Climate Counter Punching

The relentless pace of promoting my book has me in such a state that I’m almost relieved to be distracted by more of the usual nonsense emanating from such anonymous climate bullies as Eli Rabett and And Then There’s Physics. (But don’t forget to buy my book if you haven’t done so.)

The birth of the Heterodox Academy has Rabett in a tizzy, as he obviously fears that they will object to the Stalinist party line adhered to and enforced by Konsensus thugs.

After all, the first lines on the website of the Heterodox Academy are “We are social scientists and other scholars who want to improve our academic disciplines. We have all written about a particular problem: the loss or lack of “viewpoint diversity.” It’s what happens when everyone in a field shares the same political orientation and certain ideas become orthodoxy. We have come together to advocate for a more intelectually diverse and heterodox academy.”

This is a threat to Eli Rabett’s worldview, so in typical fashion he compares them to Donald Trump (does anybody else see a connection?) His ploy? To also compare the Heterodox Academy with a journal that failed. Nobody at the Heterodox Academy was associated with the journal. Their aims and practices are completely different. So of course Rabett lumps them together.

As for ATTP, he is in a tizzy because Richard Tol got published. Tol was criticizing John Cook’s junk science paper on the 97% consensus.

ATTP thinks it strange that Tol would criticize junk science regarding the consensus when Tol himself believes the consensus is high. The befuddled professor clearly doesn’t realize that junk science contaminates real science and obscures the truth.

The befuddled academic writes “Well, if I’m trying to survey relevant experts and they don’t know the answer, then they’re probably not relevant experts.”

Actually, no, ATTP. They were qualified as relevant experts before they were invited to participate in the survey. Climate science isn’t easy. The fact that a significant percentage of published climate scientists don’t know the answer is something for us all to consider carefully, not to gloss over in yet another attack on Richard Tol.

The consensus is clearly robust. 66% of climate scientists agree with the IPCC position attributing half or more of recent warming to human emissions of CO2. This finding is repeated in more than one survey of published  climate scientists.

But John Cook’s paper is garbage. It comes up with a 97% total only through ignoring proper research guidelines and extensive use of smoke and mirrors. It is trash. I’ve covered it here. And here.

The Brigati Verdi of the blogosphere–Joe Romm, Michael Tobis, Things Break, Deltoid, Open Mind–and of course Rabett and ATTP–have lost a lot of their clout and readership in the past two or three years. Those remaining soldier on, perhaps more bitter than before as their impact lessens.

The fact is that this Old Guard has been proven wrong on so many elements of climate science that they are now essentially talking to themselves.

The Old Guard dies, but never surrenders. Dustbin of history and all that.

Old Guard


2 responses to “Climate Counter Punching

  1. Oh, to hope one day that the Heterodox Academy will recruit members from the English Department and Schools of Journalism and Law. Probably will never happen.

  2. I like how you raise the warning flags about the consensus echo chamber in your book.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s