New term from the Chronicle: “Climate Thuggery” (2011-08-01). Funny how the National Association of Scholars sounds a lot like the National Academy of Sciences. I guess Anthony Watts didn’t spot the difference. The “Scholars” have been subverted by conservative interests and are now merely a right-wing front, the Academy is actual distinguished scientists (I mean, communists). Also the “Chronicle” isn’t the respected Houston Chronicle, it’s just the mouthpiece of the National Association of Scholars.
Now then given Anthony’s approval, sparked by roving bridge-builder Dr. Roger Pielke Jr., of “NAS” President Peter Wood’s position on the climate change debate, what are his credentials? Well, like most denialists, Wood’s education is entirely outside of the field of climate science. He’s an anthropologist. He’s an enthusiastic conservative though, so of course he thinks properly. That’s pretty much it.
So let’s turn to Climate Thuggery, Wood’s final nail in the coffin of (arguing about) AGW. The first three sentences are a pretty good warning:
Is anthropogenic global warming (AGW) a valid scientific theory? Is it well supported by the empirical data or is it mostly an artifact of computer modeling? I don’t have answers to these questions.
From there it’s just resentful assertions such as “Far from welcoming discussion, [the proponents of AGW] seek to suppress it.” and false claims of using lawsuits to silence denialist critics. (The lawsuit accusations are hilarious as the lawsuit Wood mentions was aimed at correcting denialist Tim Ball’s actual libel; Ball is remembered for explicitly trying to use a lawsuit to silence a critic, a tactic which blew up in his face when the criticisms were confirmed.) And, of course, that denialists are being bullied. Dr. Wood’s whole piece is classic example of combining baseless accusations with claims of victimization.
All this because apparently Wood found himself squirming under the microscope of John Mashey after accusing Mashey of defending the “tattered reputation of “hide the decline” Michael Mann, the climate scientist whose famous “hockey stick” chart shows exponentially increasing global temperatures in the near term”. Tellingly, Dr. Mann remains highly respected in the climate science field, and the out-of-context “hide the decline” quote was not by Mann. But that just gets lost in the confusion with Wood’s other nonsense. Read the whole idiotic original complaint at Bottling Up Global Warming Skepticism, which by word count is actually about P.T. Barnum, and don’t miss out on the pleasure of Peter’s pompous squirming in the comments.
Desmogblog.com covers Dr. Wood’s ignorant partisanship at NAS President Peter Wood: wrong, dishonest or hopelessly compromised?
2011-07-04 Update: Someone’s embarrassed at “The Chronicle of Higher Education”. John Mashey and Robert Coleman were given space to respond to Wood’s political attack. Read Bottling Nonsense, Misusing a Civil Platform and see Wood neatly packaged.
A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.
The truth is incontrovertible, malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end; there it is. Winston Churchill
Actually, the questions: “Is anthropogenic global warming (AGW) a valid scientific theory? Is it well supported by the empirical data or is it mostly an artifact of computer modeling?” are easily answered with the following: Read the IPCC 4th Assessment Report. Then tell us where the science is wrong.
Of course, the denialists have refused to do this. When you point them in the direction of the documents, the conversation turns to how the UN is corrupt, or how a single error in one sentence discredits all the reseearch, etc. So, I welcome denialists into a discussion about the IPCC technical reports. But I suspect they will find a way to call that “climate thuggery” as well.