The 97% Need To Strike Back
Dear Bunnies,
A few days ago, Eli and others pointed to a new paper on natural variability by Camilo Mora and others at the University of Hawaii.
Mark Morano has called out the flying wingnuts to harrass Prof. Mora, which, as you know can be quite unpleasant, but even if not, those of us who appreciate good work (and Mora has a long and excellent track record on biodiversity issues) do not mind giving a pat on the back, so if you feel that a pat is of value, let him know, if you have a question about his new paper, ask, and if you think you have something to add, that would be nice, better tho if brief. And finally, if you have been the subject of a flying monkey attack, talk about how you dealt with it.
The Email is cmora@hawaii.edu
Eli
Posts
26 comments:
Thanks prof. Mora for putting out a specific year in the estimates of irrecoverable antrhopogenic climate change... This is psychologically much straighter than the 'likely in the 40s or 50s arguments put out by scientific establishment previously. Of course there's still some room for speculation of the exact year this happens in various places, since your study is just an interpretation of God's work in progress, and not some ancient scripture selected priests of CO2-religion know to be correct. Morano is no Mora, that much has been clear already when you've entered the discipline of climate science. Finally wishing Strenght and not-too-much patience to withstand and attack these assholes.
sub-arctic bunny.
Done. What's the plan for the counter-attack? :)
In my opinion wing nuts don't need to be attacked. They generally self destruct. Like male moths.
http://ketchupisavegetable.com/?p=4982
Sad but amusing how hysterics will rush to defend some one who excretes such gems as:
"Extreme weather will soon be beyond anything ever experienced, and old record high temperatures will be the new low temperatures, Mora told IPS."
Lucifer
hysterics
And when do you think carbon emissions will slow down and stop?
Get a clue.
TLE:
Eli has it exactly right.
It is not a question of wingnuts self-destructing, it is that the tactic of Morano and co encouraging on onslaught of them against someone, in which case it is important for experienced, sane people to offer support and advice.
Some people are/were long used to this.
Steve Schneider often told stories, such as the police asking him for copies of emails, but when he tried to send them, their spam filter kept rejecting them for obscenities.
Andrew Weaver has a bulletin board outside his office at UVIC called "the wall of hate," basically to innoculate his grad students.
You may recall the Similar attack on Katharine Hayhoe, which boomeranged. (She was about the dumbest choice of target possible.)
But all 3 of those folks were quite familiar with this junk. Every once in a while, these do lead to physical action, of which the eviscerated rat on Ben Santer's doorstep is the best-known. Still, many high-profile climate scientists I know get regular hate mail and the 2009/2010 attack on Mike Mann was organized this way, generating an inchoate mass of ill-formed academic misconduct complaints.
But if this wave hits someone unused to it, at the very least it can waste time and and worst it can be very stressful. I have more than once had discussions with people who were fairly upset by this, including spending an hour or so on a phone with someone to explain how these things work, include a whole lot of threats that don't materialize, and then usually disappear pretty quickly as the flying monkeys go elsewhere.
Of course, in a similar fashion, a certain Viscount is famed for writing/orchestrating nasty letters to university administrations. In such cases, it makes a big difference to quickly offer informed help, be ready to write letters to administrators in support, etc. I've been involved in 2-3 such.
Yes, but Morano is an incorrigible wingnut with a long history of threats against scientists. These people are immune to attack with either logic or evidence.
Ditto Delingpole. History will not be kind to these people. But attacking them just further inflames them. So if you are going to do it, just make occasional sport of it. Consider it as a form of entertainment. You'll feel much better about it that way as well.
There are other strategies open. Not to be discussed here. Legal :) just in case you thought I was a wingnut.
btw; Mora very generously took the time to reply to the support email. Evidence that such efforts do make a difference, people.
Thomas Lee Elifritz said...
Yes, but Morano is an incorrigible wingnut with a long history of threats against scientists. These people are immune to attack with either logic or evidence.
Ditto Delingpole. History will not be kind to these people.
I wholeheartedly agree, Professor Lysenko
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/10/11/friday-funny-the-warming-monster-at-the-door/#comments
Yeah, they said that about earthquakes and tsunamis too.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/10/11/friday-funny-the-warming-monster-at-the-door/#comments
"h/t to Bob Fergusson."
Watts is buddies with mini-Morano. No surprise there.
Winged or nutflanged headgear seems to exert a strange attraction on the climatically challenged.
The last individual I encountered wearing a wingnut hat was good and great Xtreme aircraft and catamaran designer Burt Rutan , who apart from agreeing with Marc Morano, believes space aliens built the pyramids, only to see them re-aranged by the glaciers of the Nile.
Russell, did pyramids and aliens come up in your meeting with Rutan? I ask, as on his website he says otherwise (and claims to have been misrepresented by Wired):
http://burtrutan.com/downloads/RutanIntroToJohnAlexanderUFOBook.pdf
On topic: I'm sorry that yet another climate scientist gets the Two Minutes Hate treatment by the deniers.
Does anyone have a good list of those treated this way by Morano?
http://judithcurry.com/2013/10/13/spinning-the-climate-model-observations-comparison-part-iii/#more-13310
JC summary: Sure makes the Mora et al ‘we are toast by 2047′ argument, based on climate model projections, look pretty far off the mark.
@Mashey
No list, but I am surprised just how many examples of Morano "helpfully" providing the e-mail address a simple search turns up already:
site:www.climatedepot.com edu
All the examples I have seen point to mainstream scientists offering inconvenient parts of the truth.
Blugre
Though I visited him to discuss a boat, it was hard not to notice the ten foot wide pyramid and alien mural on his wall.
Let Morano do whatever he does, he's an attention-seeking idiot and what he does is irrelevant.
That paper has a number of seriously questionable aspects, and illustrates some more general problems in the field.
Jim, pointing out that variability is local in how it affects the biosphere is, Eli would say important. Yes, the details are a off. The way natural variability was defined was probably a great overestimate.
OTOH, Morano is not interested in people writing to Mora with intelligent questions/objections, but rather in beating up on them and that has to meet with considerable resistance.
You would do well to gather your thoughts together an write Mora directly, he is responding to many. Eli would be happy to publish that correspodence. It is also worth noting that Mora is more of a WGII type than WGI.
That biotic communities are affected differently, based on their inherent characteristics and local environmental dynamics, is not a noteworthy finding, unless you're a freshman taking Ecology 101.
There are a number of problems with the science here, on the climate end, on the ecology end, on the worthiness of publication in Nature end, and more. Yes, I'm writing up my thoughts, starting here and hoping to continue:
http://ecologicallyoriented.wordpress.com/2013/10/12/the-projected-timing-of-climate-departure-from-recent-variability/
It would be nice if scientists could argue about science, and Morano does not help that.
On the other hand, last I looked, Morano was the highest-paid employee of CFACT, which is a tax-exempt 501(c)(3) public charity, i.e., paid for by Richard Mellon Scaife and friends, and sometimes supported the Viscount.
SO, the more egregious Morano is, the better, especially since CFACT differs from many other 501(c)(3)s of interest in NOT having any long-time funding from the tobacco companies.
Perhaps a bit off topic but not IMO. I feel progressives should be taking no the tax inequity that the GOP have milked for years. The GOP do not fund abortion. Fine. A precedent. Why tolerate funding profits from the pollution of the commons that drive the Tea Party, climatic disruption, ocean acidification, GOP hostage taking of the government and toasting the planet for the Kidders?
I am trying real hard to get some legs on this inequity and I am baffled why progressives are so passive in the face of supporting profits on pollution and eminent Toastville for the kidders. As I say the GOP do not fund abortion. Is Planetary ecocide any less deserving?
Jim, why not send it to Mora first for his comments?
> not a noteworthy finding,
> unless you're a freshman
> taking Ecology 101
Or a policy analyst, or ...
Do many college students take Ecology, these days?
When I was in college few outside biology even knew the word and fewer of those ever took the class.
I'd guess ecology is still rarely thought about, let alone accurately.
And don't get me started about environmentalists ...
Some basics bear repetition, as they're so hard for people to be willing to hear.
Post a Comment