Klimate Kooks

Scientists can reasonably say: Here is what we think we know. This statement sums up the dynamic process that scientific investigation entails. It recognizes the ignorance present in all scientific inquiry. We are not yet omniscient and it is always best to remain humble in the presence of an enigmatic natural environment. When scientists act like all-knowing religious zealots and forget their humility with definite prognostications of the future our skeptical radar should automatically activate as a protective device. Harold Camping of recent 'end of the world' fame was suitably humbled by reality and his religious views were shown to be kooky to all of his admiring sheeple not to mention an ever hopeful media. He did neither himself nor his followers any favors by treating his mistaken non peer reviewed calculations as gospel. Those who claim special knowledge are immediately suspect in the world of the skeptic. Harold removed himself from future seer consideration. His crystal ball was shown to be broken. But that was religion, a realm filled with fanciful opinion and belief and those that have a mind to are free to engage their imaginations without the restraint of reality. We accept that.

However, when scientists similarly step outside the humility of  'this is what we think we know' and offer predictions of the future without humble caveats they proceed into the realm that Harold C. has so ignominiously vacated and will copy his result. This is not good for their reputations as serious scientists nor is it good for the discipline of science itself. It cheapens what otherwise is our road to enlightenment and  makes a mockery out of a serious guide to human betterment. It strengthens the fanciful to be just as reliable as science.

In the realm of global warming/climate change/climate disruption several scientists have in the past and in the present danced in the limelight of tomfoolery without, it seems, any awareness of the damage they are doing to themselves and to their scientific discipline or to the fact that others less inclined to the need for fame are mocking their spotlight appearances. 

In the 1970s Paul Ehrlich of Population Bomb fame predicted mass famine for the human race before the turn of the 20th century. Undeterred and unrepentant by his failed predictions he continues to marginalize himself among a dwindling band of admirers.

James Lovelock of Gaia hypothesis fame famously once said “billions of us will die and the few breeding pairs of people that survive will be in the Arctic where the climate remains tolerable” by the end of the 21st century.

He, to his credit, has since repudiated his alarmist notions of climate change. This allows him to step back under the scientific umbrella and be a voice heeded once again.

When a scientist steps into the role of activist for a cause rather than remain an impartial seeker of truth the temptation to play the role of omniscient expert can lead to embarrassment when the data don't support the conclusion being pursued or the temptation to manufacture results that support the cause in fraudulent disregard for the truth which will attract nothing but the deserved opprobrium of fellow colleagues uncorrupted by star quality attention.. The latter is a sad ending and betrayal for any scientist.

It appears that James Hansen of NASA's GISS has chosen this road to infamy. First, an apocalyptic prediction: "If Canada proceeds, and we do nothing, it will be game over for the climate." He was talking about Canada's development of its tar sands for oil export. Game over for us too, I suppose. Hysterical talk detected, skeptical radar on. There is no evidence that the burning of fossil fuels is leading to CAGW. In fact, there seems to be ample evidence that the scare is unwarranted. Perhaps, suspecting that that is so,Mr. Hansen has been caught adjusting the temperature records over which he has some control to fulfill his preferred view of the world's climate direction. If Nature won't behave as I want I will make it. It must be true. I have staked my career and life's work on it. Hansen's scary climate predictions have been contradicted by scientists and others with a working brain are dubious.

Reality is no fan either.

CAGW does lead to Conning A Gullible World.

At least, this is what I think I know.