Science back in its rightful place?
posted at 10:30 am on June 20, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Barack Obama promised repeatedly to “restore science to its rightful place” as President during his campaign, repeating the Left’s accusation that George Bush ignored scientific conclusions in favor of his own policy preferences. How has that promise worked so far? Ask Dr. Roger Pielke, professor of environmental studies at the University of Colorado, who saw his research misrepresented and manipulated to support conclusions on global warming completely at odds with his findings. The New York Times relegated this to their science blog:
[Why] is a report characterized by [White House] Science Advisor John Holdren as being the “most up-to-date, authoritative, and comprehensive” analysis relying on a secondary, non-peer source citing another non-peer reviewed source from 2000 to support a claim that a large amount of uncited and more recent peer-reviewed literature says the opposite about?
The issue is the recent White House claim, in support of their push for a cap-and-trade system to regulate carbon emissions, that global warming has already begun damaging the US. Pielke claims that Holdren uses unsubstantiated claims in place of actual peer-reviewed data that paints a much different picture than Obama does on climate change. Pielke notes the difference in two years of reporting:
1. Over the long-term, U.S. hurricane landfalls have been declining.
2. Nationwide there have been no long-term increases in drought.
3. Despite increases in some measures of precipitation . . . there have not been corresponding increases in peak streamflows (high flows above 90th percentile).
4. There have been no observed changes in the occurrence of tornadoes or thunderstorms
5. There have been no long-term increases in strong East Coast winter storms (ECWS), called Nor’easters.
6. There are no long-term trends in either heat waves or cold spells, though there are trends within shorter time periods in the overall record.
Pielke doesn’t necessarily refute global-warming concerns, but he notes that the administration is hardly taking a scientific approach to a scientific issue. Instead of focusing on peer-reviewed research, which has become increasingly inconclusive, the White House and Holdren have begun seizing on claims that are not scientifically derived, have not been tested, are out of date, and in many cases are simply false. That doesn’t give any credibility to the science of climate analysis, and instead gives critics the kind of ammunition that makes it look like phrenology.
Is that “restor[ing] science to its rightful place” in policymaking? Or is it the kind of political hackery that Obama promised to end?
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
A very active Hot Air Saturday morning, thank you Ed.
I’d say this is political hackery and not at all surprising. Democrats only like the science that support their assumptions.
myrenovations on June 20, 2009 at 10:32 AM
This isn’t science, this is bad comedy.
Skywise on June 20, 2009 at 10:35 AM
That’s Pielke, Jr. He is relatively soft on AGW. His father is the climatologist, and is a strident AGW skeptic.
iurockhead on June 20, 2009 at 10:35 AM
Dopey/Blamey
csdeven on June 20, 2009 at 10:36 AM
I had read the white house hired a pr firm to dumb down the report so the press could run with it.
rob verdi on June 20, 2009 at 10:36 AM
Two good sites about the global warming hoax. Perhaps the Obozo administration should thoroughly read them.
http://www.globalwarminghoax.com/news.php
http://www.petitionproject.org/
txag92 on June 20, 2009 at 10:37 AM
http://townhall.com/columnists/PaulDriessen/2009/06/20/us_governments_climate_con-job
A few tasty lines:
Read the entire piece…
Keemo on June 20, 2009 at 10:38 AM
I’m leaning more towards horror.
MarkABinVA on June 20, 2009 at 10:39 AM
AGWism has zero to do with science. It has everything to do with political power and profiteering.
Pavel on June 20, 2009 at 10:40 AM
I look forward to going back to doing science the way the leftists say we did. Tying scientists to rocks and throwing them into rivers. If they float, there telling the truth.
RobertInLexington on June 20, 2009 at 10:41 AM
The whole issue is based on, and driven by political hackery. The basic physics of gases absorbing and re-emitting infrared radiation don’t allow any significant additional greenhouse effect by adding more CO2. The narrow band of the spectrum that CO2 can absorb is already saturated.
Holdren has always been a hack, and has consistently been wrong on his predictions. He’s perfect for the job, someone who is objective and paying attention to the real science couldn’t fill the bill that 0 wants.
iurockhead on June 20, 2009 at 10:43 AM
How could a hack politician from Chicago overseeing a bunch of his hack politician friends from Chicago end political hackery? Just how could that ever happen?
Griz on June 20, 2009 at 10:44 AM
After the enlightenment, Science came increasingly to be seen as a tool for acquiring power rather than knowledge. The ugliest symptom in the modern age is our fetish for “experts” who have come to replace moral authorities in our lives.
Kind of pathetic really.
Anyway, Obama is just a simpleton who wants power. We’ve seen it before in history.
jeff_from_mpls on June 20, 2009 at 10:47 AM
Ignore science – think of the children!
OldEnglish on June 20, 2009 at 10:48 AM
Last year the violent death rate in Chicago was higher than the soldier deaths in Iraq. This man was to bring us hope and change? Let him bring it first to Chicago, then try the rest of the country. Sigh, but 54% of the population thought style = substance.
RobertInLexington on June 20, 2009 at 10:48 AM
As do republicans. Goddamn partisans
ernesto on June 20, 2009 at 10:50 AM
Well, that is a step up. Usually we’re told that Republicans just hate science, cuz we is stupid.
myrenovations on June 20, 2009 at 10:53 AM
That’s right. It’s easy to confuse the ability to speak well with intelligence, but they’re not the same thing. You can teach a parrot to talk Queen’s English, but that doesn’t make him intelligent.
Our elites — including conservatives — value communication skills and style above all else, and these are the criteria they use to judge who is intelligent. This is why the Left doesn’t understand why we ridicule them for saying Obama has an IQ off the charts. We simply don’t share a common criterion of judgment with liberals. And their criterion of intelligence is frankly indefensible — dare I say, by any scientific standard.
jeff_from_mpls on June 20, 2009 at 10:53 AM
cap ‘n trade has strong industrial support from people like Edison Electric. that’s because they will be getting the money.
and we’ll be paying alot more for our electricity.
damn, just another bill that we have to protest. its a good thing i’m retired & have time to protest.
kelley in virginia on June 20, 2009 at 10:55 AM
You are wrong.
Step foot in a conservative classroom and you will find students reading the classics, studying ancient languages advanced mathematics. They study Isaac Newton’s Principia from the original text and re-create his proofs.
You have a cartoon vision of conservatives. And while some of them cling to bogus science, on the whole, there is no equivalence between Left and right. The Left sees science as a propaganda instrument, pure and simple. The right is trying its best to preserve our intellectual traditions.
You’d know this if you had any experience in the matter.
jeff_from_mpls on June 20, 2009 at 10:56 AM
John Holdren is Obama’s Dr. Frankenstein.
Enough said.
Buy Danish on June 20, 2009 at 10:56 AM
Meanwhile…As all this back and forth BS about GW is taking place, the adminisrtaion is coming down hard on operators trying to drill in the Gulf of Mexico. Hope ya’ll don’t mind $6/ga gas.
HoustonRight on June 20, 2009 at 10:56 AM
Golly gosh, I would happily pay up to $8.50 a gallon just for the pleasure of participating in Obama’s Great Leap Forward.
myrenovations on June 20, 2009 at 10:59 AM
It’s demoralizing to see how Leftist rhetoric succeeded in the last 50 years. They demonized big business only to use big business as a foil for seizing power. They demonized so-called fascists on the right only to enact a fascist form of government. And worst of all, they decried racism and sexism as the cardinal social thought crimes, only to reveal themselves to be deeply racist and sexist with no apology whatsoever.
The once-great Democrat party must be dismantled and rebuilt. Let the anarchist vermin have Cuba or something. But they need to give their party back to moral, thoughtful people. There have been none since about 1970.
jeff_from_mpls on June 20, 2009 at 11:00 AM
Nice language.
Johan Klaus on June 20, 2009 at 11:00 AM
We’d be better off with the parrot as president.
Cap and Trade is nothing more than a way to destroy what little industry we have left in this country, period.
Rebar on June 20, 2009 at 11:01 AM
Ignore science – think of the children!
OldEnglish on June 20, 2009 at 10:48 AM
Cindy Munford on June 20, 2009 at 11:01 AM
Not arguing, but asking; do you have a link to this?
massrighty on June 20, 2009 at 11:03 AM
There are so many people unhappy with their own lives that they feel they must make the rest of us miserable. Tax all of our freedoms until no one can afford or access many of them without the help of the government.
kahall on June 20, 2009 at 11:03 AM
+10
jeff_from_mpls on June 20, 2009 at 11:04 AM
It’s a crisis nearing catastrophie,
It’s a crisis nearing catastrophie,
It’s a crisis nearing catastrophie,
It’s a crisis nearing catastrophie,
It’s a crisis nearing catastrophie,
It’s a crisis nearing catastrophie,
It’s a crisis nearing catastrophie,
It’s a crisis nearing catastrophie,
It’s a crisis nearing catastrophie,
It’s a crisis nearing catastrophie,
It’s a crisis nearing catastrophie,
It’s a crisis nearing catastrophie ….
There, now it’s true.
fogw on June 20, 2009 at 11:07 AM
Giant scary tidal waves caused by drowning Polar bears will be bad for Michelle’s children, so let’s spend what little money we have left to pay off Al Gore and his political friends.
TexasJew on June 20, 2009 at 11:07 AM
There is about as much science in the Global Warming community as there is in the Saved Jobs formula. If you use one square of butt wipe instead of four you save 4,000 TREES.
fourdeucer on June 20, 2009 at 11:10 AM
Not arguing, but asking; do you have a link to this?
massrighty on June 20, 2009 at 11:03 AM
For starter – google “Salazar” and “Utah” or “offshore drilling”, Salazar being the dumbass who is Obama’s Sec. of Interior.
And $6 gas would be a pleasure, once these clowns are finished.
TexasJew on June 20, 2009 at 11:11 AM
No links. This is directly from friends and family in the oil and gas business. I’ve posted this before but, the MMS (mineral management service) which is the regulatory arm of the dept of the interior regulates offshore drilling and all pipelines transporting oil and gas.
The relationship has become more adversarial in the last 4 months. Operators are being denied permits for drilling in proven and currently producing areas in the Gulf. On FBN they had the CEO of Chevron telling them that they are having to go into deeper waters to obtain permits which is drastically more expensive to operate in.
Off the coast of California, Plains Exploration wanted to rework a proven well on an existing lease (good until 2020) and was refused the permit. This was not to drill a new well, just to update an old one.
HoustonRight on June 20, 2009 at 11:12 AM
Ed, Warren Meyer at Climate Skeptic has been on a roll in criticizing the report. He’s up to #11 now.
I especially liked his take down of the NCDC arguments that the electric grid is in danger of increasingly severe weather related to climate change.
One phone call, a call the GCCI authors couldn’t be bothered with, totally debunked the NCDC argument here.
Dusty on June 20, 2009 at 11:18 AM
But, remember, AGW is largely a religion, and more resembles witchcraft than good science. Just look at its leading proponents.
Ragspierre on June 20, 2009 at 11:22 AM
MORE INFORMATION
http://www.climate-skeptic.com/
thedude on June 20, 2009 at 11:23 AM
What? You expect consistency? Expediency rules! – sad to say.
OldEnglish on June 20, 2009 at 11:23 AM
Yep, no apologies either.
Cindy Munford on June 20, 2009 at 11:31 AM
if you believe in Global Warming you are allowed to raise taxes and run other peoples lives. What’s not to like?
“Restoring science to its rightful place” means using sceince in the noble cause of big government.
Fred 2 on June 20, 2009 at 11:32 AM
What’s the reasoning for denial? Environmental? Harm to tourists?
Skywise on June 20, 2009 at 11:32 AM
Science is just another tool to be used selectively to reinforce the farce known as the Obama plan for global warming. Always remember that a lie is not a lie if Obama wants you to believe it. What is happening now would be funny if it wasn’t so nauseating.
volsense on June 20, 2009 at 11:33 AM
Does anybody out there have any memory of the reason given for the establishment of the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ….. during the Carter Administration?
* Anybody?
* Anything?
* No?
* Didn’t think so !
Bottom line .. we’ve spent several hundred billion dollars in support of an agency … the reason for which not one person who reads this can remember.
Ready???????
It was very simple … and at the time everybody thought it very appropriate…
The ‘Department of Energy’ was instituted on
8- 04-1977
TO LESSEN OUR DEPENDENCE ON FOREIGN OIL.
Hey, pretty efficient, huh?????
AND NOW IT’S 2009,
32 YEARS LATER …
AND THE BUDGET FOR THIS
*
NECESSARY DEPARTMENT IS AT$24.2 BILLION A YEAR
o IT HAS
* 16,000 FEDERAL EMPLOYEES AND APPROXIMATELY
* 100,000 CONTRACT EMPLOYEES
o AND LOOK AT THE JOB IT HAS DONE!
THIS IS WHERE YOU SLAP YOUR FOREHEAD AND SAY
o ‘WHAT WAS I THINKING?’
Ah, yes, good ole bureaucracy..
And NOW we are going to turn the Banking System, health care & the Auto Industry over to them?
NOT!!!!!
Keemo on June 20, 2009 at 11:39 AM
Science, put in its rightful place… alongside the Constitution, free-market principles, America’s alliances/values/credibility, etc., etc.
/sarc (but unfortunately coming true)
red winger on June 20, 2009 at 11:40 AM
a “conservative” classroom? really? you’re going to argue based on a whimsical hypothetical “conservative” classroom when we’re talking about science policy? im not understanding how that is at all relevant.
i made a statement about partisans, that has more to do with ideological rigidity than the merits of a left wing or right wing view. you’ve responded with a sentimental self-congradulatory view of intellectual tradition.
now, outside of the fantasy of conservative classrooms, there is certainly something to be said about making mountains out of molehills when it comes to flimsy data and ideological conviction. broadly, in both a hard science and an economic perspective, it seems that more and more we are unwilling to accept the “inconclusive”, yet rigorous data in favor of the one outlier poll or one shoddy piece of research that validates our preconceived notions.
of course, this behavior is exhibited by hard partisans on both sides, hence my original exclamation of frustration at partisans.
ernesto on June 20, 2009 at 11:40 AM
My vote would be for the political hackery thing. We know it’s a hoax, they know it’s a hoax. It’s the old fool some of the people some of the time but turn it into control all of the people all of the time.
Kissmygrits on June 20, 2009 at 11:43 AM
Skywise on June 20, 2009 at 11:32 AM
Not sure, but probably all of the above.
HoustonRight on June 20, 2009 at 11:45 AM
Did anyone ever expect real science to be honored in an adminstation so liberal as to not be able to recognize what science is? From embrionic stem cell research,global waming,wind and solar generated electricity,to “environmentally friendly”autombiles,any real scientific research has been so degraded and prostituted as to be unrecognizible as real science.
Obama and his whack-nut science advisor James Hanson are accelerating our decent into a new Dark Ages.There is no such thing as objective observation in these people’s minds.Ther version of science is defined by feelings,rather than objective reality.
Of course this regession into a culture defined by pseudo-science fits right into Obama’s plan to turn the United States into an Islamic Mullacracy.
—–Thanks a lot Democrats.
Welcome back to the 7th Century.
DDT on June 20, 2009 at 11:46 AM
Standing to give proper ovation!!!!
+10
HoustonRight on June 20, 2009 at 11:47 AM
Seems to me the abortionists, the gay rights folks, the embryonic stem cell researchers, the environmentalist wackos, and the evolutionists have been doing this for years and passing it off as science. The global warming hoaxers are just the latest to adopt the technique and now with POTUS at the head. And of course the teachers unions get in line and teach it as fact to our kids!
Christian Conservative on June 20, 2009 at 11:59 AM
I feel like I am trapped in a bad horror movie where logic and reason are turned upside down.
southsideironworks on June 20, 2009 at 11:59 AM
AGW is a political program that has nothing to do with science…it’s a tool created to destroy free market capitalism. I expect Ogabe to use this tool to the full extent. Much more of this to come in preparation for cap and trade.
AUINSC on June 20, 2009 at 12:02 PM
The Obama administration is LYING to get what it wants???
Gasp! Shocking! [insert other indications of false surprise here]
Daggett on June 20, 2009 at 12:06 PM
Check out this parody of the “feel-goodiness” that’s driving the global warming train: “Scientists Say “Warm and Fuzzy” Feelings Generated by Environmental Initiatives Increase Global Warming”: http://optoons.blogspot.com/2009/06/scientists-say-warm-and-fuzzy-feelings.html
Mervis Winter on June 20, 2009 at 12:22 PM
If only we had a media that would demand accountability from “all” of our politicians… Absolute pipe dream at this point in time.
Our political establishment should be held accountable to it’s people for failed programs, failed use of tax payer dollars, and so on. The good, bad, and the ugly should be discussed on a regular basis. When politicians run for cover, spin like a top, refuse to have open and honest discussions regarding policy, the people should demand for their removal right there on the spot. No longer should it matter which party is in power, open and honest discussion (accountability) is what need. Failed policy is exactly that. If it doesn’t work, then we need to fix it rather than continue to fight over reasons and causes.
I’m freakin sick and tired of being lied to, and treated as if I can’t see the truth because I’m just a lowly tax paying citizen.
I want the cost of health care to go down; way the f*** down. It appears to me that the biggest dynamic in this picture is to get a grip on the damn blood sucking lawyers that are responsible for raising the overhead on doctor’s in this country by hundreds of millions every year. It also appears that these same blood sucking lawyers are the very one’s running our government… Isn’t that a striking coincidence.
Keemo on June 20, 2009 at 12:23 PM
Since the beginning of the year, avg temp at O’hare Airport, Chicago = -12degrees F
where’s the global warming?
UNREPENTANT CONSERVATIVE CAPITOLIST on June 20, 2009 at 12:25 PM
That’s rich, coming from someone like The Precedent whose math skills don’t even rise to the level of the average 8th grader.
progressoverpeace on June 20, 2009 at 12:31 PM
Man-Made Global Warming is a FACT people.
And the ONLY SOLUTION is for Americans to give up more of their freedoms AND money to an ever-increasing Government.
Otherwise we will be drowned in the rising, boiling oceans littered with polar bear corpses. Don’t you people have a heart?
HumblyRight on June 20, 2009 at 12:32 PM
Yep, you’re exactly right on this one. Don’t see how anyone could honestly disagree. Especially when there are so many “conservatives” pushing the creationist agenda. The thought process is exactly the same.
Interweb Troll on June 20, 2009 at 12:33 PM
“Ah will nevah lah t’yew,” -Jimmah Cahtah, 1976.
“I restore science to its rightful place,” -Obooba, 2008.
Akzed on June 20, 2009 at 12:33 PM
“All men are endowed by ther Creator with certain inalienable rights,” -The Founding Fathers of the United States of America.
Really, what are “conservatives” thinking about with all this talk about a “creator” and all?
Akzed on June 20, 2009 at 12:35 PM
I’d love to rip your arse some more, but I gotta go eat crabs.
Akzed on June 20, 2009 at 12:37 PM
Well, duh. When Obama said “put science back in its rightful place,” he meant “double down on using fake science about climate change to amass power and resources for the state.” Did you people think he meant something else? This is, after all, the “Constitutional professor” who has read little of the Constitution, and the few parts he has read, he doesn’t really like, what with all their “negative powers” and all. This Obama guy is a lot of things, but he’s no intellectual.
Rational Thought on June 20, 2009 at 12:38 PM
The old idea of “evidence based decision making” has been replaced with the new idea of “decision based evidence making”.
Just state the decision that you want; then work hard to manufacture the evidence that you need to support the decision.
Terence Corcoran in the National Post says it all in the article linked below:
westerncanadian on June 20, 2009 at 12:39 PM
The debate is over. Global warming causes solar flares.
petefrt on June 20, 2009 at 12:47 PM
Hmmm, start with a conclusion and manipulate the data to support that conclusion.
Brilliant!
This could lead us to a Final Solution.
SKYFOX on June 20, 2009 at 12:51 PM
Heh. That about nails it.
Well said.
progressoverpeace on June 20, 2009 at 12:51 PM
Yes, ernesto, there are academies and colleges in the United States with an express mission to offer a classical (= rigorous) education.
A liberal, by definition, does not wish to subject himself or his students to hard work. Many believe hard work to be unconstitutional or racist.
So yes, ernesto, a liberal teacher will always give you a raw deal. And while some conservative teachers will give you a bad education, it’s at least possible to get something of value from a conservative professor because the conservative wishes to impart the truth, while a Leftist wishes to impart The Struggle.
You can’t close your eyes in the nirvana of moral equivalence and pretend that Leftists in particular are dumbing down education for political purposes.
jeff_from_mpls on June 20, 2009 at 12:57 PM
On global warming itself, let me give you some advice. One of the primary methodologies in global warming science is the method of large scale computer simulation.
It’s never proper based on computer simulations to utter the words “settled science” or “the debate is over”.
Do you know what’s involved in a computer simulation in a domain involving complex or chaotic processes — like climate?
A miniscule difference in initial parameters and startup conditions can lead to widely divergent results. I don’t know if it’s junk science, but I can tell you it isn’t settled science.
jeff_from_mpls on June 20, 2009 at 1:07 PM
So when does Obama assume his new name – Theodoric of York?
greasywrench on June 20, 2009 at 1:09 PM
This report is a fraud, pure and simple.
1. Temperatures have been cooling since 2002.
2 Sea temperatures, only measured with consistency since 2003, have shown a downward trend since measurement began.
3. Antarctica has had a stable ice pack and as a whole the temperatures have decreased by 1 degree F since 1950, the exception being the Wilkins Ice Shelf.
4. The 1980-1998 temperature rise coincided with a similar temperature rise throughout the solar system, making CO2 an unlikely cause, and solar activity a probable causation.
5. There is no known relationship between Hurricanes and overall global temperatures.
6. Satellite temperature readings have been consistently at odds with ground readings. Ground stations have been sharply reduced in numbers in recent years, with most of the ones left in urban areas or in airports. The accuracy of these gauges is suspect. Urban heat radiation is a real and measurable influence on micro-climate. Temperatures in these areas were once adjusted downwards to account for the same. Inexplicably, NOAA, quietly stopped the practice, thus using data that is measurably hotter than the actual temperatures of the region as a whole.
7. The annual contribution of CO2 by man to the atmosphere is 6 billion tons annually, as compared to the 183 tons created by nature. It is inconsequential. And all the was, of course, already here. Man did not create the CO2. It was always here, stored in biomass or geologically.
8. Recent studies suggest that there has been a general rise in CO2 by non anthropogenic means coinciding with the 1980-1998 temperature rise.
9. As CO@ is a necessary component of life on earth, a rise should show beneficial aspects. This appears to be the case. A study of tundra regions has shown a combined flora fauna biomass increase of an estimated 25% in the last 25 years. A recent study in the tropics suggests the same happened there also.
pat on June 20, 2009 at 1:11 PM
Yes, but attacking without proof is so much easier than defending and indefenseable position.
29Victor on June 20, 2009 at 1:14 PM
Heh.
Maquis on June 20, 2009 at 1:20 PM
That GCCI fake climate report is getting cut up by reviewers, starting with its intentional omission of supporting science.
* The Climate Skeptic blog is pointing out specific problems.
* “The US Synthesis Report and the Search for Climate WMD”
* “Note to NCDC climate report authors: try using the telephone next time”
* A UK agency created a climate report which a year ago they said was impossible to create, and they also omit their science: “The Met Office brings doom to a place near you”
HotWeaver on June 20, 2009 at 1:24 PM
Just continuing the long-storied tradition of Obama saying one thing and doing the opposite. To call him a hypocrite would be an embarrassment to hypocrites.
Queasy on June 20, 2009 at 1:29 PM
All Obama Scientific reserach you need to know:
“Raise your hands if you contributed to my campaign?”?
OK your view is valid and i consider it fact. Want a job?
rlongstrat on June 20, 2009 at 1:29 PM
I did a lot of Googling a couple of weeks ago and found that the consensus is that there has been no global warming in the past decade. One source was the UN of all places. Yep, greenhouse gases have been increasing at their normal rate but not the average global temperature…. hmmmm.
Is this the real “Inconvenient Truth” for Mr. Global Warming Investments?
Ernest on June 20, 2009 at 1:31 PM
Pretty thorough smack-down at Climate Audit.
Good site to follow re: AGW.
nukemhill on June 20, 2009 at 1:32 PM
Another piece of evidence that’s always intrigued me when AGW is linked to drought is the vegetative cover difference in the last 100+ years in the eastern U.S. If you compare Civil War era daguerreotypes and old photos of battlegrounds, etc., with recent photos of the same areas, the old ones look like they were taken in the Nebraska panhandle rather than in Virginia, Maryland or Tennessee, where lush tree and shrub growth is now extensive.
whitetop on June 20, 2009 at 1:41 PM
Wonder if anyone’s figured out a brand-new term for Marxist pseudoscience…perhaps lysenkoscience after Trofim Lysenko? Marxoscience? Socioscience?
We definitely need a new word for this.
Dr. ZhivBlago on June 20, 2009 at 2:03 PM
Crapoganda!
Maquis on June 20, 2009 at 2:15 PM
I concur. I vote for your “socioscience”, or perhaps a shorter, “socience”. But there definitely should be a catchy label attached to it and pounded home every time someone addresses their pseudo-scientific babble.
progressoverpeace on June 20, 2009 at 2:21 PM
I like that, too.
progressoverpeace on June 20, 2009 at 2:22 PM
Bullshitology.
SKYFOX on June 20, 2009 at 2:25 PM
George Soros pays a sock puppet named Joseph Romm to push his political views. Science? Not so much. He uses power points to draw graphs and calls his forcasts scientific.
Obama hired a PR firm named Resource media to push the pictures and the dog an pony shows. They specialize in fear. They are related to a group that did the apple alar scare, the silicon implants and another one if forgot. Mostly these extremists want punitive taxation on corporations and american individuals that still work for a living,
Rom and another even want people that raise questions tossed in jail with criminal judgements.
Romm reminds us of just another sorceror, astrologer witch doktor . all angry and huffy to people that dare question data and facts.
seven on June 20, 2009 at 3:25 PM
Houston Right, that’s very interesting, and disturbing.
juliesa on June 20, 2009 at 3:26 PM
I first heard this term from Thomas Sowell, IIRC. He calls such people “Watermelons”. Green on the outside, red on the inside.
They are misusing science to further their political aims.
rbj on June 20, 2009 at 3:30 PM
Until the early 1900s, tree and shrub growth was kept under check, then tree worship took hold, and forest succession took over the eastern savannah.
HotWeaver on June 20, 2009 at 3:30 PM
Marxoscience? Socioscience?… … “socience”.
Popular pseudo-science, accepted and preached by the pseudo-intellectual and movie star elites, is…
Scientique!
ROCnPhilly on June 20, 2009 at 4:24 PM
+1.
A friend sees the current situation as the (ugly, but inevitable) implosion of Leftism. I pray she’s right.
The exposure of the apparently depthless venality of modern “Liberalism” in the last year has unquestionably been a shocking revelation to all concerned – which is to say that you can still be a moonbat, but somebody’s gonna call you on it now. Staggering, at least to me.
warbaby on June 20, 2009 at 4:59 PM
It’s worth noting that the scary computer projections have so far been incorrect.
See the chart here, and the article here.
If the conservative estimate has been too high in the early years of the projection, it doesn’t stand to reason that the high estimate will come true, now does it?
hawksruleva on June 20, 2009 at 5:36 PM
Anytime the global warming kooks bring up their computer simulations, I demand that they point to any econometric models that have been accurate over the years, or any that predicted anything about the credit crisis last year. The fact is that econometric models have been around a lot longer, have much more funding, have attracted much better minds, and have remained inaccurate and nearly worthless.
And if the global warming nuts don’t bring the computer simulations up, I do it for them, and then launch into the econometric argument. They usually have little to say after this.
I like the sound of this one.
progressoverpeace on June 20, 2009 at 6:23 PM
Interesting that they (the Marxists) will eagerly accept the worst case scenario models for global warming—but won’t the CBO numbers.
Hmmm.
Dr. ZhivBlago on June 20, 2009 at 6:56 PM
The Climate Audit post previously mentioned is really a must read. CA gets very technical sometimes (often actually), but this post just shows how much the climate advocates are willing to be sloppy and/or misleading in their quest.
This is very non-technical…it is just about one chart, one that argues that there has been a huge increase in electrical grid outages in the last 20 years.
Regardless of whatever fancy computer models and remote sensing scientists have done, this graph shows the true shameless low level fraud that is occurring in front of our eyes.
Here’s John Christy’s thoughts:
This document is so pervasively misrepresentative of the science that a legitimate review requires a broader-based explanation of its shortcomings…
By letting a collection of one-sided authors, who share common views on the topic, serve as their own writers and final reviewers (hardly a peer-review process), they have created the opportunity for the complete dismissal of the whole project
r keller on June 20, 2009 at 6:59 PM
i meant to re-link:
http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=6327
r keller on June 20, 2009 at 7:02 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »