Earlier this week you may have read this: How to Publish a High-Profile Climate Change Research Paper.
It’s worse than we thought.
Josh has a take on it below:
Like his work? Buy him a pint.
I applaud Dr. Patrick T Brown for having the courage to speak out against the journal policies
Nothing sexy about CCBS so lets keep everyone as scared as possible and maybe I can make a few bucks in the meantime. Another point to the madness is the use of projection as a tool of fear. The cookie crumbs are all over my face so I ask you why did you eat all the cookies.
You left out promotion, tenure, travel, and faculty research awards with extra dollars.
Absolutely. Even in forestry- which you’d think is a conservative profession/industry. Not when the money starts flowing. There is a suppossed non profit firm called New England Forestry Foundation which has made a business of convincing forest owners to give them their land for tax breaks and to benefit the ecosystem and now to help save the planet. Recently the feds gave this outfit 30 million bucks to help spread the word that we must now practice extra special, extra fussy forestry to lock up more carbon to save the planet. The guy running this outfit gets a salary far larger than anyone working in the private sector of forestry and even the various forestry agencies. I suppose I should congratulate him for his smarts in landing the big fish- but it ticks me off- that this money is all about the f*****g climate BS. This mantra of a new kind of forestry- to lock up more carbon- to save the planet – is now the official party line spread by all forestry agencies, academics, non profits, etc. It means the grunts who go in the woods with a chainsaw and consulting foresters like me must now go to numerous reeducation events to learn the new zeitgiest! So, at the age of 73, I decided to stop my forestry work and not apply again for my license. I just WON’T participate in this scam- which only enriches and justifies the careers of all of these people who DON’T actually go in the forests to harvest wood which we all love! It’ll help kill the industry-then we can import wood from thousands of miles away- or Scandinavian nations- or Russia, once they get their asses kicked out of Ukraine. 🙂
Reeducation = liberal full employment.
But…but…how could so many climate scientists be wrong in the same direction?!?
Maybe because 50 years ago the idea of “climate” science as a separate discipline was unherd of.
Or, for “the cause”.
and it still isn’t – it’s just collection of many other sciences, not yet melded into a science with the ability to prove anything other than its political power
At my Physics Department in the 1970’s the “Meteorology Section” was poorly funded, had few profs, and little equipment And btw, global warming was not the issue; it was cooling.
But now, after the tsunami of federal funding, I bet the Climate Section” dominates most USA physics departments.
We are getting very liitle useful return on that investment.
“But now, after the tsunami of federal funding, I bet the Climate Section” dominates…” – exactly. That is the herd I had in mind.
There is $ at both ends learned this today from a newspaper friend. “The AP receives money from one or more foundations to cover climate news. I’ll give you three guesses which way those money sources lean, and the first two don’t count.”
“I’ll give you three guesses which way those money sources lean, and the first two don’t count.”
I hear that expression all the time. Does it mean 5 guesses?
“Truth be damned” …. that reminded me of something….
From: Hal Lewis, University of California, Santa Barbara
To: Curtis G. Callan, Jr., Princeton University, President of the American Physical Society
6 October 2010
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 ***
… the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist. ***
4. So a few of us tried to bring science into the act *** We conformed in every way with the requirements of the APS Constitution, and described in great detail what we had in mind—simply to bring the subject into the open.
5. To our amazement, Constitution be damned, you declined to accept our petition, ***
This scheming at APS HQ is so bizarre that there cannot be a simple explanation for it. Some have held that the physicists of today are not as smart as they used to be, but I don’t think that is an issue. I think it is the money, ***
I’m not going to explore at just which point enlightened self-interest crosses the line into corruption, but a careful reading of the ClimateGate releases makes it clear that this is not an academic question.
I want no part of it, so please accept my resignation. APS no longer represents me, but I hope we are still friends.
Hal
==========================================================
Harold Lewis
is[was] Emeritus Professor of Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara, former Chairman; Former member Defense Science Board, chmn of Technology panel; Chairman DSB study on Nuclear Winter; Former member Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Former member, President’s Nuclear Safety Oversight Committee; Chairman APS study on Nuclear Reactor Safety Chairman Risk Assessment Review Group; Co-founder and former Chairman of JASON; Former member USAF Scientific Advisory Board; Served in US Navy in WW II; books: Technological Risk (about, surprise, technological risk) and Why Flip a Coin (about decision making)(bolding mine)
Source: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/10/16/hal-lewis-my-resignation-from-the-american-physical-society/
Many years ago (about 1976) I heard Hal Lewis give an after-dinner speech at a conference in Sun Valley. He was brilliant, had everybody’s undivided attention!
“ (literally) trillions of dollars”
Sure?
Hal Lewis was, at the time he wrote that:
1. Mentally 100% competent.
2. Well-informed.
with
3. No motive to lie.
He had, throughout his life, an impeccable reputation for veracity.
I believe, therefore, that his testimony is highly credible.
So, yes.
We’ve known about this since Climategate. A Nature editor was trying to justify their “balanced” publishing principles on the Biased Broadcasting Corporation. As always with the BBC, nobody was asked on to contest her opinions.
I heard a mealy mouthed Nature editor being interviewed on the BBC yesterday. She defended her article saying simply that Patrick Brown only “left out some complexity- to make it more easy to understand” you see. She did not say anything about Patrick ignoring the data to draw what he knew was a false conclusion. Nor was she held to account by the BBC person. Well there’s a surprise then!
If the paper is too complex for your reviewers to understand, the solution is to get better reviewers, not water down the paper.
What does this say about the Scientific community to the public at large? Now that the curtain is pulled further back on how climate research has been published, for the past 30 years or more, are they to assume that most of the papers are suspect? If so, that may help explain why many don’t know what to believe, so they just follow the dogma of the day!
Story(journal article) tip: “Stability inspection for West Antarctica shows: marine ice sheet is not destabilized yet, but possibly on a path to tipping”https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2023/09/230907105813.htm
‘Their diagnosis: … they found no indication of irreversible, self-reinforcing retreat of the ice sheet in West Antarctica’
BUT!!
‘The process of melting would happen over hundreds or thousands of years. However, the cause could be human actions today, as they have the power to trigger and commit a future of 10,000 years to several meters of global sea-level rise. And stronger warming in the future would even speed up this process,” Julius Garbe from PIK stresses.’
So… There’s nothing wrong, BUT if we use our imagination, sea level might rise a few meters within 10,000 years.
I’m sorry, but if these coastal cities haven’t figured out a way to manage ‘several meters’ of sea level rise (maybe call the NETHERlands about it…) in TEN THOUSAND YEARS, they deserve their fate.
By this measure, in 10K years I’ll be rich because I own beachfront property.
The CAGW narrative has infected so many aspects of our society . I have been in two “activities” related to this over the years; and I cannot even talk about some of them for fear of damaging certain peoples “ gigs” .
It does not even have to be big money so to speak. Large numbers of middle class type incomes are now dependent on this “ narrative”/ industry. I classify it as a severe parasitic economic perversion.
Bandwagon jumping. When there’s money to be handed out, some people will invent an activity or occupation specifically designed to be funded by this money. Human nature – it’s easier than working for a living.
“… base my conclusions on tree ring thermometers” 🙂
Somewhat related and an item I don’t grasp- but in a video I saw researchers who collected deep ice samples- I think in Greenland. They claim- and this is what blows my mind- that as they pull up the core, they measure the temperature of the ice at many points on the core- and that the temperature they measure WAS the temperature at the surface the year that layer formed even if thousands or millions of years ago. Somehow, that just doesn’t ring true– though maybe it is. Seems impossible. Either they didn’t explain what they really meant (simplifying for the dumb viewers) or I misunderstood what they said.
The ultimate ice chest? Maybe Igloo should use it as a marketing campaign “ keep your stuff cool for centuries ” just like Greenland ice cores!
For all the wailing about Greenland ice melting these many decades, how is it possible that a couple of airplanes (P-38s, magnificent craft) were dug out from 250 feet of ice after about 50 years of ice accumulation over them?
Slowroll: Yes!
The book “Glacier Girl” was a good read.
Crashed 1942 and found in 1992 under 264 ft of ice.
Reminder: glaciers correlate best with rainfall; not temperature or CO2.
Depends whether net melt flows from top or bottom. (If bottom, then it says… something else?)
It’s not melt, it’s outflow.
Snow falls on the top, and ice flows out from the bottom.
An old fashioned step would have a number of ice cores taken near to each other, analysed for the customary main chemical and isotope factors, spot temperatures taken, then all of it compared.
It is called replication.
I do not know if it has been done so I have no links to help. However, one often reads more generally that climate research is in a replication crisis. Geoff S
Sherro01 would have understood the ice core explainers if they had been allowed to speak without guidelines.
The ice core explainers were oversimplyifying. Salesmen suggested saying untrue things (long ago, don’t work there anymore, won’t name names) as a way to sell complicated truth. The explainers might be wrong, but I bet they believed they were telling a greater truth.
That image at the top- a nice mix of male/female and white, black and asian. But, heck, nowadays at least half must be LGBQT+. If not, this site will be considered severely reactionary!
Of course none of this surprises me. What does surprise me is the naive younger scientists and paper authors who honestly think their work is being honestly reviewed. Of course, they also hew to the party line as well.
Who are the most eminent, most authoritative pro AGW scientists with heaviest CV, the one “they” go to for their stamp of approval? I can’t seem to find any willing to take the technical fire. I don’t mean the ones on TV the most. Their heavy weight theoretical go to guys technically.
Most of the arguments used by warmists cannot survive close examination. When forced to defend or prosecute their position in a strictly controlled evidence and credibility based environment , expert witnesses direct and cross examination like civil litigation , it all tends to fall apart.
I spent spent about 5 years working for a court reporting company( legal hearings, depositions, court cases, agency appeals etc , we also had contracts with trial lawyers associations for their continuing ed seminars- these were the big boys in the game and I got to be the fly on the wall and watch them work. Some of these guys and ladies could just eviscerate the warmist argument if you could get a technically qualified judge panel or jury. That is the problem.
The anti AGW could get a dozens of very well known heavyweights willing to stand up. Can’t find even one NAME on the warming side that is not a media type. How can an argument be mounted against a anthill of opponents. Dr. Mototaka Nakamura was a brave soul who elected to stay in Japan rather then face the withering PR fire in the US. Clauser is a nobel winner who one might suppose would garner some respect but I guess not. The late Freeman Dyson, a giant of physics, was dismissed too. William Happer quit in disgust. Curry should have sufficient CV to garner respect, but guess not. Yet not a single name James Hansen never was that much a heavy weight and is now long since retired. There is nobody to debate, just this ant hill.
The discovery process itself would reveal how weak the case is when a top notch lawyer starts taking depositions of the warmists side expert witness list. Depositions under oath by a really good lawyer can be brutal- they can go on for days. The lawyers would often ask me to “ read back” a witnesses previous response when the attorney taking the deposition smelled blood. Very intimidating.
James Hansen seems to honorable for the team he found himself on (leading?)
After great expectations about how the scientific method could be applied to everything, the excitement of the space race, nuclear everything and Hari Seldon, “social sciences” like psychology faced similar reconning long ago.
M Mann
Opportunity cost: what are the generation’s sharpest minds _not_ being directed toward.
Sums up nearly all pro vax arguments.
Polio? Vaccines and tests were introduced at the same time in the US. Before biological tests, anything was called polio. Also, by the old definition, the US had a polio issue in 2019, just before the “pandemic”.
Measles? Killed 1 per 35 000 children in France, before mass vax.
(US data doesn’t mean anything as you have absolute terrible overall health – not healthcare, health. Anyway, since vaccines are to be considered Godsent, not just in the US, so why would the rest of the world suffer from US “public health” imperialism?)
I am the very model of a Major Model generation
I’ve information vegetable, animal, and mineration
I know the kings of England, and I quote the fights historication
From Marathon to Waterloo, in order categorication
I’m very well acquainted, too, with matters mathematication
I understand equations,both the simple and quadratication
About binomial theorem I am teeming with a lot o’ news
With many cheerful facts about the square of he hypotenuse
Apologies to G&S
Thanks again for the donations, I really do appreciate the support!
Finally. This Saturday 9/11 an editorial in The Times on Brown’s admission.
‘These tactics lead to work that is deceptive and neglects promising lines of inquiry for fear of challenging consensus. Such incuriosity is the hallmark of bad science and timid politics’.