On the importance of distinguishing them.
As noted, that this was published in Nature may be an indication that there are growing cracks in the wall of the hysteria.
7 thoughts on “Climate Science Versus Climate Activism”
Comments are closed.
On the importance of distinguishing them.
As noted, that this was published in Nature may be an indication that there are growing cracks in the wall of the hysteria.
Comments are closed.
A near impossible task at this late date. The becoming part happened decades ago.
Science was ever this way. There was never a time when the field was dispassionate. Nerds are still humans and prone to all the same failings only they are too smart to realize it.
True, but the ‘battle’ over determining whether the speed of light was instantaneous vs finite took place in scientific backwaters and had no public policy implications. Today’s climate discussions are happening live, with very large policy implications.
The NGOs that finance Climate Activism need to be sued well into 8 figures when a family member dies in an ambulance blocked on its way to the hospital by “climate activists“.
Discovery is a bitch.
A few of those will take care of the more dangerous acts.
I think they should be sued even more so on behalf of the third-world people who are a) denied access to energy, demonstrably shortening their lives, and b) put into virtual slavery to mine materials for batteries to meet the “demand” for EVs mandated as a result of the NGOs lobbying. Your approach is cleaner, because it is more understandable. It should definitely be the first route. Mine should be followed, I think, because it has even more potential to ruin the NGOs donors, financially and morally. Both ruins need to happen.
“Motivated by the continuous inability of an international agreement to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to tackle global warming, despite an alarming recent rise in surface temperatures and associated hydroclimatic extremes”
The US has lowered it’s CO2 emissions, but the US didn’t lower global CO2 emissions.
Though it could be said US govt did a lot to increase China’s CO2 emissions.
International agreements and US laws have done nothing to increase, and if anything, increased global CO2 emissions.
One might say US coal industry lowered global CO2 emission, as the advancement in Coal powerplants, was later used by China’s coal industry. Or without such increase in efficiency, more Chinese coal would be burnt for same amount of energy.
Once again, from Eisenhower’s Farewell Address:
“Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.
In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.
Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been over shadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.
The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded.
Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.
It is the task of statesmanship to mold, to balance, and to integrate these and other forces, new and old, within the principles of our democratic system-ever aiming toward the supreme goals of our free society.”
Surface temperature data is garbage. Yeah record temperatures due to urbanization and the proliferation of air conditioning in the 20th Century. Remove the UHI effect and wow, no significant change. So logic would dictate we remove the stations giving us biased bad information based on known bad siting that violates NOAA’s own requirements. But no, we include all the garbage data and run statistical methods on it! Worse for sites that no longer produce data, we don’t remove them, we “interpolate” and assume numbers for them based on their neighboring sites, UHI or no. GIGO.
The satellite temperature measurements are useful. Indicating recent warming due to El Nino… We are still at an instrumental high there. But it trends up and down… As I understand it long term were looking at ~.12 C per decade or a total rise of ~1.5C per century.