Climate Change and the Integrity of Science

blau tips news of an open letter from 255 members of the US National Academy of Sciences, including 11 Nobel laureates, decrying the "recent escalation of political assaults on scientists in general and on climate scientists in particular." The letter lays out the basics of the scientific method, and explains how certainly highly-regarded theories — such as the big bang, evolution, and Earth's origin — are commonly accepted due to the strength of the evidence supporting them, though "fame still awaits anyone who could show these theories to be wrong." It goes on to "call for an end to McCarthy-like threats of criminal prosecution against our colleagues based on innuendo and guilt by association, the harassment of scientists by politicians seeking distractions to avoid taking action, and the outright lies being spread about them." According to the Guardian, the letter "originated with a number of NAS members who were frustrated at the misinformation being spread by climate deniers and the assaults on scientists by some policy-makers who hope to delay or avoid making policy decisions and are hiding behind the recent controversy around emails and minor errors in the IPCC."

Comments

Cry me a river

[Mr. Firewall]

Oh come on. These guys have spent the last 20+ years politicizing science, subverting the Scientific Method and committing massive fraud -- and they're upset because they are beginning to be investigated?

What these people have done to Science is absolutely inexcusable. They have set back scientific progress -- and the public's confidence in Science -- by decades. As a science nerd, that just flat pisses me off.

I hope this doesn't end until Al Gore himself is in a pound-me-in-the-ass prison.

Re:So convince me, then

[medcalf]

You restated my point 4, that the warming will cause catastrophic effects. You are making an assumption that I understand nothing about this. That's as good a start as any, and I won't correct you. I only ask that you convince me that catastrophic AGW is correct, or at least holds a reasonably good chance of being correct. I even gave you the list of what you'd have to convince me of already broken out. All you have to do is explain the hypothesis and present the evidence and answer questions. "Shut up," which is the meat of your response, is not a useful substitute.

Re:always the loudest wins.

[jhol13]

You are effectively denying all science by grouping AGW sceptics with "useful idiots".

There is one huge problem with AGW: we cannot measure it. So how can you claim it is a scientific fact? If Earth is warming we certainly should be able to measure it, right? Why cannot we?

See, last decade "warming" could be, according to statistics, due to just random fluctuations. This is a mathematical fact and there is no way to deny it. Yet you never hear that fact, you only hear "last decade was warmest ever measured". Why should I trust AGW proponents when they do bad math while knowing it is bad math? Similarly for purposefully claiming Himalayas will dry off in 30 years while knowing it is 100% bogus. What else have they done, cherry picked "scientific" papers perhaps? Who know as they will not tell.

Then there is another, even bigger, problem in the news. Everything "could be caused by global warming", everything, even the Icelandic volcano eruption! But no matter what happens (last winter was exceptionally cold in many, many places) it does not show anything, it is "just weather". This, although true, does not make good science and is very sickening.

I do not claim CO2 emissions are not bad, I do not claim we are not raping the Earth in many ways, I am not even claiming AGW is not true. All I am saying: stick to the science, please, don't deny it.