This too did not go so well until Richard came up with the Betts test, that there were nowhere to be found on said list those who were really out of their mind worried about the dangers of climate change (the name of Peter Wadhams came up in this regard and indeed Dana Nucetelli has a few words on this)
However Eli finds the Betts test a good one and would point to an interesting example previously discussed here on Rabett Run, specifically Roger Jr.’s Convenient Truthiness. Now at the time, Roger’s Prometheus had not yet been pecked to death by Ethon, and Rabett Run was but a small vanity blog, but Eli had asked over there why Roger reserved all his fire for Mike Mann, Al Gore and the IPCC. The answer came
Question: Why don’t I write about glaciers, solar variability, Fred Singer, or Pat Michaels?
Answer: I don’t know anything special about glaciers, solar variability, or the issues which are often discussed by Fred Singer or Pat Michaels. By contrast, I do know something about disasters and climate change. In fact, I know a lot, perhaps as much as only a few dozen people.Eli was not particularly impressed
Other than the fact that the Google turns up a mess of Singer / Michaels pronuncimientos about climate change and disasters, we here at the Rabettorium were under the impression that the good Prof. Pielke runs a SCIENCE POLICY INSTITUTE and is always telling us that he loves science policy and we don't.You want the links bunnies, well go to the original
S. Fred and Pat have been playing in the science policy patch like forever, and maybe before. I am morally certain that RPJr has never, ever read a single word of that stuff. On the other hand, I am a bunny, and you know about the morals of hares. In the words of Dorothy Parker about a particularly childish children's book, Tonstant Weader Fwowed up.
UPDATE: Well, it looks like Roger knows S. Fred well enough to invite him to lecture his classes. FWIW, Trenberth, Sawitz et al also came. Roger also knows Pat Michaels work well enough to cite it in his publications on hurricane damage and elsewhere, as well as the fact that his father and Michaels are co-authors and long term collaborators. In short, the deniability here is not even plausible.
Then, not a single comment from the audience now, well, ATTP has gathered a few but he always does a better job of that than Eli, but none at the time.
As to Roger, the Betts test is a wonderful razor to tear apart the envelop of his latest and Richard might consider taking a Betts test hisself. Eli will be back with the results.
ReplyDeleteA link or twelve would be mighty useful/helpful in watching RB digging that hole of his. TIA
Added a few. Like most twitter things it went all over the place, but it was ~ July 1-2 just look on Betts' timeline
ReplyDeleteRabett Run is still a small vanity blog. Smaller now than once it was.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteall the best climate scientists shop here.
Yeah. I mean just compare people of Eli to people of Wal-Mart.
ReplyDeletehmmmmm
ReplyDelete==================================
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/earth-insight/2014/may/15/ipcc-un-climate-reports-diluted-protect-fossil-fuel-interests
==========================
... as noted by Dimitri Zenghelis, principal research fellow at the London School of Economics Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment, Tol's claims about alarmism in the Stern review on the economics of climate change contain a number of "significant errors and misrepresentations," "selective" and "misleading" quoting, and are based on his own paper containing "a number of mistakes", as well as a "fundamentally flawed" understanding of "the risks of climate change."
...
==============================
• This article was amended on 20 May 2014. An earlier version quoted comments by Dimitri Zenghelis and said they were in response to Richard Tol's claims about "IPCC alarmism". In the article Zenghelis was commenting on, Tol compares the IPCC's conclusions on climate change costs with what he considers to be biased estimates in the Stern review on the economic effects of climate change.
• This article was edited on 13 March 2015 following a recommendation from The Review Panel to remove the word "riddled" and replace it with "a number of".