubling that something with Chinese Communist Party flavor would in anyway have a positive air to it.

Enes Freedom showed us the way to deal with CCP. Call them out don’t flatter them.

Reply to  mkelly
December 30, 2022 5:53 pm

And although he was an NBA level player, he no longer plays in the NBA.

IMO due to his speaking out.

Huston accepted him in a trade than released him, curious?

The owner of the rockets is a supporter of Bill Clinton and the Bush family, deep state much?

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Drake
December 31, 2022 4:33 am

“IMO due to his speaking out.”

No doubt about it. The Chicoms control the NBA and if you speak out against them, the NBA/Chicoms slap you down.

Last edited 1 month ago by Tom Abbott
December 30, 2022 6:23 pm

I’m going to have to sleep on this.

December 30, 2022 7:11 pm

I found your comments on framing particularly useful.

Leo Smith
December 31, 2022 2:30 am

Its sad when a carefully constructed response simply gets deleted from WUWT.
Free speech? Not here it seems

Richard Greene
Reply to  Leo Smith
January 1, 2023 4:50 am

I can advise you to never make any comments here that are critical of Ukraine. They will be “disappeared”

Ulric Lyons
January 1, 2023 11:21 am

Your comment is awaiting moderation.
I drew a metaphor from music, the relative, and the absolute, as Yoni and Wang. In real-time consciousness, mind and cognition is relative, and intuition is absolute. In memory, associative memory is relative, and photographic is absolute.
It probably works as a cosmological metaphor too.

In the climate system, I can see the ordering of the solar signal driving NAO/AO anomalies, but what could be considered as chaotic responses of the atmosphere/oceans, tends to mediate what the solar signal does:

Weaker solar wind states => negative NAO/AO => meridional jet stream => a warmer AMO and brief tropical/Saharan plumes into mid and higher latitude land regions.

The atmosphere keeps the torrid zones daytime cooler, and the oceans and clouds keep the night time warmer, seems pretty well balanced wherever you look really.

As for the framing, I would suggest that “controlling the climate” is actually the Yang chatting nonsense to the Yin and confounding it to the extent that it can only chat back more nonsense. Like in a bad case of runaway paranoia. Tipping points of delusion.

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights