Reddit’s science forum banned climate deniers.

[galdur]

The Political Assault on Climate Skeptics
Members of Congress send inquisitorial letters to universities, energy companies, even think tanks.

By RICHARD S. LINDZEN
March 4, 2015 6:50 p.m. ET

Research in recent years has encouraged those of us who question the popular alarm over allegedly man-made global warming. Actually, the move from “global warming” to “climate change” indicated the silliness of this issue. The climate has been changing since the Earth was formed. This normal course is now taken to be evidence of doom.

Individuals and organizations highly vested in disaster scenarios have relentlessly attacked scientists and others who do not share their beliefs. The attacks have taken a threatening turn.

As to the science itself, it’s worth noting that all predictions of warming since the onset of the last warming episode of 1978-98—which is the only period that the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) attempts to attribute to carbon-dioxide emissions—have greatly exceeded what has been observed. These observations support a much reduced and essentially harmless climate response to increased atmospheric carbon dioxide.

In addition, there is experimental support for the increased importance of variations in solar radiation on climate and a renewed awareness of the importance of natural unforced climate variability that is largely absent in current climate models. There also is observational evidence from several independent studies that the so-called “water vapor feedback,” essential to amplifying the relatively weak impact of carbon dioxide alone on Earth temperatures, is canceled by cloud processes.

There are also claims that extreme weather—hurricanes, tornadoes, droughts, floods, you name it—may be due to global warming. The data show no increase in the number or intensity of such events. The IPCC itself acknowledges the lack of any evident relation between extreme weather and climate, though allowing that with sufficient effort some relation might be uncovered.

World leaders proclaim that climate change is our greatest problem, demonizing carbon dioxide. Yet atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide have been vastly higher through most of Earth’s history. Climates both warmer and colder than the present have coexisted with these higher levels.

Currently elevated levels of carbon dioxide have contributed to increases in agricultural productivity. Indeed, climatologists before the recent global warming hysteria referred to warm periods as “climate optima.” Yet world leaders are embarking on costly policies that have no capacity to replace fossil fuels but enrich crony capitalists at public expense, increasing costs for all, and restricting access to energy to the world’s poorest populations that still lack access to electricity’s immense benefits.

Billions of dollars have been poured into studies supporting climate alarm, and trillions of dollars have been involved in overthrowing the energy economy. So it is unsurprising that great efforts have been made to ramp up hysteria, even as the case for climate alarm is disintegrating.

The latest example began with an article published in the New York Times on Feb. 22 about Willie Soon, a scientist at the Harvard Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics. Mr. Soon has, for over 25 years, argued for a primary role of solar variability on climate. But as Greenpeace noted in 2011, Mr. Soon was, in small measure, supported by fossil-fuel companies over a period of 10 years.

The Times reintroduced this old material as news, arguing that Mr. Soon had failed to list this support in a recent paper in Science Bulletin of which he was one of four authors. Two days later Arizona Rep. Raul Grijalva, the ranking Democrat on the Natural Resources Committee, used the Times article as the basis for a hunting expedition into anything said, written and communicated by seven individuals— David Legates, John Christy, Judith Curry, Robert Balling, Roger Pielke Jr. , Steven Hayward and me—about testimony we gave to Congress or other governmental bodies. We were selected solely on the basis of our objections to alarmist claims about the climate.

In letters he sent to the presidents of the universities employing us (although I have been retired from MIT since 2013), Mr. Grijalva wanted all details of all of our outside funding, and communications about this funding, including “consulting fees, promotional considerations, speaking fees, honoraria, travel expenses, salary, compensation and any other monies.” Mr. Grijalva acknowledged the absence of any evidence but purportedly wanted to know if accusations made against Mr. Soon about alleged conflicts of interest or failure to disclose his funding sources in science journals might not also apply to us.

Perhaps the most bizarre letter concerned the University of Colorado’s Mr. Pielke. His specialty is science policy, not science per se, and he supports reductions in carbon emissions but finds no basis for associating extreme weather with climate. Mr. Grijalva’s complaint is that Mr. Pielke, in agreeing with the IPCC on extreme weather and climate, contradicts the assertions of John Holdren, President Obama ’s science czar.

Mr. Grijalva’s letters convey an unstated but perfectly clear threat: Research disputing alarm over the climate should cease lest universities that employ such individuals incur massive inconvenience and expense—and scientists holding such views should not offer testimony to Congress. After the Times article, Sens. Edward Markey (D., Mass.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D., R.I.) and Barbara Boxer (D., Calif.) also sent letters to numerous energy companies, industrial organizations and, strangely, many right-of-center think tanks (including the Cato Institute, with which I have an association) to unearth their alleged influence peddling.

The American Meteorological Society responded with appropriate indignation at the singling out of scientists for their scientific positions, as did many individual scientists. On Monday, apparently reacting to criticism, Mr. Grijalva conceded to the National Journal that his requests for communications between the seven of us and our outside funders was “overreach.”

Where all this will lead is still hard to tell. At least Mr. Grijalva’s letters should help clarify for many the essentially political nature of the alarms over the climate, and the damage it is doing to science, the environment and the well-being of the world’s poorest.

Mr. Lindzen is professor emeritus of atmospheric sciences at MIT and a distinguished senior fellow of the Cato Institute.

[Wilikon]

Biden: Global Warming Skeptics “Close To Mindless… Like Denying Gravity”…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGH_vkC2B80

---------------------------------------------
You know what else is denying gravity? Biden's hair transplant...

[Agestorzrxx]

Why won't Climate Scientists produce the empirical data that will prove their theory that CO2 is the primary culprit behind Climate Change and shut their critics up once and for all? Answer: The reason they refuse to show any data is because the data does not exist. In fact all the empirical data refutes their theory. So instead of showing the data that would prove their theory they manipulate the data;

[1369]

this is why I stay away from reddit

[Spendulus]

Why won't Climate Scientists produce the empirical data that will prove their theory that CO2 is the primary culprit behind Climate Change and shut their critics up once and for all? Answer: The reason they refuse to show any data is because the data does not exist. In fact all the empirical data refutes their theory. So instead of showing the data that would prove their theory they manipulate the data;

Earlier in this thread there was, IIRC, the Al Gore/Bill Nye "science experiment" with CO2 in a glass jar that was intended to "prove" co2 causes warming.

Well it was good for a laugh.  I think I debunked it or someone did pretty quick.

But it might have convinced sixth graders.

[Wilikon]

Why won't Climate Scientists produce the empirical data that will prove their theory that CO2 is the primary culprit behind Climate Change and shut their critics up once and for all? Answer: The reason they refuse to show any data is because the data does not exist. In fact all the empirical data refutes their theory. So instead of showing the data that would prove their theory they manipulate the data;

Earlier in this thread there was, IIRC, the Al Gore/Bill Nye "science experiment" with CO2 in a glass jar that was intended to "prove" co2 causes warming.

Well it was good for a laugh.  I think I debunked it or someone did pretty quick.

But it might have convinced sixth graders.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3v-w8Cyfoq8

 

[NUFCrichard]

this is why I stay away from reddit

I agree with man made climate change - generally warming, but I am not really all that bothered by it.  I think science will solve the problems for us, and that turning off my lights when I go to the toilet will never make any sizable difference.

Reddit shouldn't ban any opinion that isn't illegal in my opinion, but they were probably sick of every thread being constantly spammed by climate change deniers or skeptics.  It's the same as Atheists getting involved in religious discussions, it's not really adding to the conversation, you have your opinion, good, now leave us in peace to chat!

[Wilikon]

this is why I stay away from reddit

I agree with man made climate change - generally warming, but I am not really all that bothered by it.  I think science will solve the problems for us, and that turning off my lights when I go to the toilet will never make any sizable difference.

Reddit shouldn't ban any opinion that isn't illegal in my opinion, but they were probably sick of every thread being constantly spammed by climate change deniers or skeptics.  It's the same as Atheists getting involved in religious discussions, it's not really adding to the conversation, you have your opinion, good, now leave us in peace to chat!

Leave us alone in peace to chat may not be the ultimate goal of all of those warmists, forcing others to pee in the dark, to save a polar bear or two...

That is why this thread exists...

[hdbuck]

this is why I stay away from reddit

I agree with man made climate change - generally warming, but I am not really all that bothered by it.  I think science will solve the problems for us, and that turning off my lights when I go to the toilet will never make any sizable difference.

Reddit shouldn't ban any opinion that isn't illegal in my opinion, but they were probably sick of every thread being constantly spammed by climate change deniers or skeptics.  It's the same as Atheists getting involved in religious discussions, it's not really adding to the conversation, you have your opinion, good, now leave us in peace to chat!

ha, so you agree AGW is kind of a religion?

[Spendulus]

this is why I stay away from reddit

I agree with man made climate change - generally warming, but I am not really all that bothered by it.  I think science will solve the problems for us, and that turning off my lights when I go to the toilet will never make any sizable difference.

Reddit shouldn't ban any opinion that isn't illegal in my opinion, but they were probably sick of every thread being constantly spammed by climate change deniers or skeptics.  It's the same as Atheists getting involved in religious discussions, it's not really adding to the conversation, you have your opinion, good, now leave us in peace to chat!

Yes, that makes total sense.  Agree with bolded above, and that's the important part.

Except it is the warmers that are trying to control you and I, and whether we want it or not.  Often on incorrect data and flawed premises.  The nature of science requires debate of that data and those premises.

There is another point of view, which is that the political issues surrounding climate are often confused with the scientific issues.

However the reddit forum in question is straight out, unabashedly political and not scientific in it's orientation.  It's them that cannot withstand criticism and/or better data with respect to their scientific understandings (or lack of, more commonly).


...you have your opinion, good, now leave us in peace to chat!....

...that's not exactly a fair representation of their points of view...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0rYN0B5xNM

[DieJohnny]

this is why I stay away from reddit

I agree with man made climate change - generally warming, but I am not really all that bothered by it.  I think science will solve the problems for us, and that turning off my lights when I go to the toilet will never make any sizable difference.

Reddit shouldn't ban any opinion that isn't illegal in my opinion, but they were probably sick of every thread being constantly spammed by climate change deniers or skeptics.  It's the same as Atheists getting involved in religious discussions, it's not really adding to the conversation, you have your opinion, good, now leave us in peace to chat!

Reddit is just part of a larger trend in public manipulation and control. The most disgusting thing i hear anymore is the trumpeting the "consensus opinion" as though if you don't get on board you are an idiot. Climate change is just one small part, the internet will make humanity the same.... side views will be relegated to extremism and socially beat to silence.

[Anon136]

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/global-warming-could-hit-rates-unseen-in-1-000-years/

thoughts?

[tvbcof]

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/global-warming-could-hit-rates-unseen-in-1-000-years/

thoughts?

My first set of thoughts:

 - They are probably overstating the precision if they are talking about 0.2 C readings 1000 years previous.  I doubt that any proxies have that kind of precision.  And it's probably not safe to interpolate within the range of proxy precision and accurately characterize the derivitives on a year-by-year or decade-by-decade basis.  (I'm not actually qualified to speak to this, but it's my gut sense.)

 - If what we are seeing now is not out-of-line with events which seem to happen once every 1000 or 2000 years then this is fairly strong evidence against the hypothesis that human use of fossil fuels generating excess CO2 is the only plausible major cause for a sharp rise in the derivative.  There are 1000 1000's in a million, and 1 million years in geological time is pretty minimal so such an event would not seem rare at all.

  - The term 'Pacific Northwest' is a red flag and a tip-off that there is very possibly some (potentially well-meaning) scammer at work.  I say this as an Oregonian, and one which recently lost his governor due to this kind of 'green/social-justice' scammery and one who hopes that the thread keeps unraveling.

At the rates people are talking, it strikes me that the most likely artifacts will be 'banding' rather than a step function like a supervolcano or meteor hit (both of which happen from time to time.)  That is to say, various vegetation types will die off on on margin of their range and expand on the opposite as an example.  Such a progression is not terribly threatening to most species.  Another example would be that people will do new construction in zones out of current flood plains and abandon buildings situated in marginal locations.  So what?  Humans and even most other organisms are eminently adaptable on such time scales.  That such changes are relatively common historically probably accounts for said adaptability.  Probably have been many creatures who are no longer among us because they were not adaptable in this way.

BTW, WUWT did a piece on this story of course: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/03/09/laughable-modeling-study-claims-in-the-middle-of-the-pause-climate-is-starting-to-change-faster/
Usually the article and comments are worth a skim.

[Wilikon]

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/global-warming-could-hit-rates-unseen-in-1-000-years/

thoughts?

My first set of thoughts:

 - They are probably overstating the precision if they are talking about 0.2 C readings 1000 years previous.  I doubt that any proxies have that kind of precision.  And it's probably not safe to interpolate within the range of proxy precision and accurately characterize the derivitives on a year-by-year or decade-by-decade basis.  (I'm not actually qualified to speak to this, but it's my gut sense.)

 - If what we are seeing now is not out-of-line with events which seem to happen once every 1000 or 2000 years then this is fairly strong evidence against the hypothesis that human use of fossil fuels generating excess CO2 is the only plausible major cause for a sharp rise in the derivative.  There are 1000 1000's in a million, and 1 million years in geological time is pretty minimal so such an event would not seem rare at all.

  - The term 'Pacific Northwest' is a red flag and a tip-off that there is very possibly some (potentially well-meaning) scammer at work.  I say this as an Oregonian, and one which recently lost his governor due to this kind of 'green/social-justice' scammery and one who hopes that the thread keeps unraveling.

At the rates people are talking, it strikes me that the most likely artifacts will be 'banding' rather than a step function like a supervolcano or meteor hit (both of which happen from time to time.)  That is to say, various vegetation types will die off on on margin of their range and expand on the opposite as an example.  Such a progression is not terribly threatening to most species.  Another example would be that people will do new construction in zones out of current flood plains and abandon buildings situated in marginal locations.  So what?  Humans and even most other organisms are eminently adaptable on such time scales.  That such changes are relatively common historically probably accounts for said adaptability.  Probably have been many creatures who are no longer among us because they were not adaptable in this way.

BTW, WUWT did a piece on this story of course: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/03/09/laughable-modeling-study-claims-in-the-middle-of-the-pause-climate-is-starting-to-change-faster/
Usually the article and comments are worth a skim.

From the comment section:

Brute  March 9, 2015 at 9:51 am
You have to factor in that they are making claims about a “pause” that they simultaneously claim does not exist…

Reply
Neil Jordan  March 9, 2015 at 10:23 am
The pause that simultaneously does and does not exist is Schroedinger’s Pause.

The Ghost Of Big Jim Cooley  March 9, 2015 at 11:39 am
Shouldn’t that be Schroedinger’s paws?


 

[galdur]

The northern hemisphere will be the first region to experience historically unprecedented warming. The Arctic, which is already the fastest warming part of the planet, will see temperatures rise 1.1°F per decade by 2040. North America and Europe will see slightly lower, though equally unprecedented, warming.

They talk like they know something for a fact that supposedly is going to occur in the fairly distant future. That sounds dubious to simple old me. It does seem to smack of some sort of religious conviction or zealotry. The deity in question being Mammon of course.

[Beliathon]

I loathe the phrase "climate change". It's a weak euphemism for climate catastrophe that utterly fails to capture the desperate urgency of changing our toxic, abusive relationship with this planet. If only we could glance the suffering our selfishness will reap upon our grandchildren.

Climate destruction deniers are and aways have been the paid shills of the fossil fuel industry,  and the scientific community is right to shun, mock, and discredit them.

[Wilikon]

Climate destruction deniers are and aways have been the paid shills of the fossil fuel industry,  and the scientific community is right to shun, mock, and discredit them.

You mean the warmists are doing the carbon tax push shenanigan out of love, not for the love of money and power? You mean scientists are working for free and never ask for grants, or better tools and top of the line labs?

[BitMos]

Climate destruction deniers are and aways have been the paid shills of the fossil fuel industry,  and the scientific community is right to shun, mock, and discredit them.

You mean the warmists are doing the carbon tax push shenanigan out of love, not for the love of money and power? You mean scientists are working for free and never ask for grants, or better tools and top of the line labs?

let him believe, he will be thought IRL and then he will agree until it, he certainly cloaks his malice by "caring"... ignore the ignorants .

[Anon136]

Climate destruction deniers are and aways have been the paid shills of the fossil fuel industry

You got me dead to rights. Exxon mobil is paying me 7 dollars for this comment alone.

[Wilikon]

Harvard Scientists Claim Global Warming Causing Mummies In Chile To Turn Into ‘Black Ooze’…


The world’s oldest mummies are at risk of disappearing because of man-made climate change, according to a group of Harvard University scientists.

Bodies mummified about 7,000 years ago in Chile are starting to rapidly degrade, the Harvard School of Engineering and Applied Sciences said Monday in an e-mailed statement.

Tests by Harvard’s Alice DeAraujo and Ralph Mitchell show that microbes that flourish in an increasingly humid climate are turning the preserved remains of Chinchorro hunter-gatherers into “black ooze”.

“Is there a scientific answer to protect these important historic objects from the devastating effects of climate change?” said Mitchell. “It’s almost a forensic problem.”

Mitchell, who has pinpointed the causes of decay in everything from the walls of King Tutankhamun’s tomb to Apollo space suits, worked with DeAraujo on mummies supplied by Marcela Sepulveda, professor of archaeology at the University of Tarapaca in Chile.

While museums can control their environments to preserve artefacts, many Chinchorro mummies are buried just beneath the surface in valleys that are experiencing higher humidity levels due to climate change, Sepulveda said.

“In the last 10 years, the process has accelerated,” said Sepulveda, commenting on the decay suffered by the 120 mummies in Tarapaca’s archaeological museum.



http://www.straitstimes.com/news/world/united-states/story/ancient-mummies-turn-black-ooze-because-climate-change-20150310



--------------------------------------------------
Please pay your carbon tax now to stop the mummies from dying!