Monday, December 21, 2015

Solstice blogging - a contrast in two styles - vivace versus con uno denialisto

I was reading Peter Gleick's anatomical dissection of the Uncle Lester Senator Rafael Edward "Ted" Cruz (Asshat-Texas) hearing (OnymousGuy wrote about it in Happer in the Hopper).

Peter was quite funny. Take the time to go read Everything Senator Ted Cruz said about climate change in this NPR interview was wrong, including the comments. You will feel refreshed.

Halfway through the comments, I saw this contribution from the Sage of Corbett. and then Peter Gleick's reply - that is the proper response. Note the contrasting styles. 

Gordon J. Fulks, PhD
Corbett, Oregon USA
December 10, 2015

Peter Gleick gives himself away by quoting the propaganda website “Skeptical Science.” Science is NOT a series of political talking points from Cook and Nuccitelli.

Science is likewise not a matter of what the scientific labor unions say. Does the US National Academy of Sciences have a policy that the Earth is round? Do they really get to dictate ANY science? Of course not! Science is the product of individual scientists, utilizing logic and evidence NOT consensus and authority. Glieck should understand that!

The first of the scientific societies, the Royal Society, has the motto “Take nobody’s word for it.” Today, they and Gleick would rather forget that, because they do not want to be questioned.

Yet we have to question Gleick’s use of evidence from propagandists and his inability to get to the real scientific issues. While the planet has warmed a little out of the depths of the Little Ice Age (from about 1830) and did warm a little since the end of WW2, none of this correlates with rising man-made CO2 except for the period from about 1977 to 1997. How can a little warming over two of the last seven decades when CO2 has been rising due to human activity be considered a definitive correlation? The real correlation is with ocean cycles.

And as Professor John Christy correctly pointed out at the Senate Hearing chaired by Senator Cruz on Tuesday, the Climate Models come nowhere close to matching the robust satellite and radiosonde data. Even Santer et al., PNAS 2012 admitted that there is an enormous difference between the Climate Models and reality. This is especially true in the tropical mid-troposphere where the predicted “Hot Spot” is missing.

In short, Senator Ted Cruz (a graduate of Princeton University) understands the science FAR BETTER than Peter Gleick.

Gordon J. Fulks, PhD (Physics)

And Gleick's response:

Peter Gleick
December 10, 2015

Thanks, Gordon. You always crack me up.

No comments: