Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Jeff Masters reviews "Climate of Fear" essay

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
 
phantom power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-18-06 12:49 PM
Original message
Jeff Masters reviews "Climate of Fear" essay
An opinion piece titled, "Climate of Fear: Global-Warming Alarmists Intimidate Scientists Into Silence" appeared in the Wall Street Journal on Wednesday, criticizing the "iron triangle" of of climate scientists, advocates and policymakers responsible for raising the alarm over the threat posed by global warming. The article's two main points:

1) Climate scientists who are raising alarms over global warming are exaggerating the danger in order to get funding.

2) "Scientists who dissent from the alarmism have seen their grant funds disappear, their work derided, and themselves libeled as industry stooges, scientific hacks or worse. Consequently, lies about climate change gain credence even when they fly in the face of the science that supposedly is their basis."

I'm not familiar with the scientists Dr. Lindzen discusses who have lost their funding because they are greenhouse skeptics, and he does not provide any quotes or references to support this point. So, to keep this discussion shorter, I will only focus on his first argument--that climate scientists are exaggerating the threat of global warming in order to get funding.

http://www.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/comment.html?entrynum=341&tstamp=200604

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
jrw14125 Donating Member (378 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-18-06 01:11 PM
Response to Original message
1. Want funding? Become a GW skeptic! Exxon pays em all!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Odin2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-18-06 01:16 PM
Response to Original message
2. Sounds like the same BS spewed by creationists and quacks.
Edited on Tue Apr-18-06 01:16 PM by Odin2005
Tell enough stupid people that "mainstream science is a dogmatic racket that is supressing the truth" and they begin to beleive it. It's an abuse of the refutation of the Argumentum ad Populorum argument (majority opinion is truth), which only applies to lay people, not experts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNadir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-18-06 05:20 PM
Response to Original message
3. It looks rather like Dr. Masters is finally committing on the matter.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phantom power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-18-06 05:31 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. He seems to be taking a firm anti-Lindzen stance, at any rate.
I noticed that he continues his hard-line skepticism about the meaning of 2005.

Several of Dr. Lindzen's concerns in his article are valid ones. For instance, he complains of "repeated claims that this past year's hurricane activity was another sign of human-induced climate change", which is a concern of mine, as well. A single extreme weather event, or an even a series of extreme hurricanes in one ocean basin during a single year, are not valid indicators of climate change. Lindzen also criticizes the world's most prestigious scientific journals, Science and Nature, for bias against papers by global warming skeptics. This bias is difficult to prove or disprove, but I believe there is probably some substance to this claim. I've seen a number of complaints that ring true about this from the greenhouse skeptic scientists.


It got me to thinking about what it takes for a climate scientist to firmly declare "Hurricane frequency and/or intensity is increasing due to climate change." The simple answer is probably "however much data it takes to drive my p-values down to <= 0.01" or something. But I wonder how that translates into "how many more years like 2005 will it take?"

And, of course, hurricanes are just one of many facets of climate. Thunderstorms, drought, floods, etc, raise the same questions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dead_Parrot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-18-06 05:46 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. I was mulling this point...
...whilst looking at your TC Monica post. I don't have the figures, but isn't this turning into an unusual year down here, too? That must shorten the odds on the 2005 (gulf) hurricane season being a freak occurance...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phantom power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-18-06 05:52 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. I'm not clear about how your season is shaping up against average.
Part of the problem is, it isn't over yet. It seemed on track to be above average as of last month. I haven't actually caught anybody down-under saying things like "dammit, that's a lot of tropical cyclones!"

Unless you want to be the first :evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dead_Parrot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-18-06 06:36 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Dammit, that's a lot of tropical cyclones!
Well, it seems like a lot. Part of the problem is, most of this end of the planet is water, so there's nowhere near the reporting or analysis that we have for the gulf: name six people* who've heard of Typhoon Tip and win a donut...

Conversely, it might be we're just noticing them because this year they're clipping Aus for a change, and it's actually just an average season... :shrug:

*excludes the wunderground posse :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hydrashok75 Donating Member (843 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-19-06 09:26 AM
Response to Original message
8. RealClimate had an interesting debunking of Lindzen
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dogmudgeon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-19-06 09:45 AM
Response to Original message
9. It's the typical story
As soon as the bullies start to attract attention for pulling the funding from their victims, they commission a large number of essays about how they, themselves, have been oppressed, and have lost funding.

The reality of the situation can be measured in dollars and academic positions, but when was the last time you've seen any accurate accounting for scientific funding under a Republican or conservative regime?

It's not so much that the neo-cons are anti-science; rather, they believe it is possible to buy the truth by "buying science" that they like. The scientists themselves are increasingly being used as pawns. The Conservatives not only crave the protection of pop-victimhood, they also want the glam and esteem of science. And they're willing to pay well.

ObFairAndBalanced: Yes, lefties occasionally do it, too. But not very often. The discrepancy is easy to observe. We all need to be careful about funding our fantasies, but science-appropriation is mainly the right-wingers' game.

--p!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 10:21 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC