Sunday, December 6, 2009

Climategate effects

"Republicans push on 'Climategate.'" I think we're going to see some pretty serious overreaching. As far as I can tell, the leaked emails show that climate scientists really didn't like their critics (not a surprise) and were determined to not give them any ammunition (also not a surprise, but not in keeping with the scientific imperative to bend over backwards to prove yourself wrong). As far as I can tell, also, nothing like a conspiracy to falsify data has been demonstrated at all. So, with the global-warming-is-a-hoax people now on the warpath, the rift between Republicans and scientists is only going to deepen, and my party is going to get stupider.


Anonymous said...

You obviously didn't read the emails.

Kenneth Silber said...

I read the ones described at Pajamas Media as "smoking guns" and found them to be the kind that fire a little flag saying "bang."

Gil Weinreich said...

I can't agree with the idea that Climategate is bringing out the wackos. We didn't need Climategate to view the global warming movement as insane. It was always insane (even back when it was the coming ice age hysteria). Sure, there's been a warming trend -- but not (primarily) manmade and certainly not catastrophic. (See MIT climatologist Richard Lindzen's recent op-ed for more on this
It's regrettable that it has taken Climategate to bring out some of these inconvenient truths. Count me a proud enviro-skeptic.

Kenneth Silber said...

Well, for the record, I think the cap-and-trade bill is a bad idea (but I favor a carbon tax on multiple grounds, including environmental). And given my penchant for annoying people, I would not hesitate to annoy my friends/colleagues at Scientific American by touting Climategate if it were in fact a scandal. This video, which I found via LGF, helps put the leaked emails in context. I also wonder if conservatives would be so enthused re Climategate if they realized they might be getting manipulated by Putin's secret service.

Gil Weinreich said...

I share your policy prefernces re: cap and trade and carbon taxes. That's simply not the point. Criticizing "climate science" is somehow considered politically incorrect, such that we have to hasten to point out that we're not for killing panda bears and such. East Anglia's climatologists are engaged in policy advocacy -- a combination that should engender suspicion. And as for Putin, so what? Stalin was even worse, yet he was on the right side during the finale to WWII. The truth is the truth no matter who says it, and lies are lies --- even if propagated by scientists. It's not a bad thing if their halo comes off as the world heads into the worrisome Cophenhagen climate summit.

Anonymous said...

Ken - I enjoy your stuff on FrumForum (even if I've argued with some of it).

I agree that this news emboldens the "global warming is a hoax by them damn liberals" camp, and that is embarrassing. But I don't support all of the conclusions of the Al Gore camp (I'm a fan of Jim Manzi'z approach, personally) and I hope this is taken seriously by the scientific community, regardless of the background noise on talk radio.

The result I'm hoping for is a more thoughtful, scrutinized anti-global warming movement, and that's something this Republican fully supports.