Wednesday, October 21, 2009

Roger vs. Roger, a game any bunny can play

Eli came back from work today to find Ethon playing with his new Wii, a huge grin on his beak. The bunny asked what's up, and the large liver loving eagle replied that he had just gotten a new game, Roger vs. Roger. How's that go?

Well, it gives you statements that Roger has made in the past and you have to parse them so they agree with statements Roger will make in the future. It's quite complex, sometimes you have to twist the words so hard that they scream. When you first play the game they give you a fine, and much quoted example from RP's Nature interview to start:

Climate change may not be the dominant factor, but it has become clear that a relevant portion of damages can be attributed to global warming.
and, from the same source
Clearly since 1970 climate change (i.e., defined as by the IPCC to include all sources of change) has shaped the disaster loss record.
When this was pointed out Roger invoked the Humpty Dumpty defense, a favorite of his

`When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less.'

`The question is,' said Alice, `whether you can make words mean so many different things.'

`The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, `which is to be master - - that's all.'

At several points the author of the Nature article conflates “climate change” and “global warming” which is something we at the workshop were careful not to do.
and of course, he was misquoted.

Wanna play?


Arthur said...

I think Tim Lambert summed it up nicely: Pielke misunderstood somehow. Yet again..

Oh wait, that was McIntyre. Same difference I suppose.

Anonymous said...

On the one hand, there's "Roger vs. Roger" and on the other hand (left hand?), there's "Roger loves Roger".

I particularly like Pielke's comment about "incestuous references".

"They then incestuously cite each other.

Quite a statement coming from the man who trademarked both the Möbius Reference (TM) and the Klein Bottle Argument (TM).