Undermining climate science

[snow hope]

you seem to lacking in common ettiquette.

Yes, I've given up on etiquette when it comes to people like Roy Spencer. If only we had an internationally recognised crime of ecocide we could but the people who deliberately spread the myth that global warming is natural or isn't happening on trial. These are the people that make it more likely that we keep burning carbon and end up making countless species, including our own, go extinct.

Who's Dr John Christy? Never heard of him. Is he another one?

It is unlikely you will take advice from me, but in general people say that when you are in a hole, it is a good idea to stop digging.......

[snow hope]

Oh that Dr John Christy. What was your point about him?

To be honest, I really can't be bothered. I think I will leave it be at this point.

[emordnilap]

Roy Spencer.

When debating climate deniers, often they will bring up the names of the few scientists with actual credentials who remain skeptical that climate change will be disastrous for the planet. Roy Spencer is usually high on the list. The self professed “Official Climatologist of the Rush Limbaugh Show”, Spencer is most famous for being conspicuously, repetitively, and stubbornly wrong with regard to some of the most critical satellite temperature measurements. Roy has a new book, which is not about climate, but is rather some kind of manifesto of his free-market economics beliefs.

The book was recently announced on his website, and in a curious answer to a comment, Roy Spencer let slip what he’s really been doing all these years.

The complete comment-

Nicholas, I would wager that my job has helped save our economy from the economic ravages of out-of-control environmental extremism.

I view my job a little like a legislator, supported by the taxpayer, to protect the interests of the taxpayer and to minimize the role of government.

If I and others are ultimately successful, it may well be that my job is no longer needed. Well then, that is progress. There are other things I can do.

And here we thought the most important thing was the objective, scientific truth.

Roy Spencer and John Christy.

As for Christy, what can you say about somebody who contributed the chapter “The Global Warming Fiasco” to a 2002 book called Global Warming and Other Eco-Myths, published by Competitive Enterprise Institute, a leading provider of disinformation on global warming that is/was funded by ExxonMobil?

In the Vermont case on the state’s effort to embrace California’s tailpipe GHG emissions standards, the car companies brought in Christy as an expert witness to rebut Hansen. In one footnote on the sea level rise issue, the judge noted, “it appears that the bulk of scientific opinion opposes Christy’s position.”

These two jokers do not need Biff to reinforce their position.

[woodburner]

If only we had an internationally recognised crime of ecocide we could...

This is disappointing to see from you. I don't always agree with you, but I usually respect the position you take. Not in this case though. Ecocide I infer to mean that the world's ecology will be destroyed. The planet has experienced major changes before, the current warming is unlikely to be any worse, if as bad.

... but the people who deliberately spread the myth that global warming is natural or isn't happening on trial. These are the people that make it more likely that we keep burning carbon and end up making countless species, including our own, go extinct.

Whatever happens in the end, there is no absolute proof that what is happening is not natural. I don't say that it could not be controlled, but most of the population (in the developed world which is what is driving the problem) don't understand what they are doing, or give a stuff. They are just doing what they do in the same way bacteria multiply. Therefore I would say this can be seen as natural.

A huge reduction in the human population has to happen if other species are not to go extinct anyway (as is happening now). If the human species goes the same way, it will just be one of earth's cycles.

[emordnilap]

http://forms.climaterealityproject.org/page/s/heartland

[emordnilap]

Whatever happens in the end, there is no absolute proof that what is happening is not natural. I don't say that it could not be controlled, but most of the population (in the developed world which is what is driving the problem) don't understand what they are doing, or give a stuff. They are just doing what they do in the same way bacteria multiply. Therefore I would say this can be seen as natural.

Almost a neat trick, that paragraph.

Whatever.

Land temperature increase, CO2 emissions and fossil fuel use all line up nicely on a graph. You may think this 'natural' but it's a awful hijacking of the word.

I agree that they don't understand and don't give a stuff, btw.

[RenewableCandy]

But we're not bacteria: we do (at least individually, and at least in most cases) have some consciousness of the idea of "consequences of actions".

We have the kit: it's called a brain (and a social one at that). We've no excuse for not using it.

[biffvernon]

Ecocide I infer to mean that the world's ecology will be destroyed.

Last week we had a paper suggesting that ocean acidification could wipe out a third of marine species within a century. If that isn't ecocide I'm a banana.

Whatever happens in the end, there is no absolute proof that what is happening is not natural.

Absolute proof is not something you get in science; only in maths and logic. I pay as much creedance to folk who don't accept AGW as to those who think the world is flat.

most of the population (in the developed world which is what is driving the problem) don't understand what they are doing, or give a stuff. They are just doing what they do in the same way bacteria multiply.

So I'm not saying everyone should be in court on an ecocide charge - just Roy Spencer and his ilk.

A huge reduction in the human population has to happen if other species are not to go extinct anyway.

I don't accept that. How we behave is more important, by at least an order of magnitude, than how many of us there are.

[emordnilap]

This is rather good:



From here.

To believe that global warming is a “hoax,” or that there is a “conspiracy,” you must believe in coordinated action on the part of scientists, environmental ministers, politicians, and NGOs around the world.