Posted by: climatewonk | May 18, 2008

This just in — New ice core data

New ice core data shows that greenhouse gasses higher today than during entire 800,000 years of data.

This is why I have been absent from this blog and the climate blogosphere for the past month or so. I am so tired of the climate wars, so fed up with the denialists and their deception and outright stupidity. Of course, the persistant among them will demand to see the data, will decry that it takes too long to get it, will cast aspersions against the scientists involved and will find all manner of ways to discount this data.

I’m fed up to my craw. I guess I don’t have the heart for it. I’m going to focus on the research rather than the naysayers, for their time is past and they are nothing but a human liability. Posts from now on will only focus on evidence and research, not on the foibles of the denialists and their ilk.

Advertisements

Responses

  1. >Posts from now on will only focus on evidence >and research, not on the foibles of the denialists >and their ilk.

    I wish you would reconsider. Research on the earth’s climate is a complex and specialized dicipline. Most people are not scientists and yet are bombarded by claims and counterclaims which even highly trained professionals outside of the field itself are unqualified to evaluate. I am an engineer and struggle to keep up with the latest research and climate models and yet despite a great deal of effort I have no hope of being able to competently evaluate the validity or significance of a particular conclusion or piece of research. I listen to the scientific experts who are actually doing the resaerch and their claims and counter-claims. Most people (and this means most voters and polititians) do not have even the technical background that engineers have any yet are going to be called upon to make difficult and far-reaching decisions on climate change and what we might do to influence it. People like yourself are the only ones with the depth of knowledge to separate the good from the bad science and from you must come the identification of bad science/disinformation as well as the explanations for why it is discredited (or why it is so in the case of good science.) When people can’t tell the difference, and let’s face it to be able to tell the difference you pretty much have to actually work in the field, you tend to go with whatever explanation fits your pre-concieved bias. And we might expect that vested interests like Exxon might have considerable resources available to them to promote the viewpoint the best suits their interest.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: