The data were released only just before Thanksgiving, and there’s already a book out on Climaquiddick.
Category Archives: Media Criticism
Who Are The Environment Correspondents?
Apparently, the people who have been reporting on climate change are as incestuous (and even more incompetent) as the people studying it. Color me unshocked. They’re likely economic ignorami as well.
[Update a couple minutes later]
Well, here’s one reporter who’s strayed from the reservation. A “saturated greenhouse” theory? If true, this would be huge. There are good reasons to wean ourselves from fossile fuels (if done in an economically sane manner), but climate change wouldn’t be one of them.
[Late morning update]
“AGW? I refute it thus.”
If there’s anyone left you know who STILL believes in Anthropogenic Global Warming, you might want to show them this chart.
It’s pretty striking.
Unspeakable Truths
Thoughts from Victor Davis Hanson:
I am fortunate for a wonderful graduate education in the PhD program at Stanford, but I learned more about the way the world works in two months of farming (which saved a wretch like me) than in four years of concentrated study.
In short, the world does not work on a nine-month schedule. It does not recognize concepts like tenure. It does not care for words without action. And brilliance is not measured by vocabulary or SAT scores. Wowing a dean, or repartee into a seminar, or clever put-downs of rivals in the faculty lounge don’t translate into running a railroad—or running the country. One Harry Truman, or Dwight Eisenhower is worth three Bill Clintons or Barack Obamas. If that sounds reductionist, simplistic, or anti-intellectual, it is not meant to—but so be it nonetheless.
I’ve never been less impressed with Ivy League degrees than I am now.
Diversity-Driven Disasters
I blame that progressive, George Bush.
Really. I think that the Mineta nomination and retention was one of the stupidest (among many) things that he did.
The problem is, of course, that the alternatives (Gore or Kerry) would have been even worse. And at least he tried to rein in Fannie and Freddie, against the successful opposition of Barney Frank and Chris Dodd.
Double Standard Alert
He’s right:
If Romney had used the phrases “light-skinned” and “Negro dialect” his religion and his religion’s history in this matter would have been noted high up in every story.
But Romney is a Republican. It’s only Republican Mormons who are evil.
Really, Reid and Pelosi are embarrassments. I’m glad that they’ve become the public face of the Dems in Congress. Long may they reign, until November. Hang in there, Harry.
[Update a couple minutes later]
Gee, the Black Congressional Caucus is totally down with the “light-skinned Negro” thing. Who would have thought?
[Evening update]
Here’s a handy flow chart to parse and analyze pseudo-offensive racial (and sexual, and gender) statements.
[Monday morning update]
Can someone please explain to me exactly what it was that was so offensive about what Harry Reid said? At least to Barack Obama? Because I’m not getting it. If he owes anyone an apology, it’s the American voters that he slandered and implied were racists. Forgiveness from the president is meaningless.
[Update a few minutes later]
I agree with Roger Simon. Reid isn’t a racist — he’s a hack. And a fool.
The Bloggist Formerly Known As Jim Treacher
…has a new site. Blame Tucker Carlson.
Why The Press Is Finally Turning On The One
They’ve been made fools of once too often:
It’s not just that Obama lied, it’s the obviousness of the mendacity. There’s no wriggle room on this one; anyone who’s been paying any attention for the last two years knows it’s a bald-faced lie. And in addition, there’s been no explanation for it, and no excuses. The administration is simply ignoring the lie as though it doesn’t matter, and insulting the press in the bargain. This makes pundits who liked and supported Obama look foolish, and they don’t like to look that way. Thus, the anger—it’s personal now.
Maybe they’ll attack him in his sleep with a golf club. Good thing he has Secret Service.
A New Science Movement
Did Climaquiddick set one off? If so, it’s not just a new, but a real (as opposed to politically ideologically driven) science, returning it to free inquiry.:
Remember these names: Steven Mosher, Steve McIntyre, Ross McKitrick, Jeff “Id” Condon, Lucia Liljegren, and Anthony Watts. These, and their community of blog commenters, are the global warming contrarians that formed the peer-to-peer review network and helped bring chaos to Copenhagen – critically wounding the prospects of cap-and-trade legislation in the process. One may have even played the instrumental role of first placing the leaked files on the Internet.
This group can be thought of as the first cousins to Andrew Breitbart’s collective of BIG websites – obsessively curious, grassroots investigators that provide vision to the establishment’s blind eye. Peer-to-peer review is the scientific version of the undernews.
Call it Big Science.
[Update a few minutes later]
I liked this comment, which puts it all in perspective for those who remain willfully blind to the implications of the data dump:
Imagine for a moment that a high school student submitted a project for competition in which he offered up the hypothesis that tree rings gave a historical blueprint of climate change.
Competition Judge: “Ok, Johnny, this is a very interesting theory. May I see your data?”
Johnny McFibber: “I lost it.”
Competition Judge: “Hmmm. That will make it nearly impossible to win, Johnny. Can you duplicate it or give us a detailed description of what it showed”
Johnny M “Actually, I hid the parts that didn’t comport with my theory., in fact, showed the exact opposite of my theory,..and I emailed all my friends to do the same”
Competition Judge” “Johnny, that’s not the way we conduct ourselves in the sciences, you must be confused with your humanities classes. Over here, we strictly scrutinize the facts.
Johnny M: There’s a reporter here I would like to introduce you to…he wants to ask some questions about your first marriage.
Competition Judge: Great work on this project, Johnny. The science is settled. You win.
Moral? Research softly and carry a big hockey stick.
Fortunately, the hockey stick is broken, probably for good.
Obnoxious Quotes Of 2009
Forty of them.
They are pretty bad.
Climaquiddick
“You should be steamed.” Some thoughts from the former head of the Hurricane Center:
What do the skeptics believe? First, they concur with the believers that the Earth has been warming since the end of a Little Ice Age around 1850. The cause of this warming is the question. Believers think the warming is man-made, while the skeptics believe the warming is natural and contributions from man are minimal and certainly not potentially catastrophic à la Al Gore.
Second, skeptics argue that CO2 is not a pollutant but vital for plant life. Numerous field experiments have confirmed that higher levels of CO2 are positive for agricultural productivity. Furthermore, carbon dioxide is a very minor greenhouse gas. More than 90 percent of the warming from greenhouse gases is caused by water vapor. If you are going to change the temperature of the globe, it must involve water vapor.
Third, and most important, skeptics believe that climate models are grossly overpredicting future warming from rising concentrations of carbon dioxide. We are being told that numerical models that cannot make accurate 5- to 10-day forecasts can be simplified and run forward for 100 years with results so reliable you can impose an economic disaster on the U.S. and the world.
I always find the religious language amusing. The “believers” seem to take it on faith, because the high priests of Science have ordained, it, while the “skeptics” act like actual scientists.
[Monday evening update]
A call for Climaquiddick whistleblowers. I hope they get a lot. I think that the bastions have been captured.