Bishop Hill Climate authorities
Feb 5, 2012 Climate: Sceptics Climate: other Belgian climatologist Michel Crucifix has published an interesting post about climatologists' engagement with the wider world. There's a bit of a language barrier here - Prof Crucifix's English is in need of a polish - but he seems to be saying that we "deniers" (yes, he uses the d-word) should show a bit more respect because he's the expert.
I believe, as a climate scientist, that there is not benefit to be gained from engaging discussion with an individual or with a group if my authority is not acknowledged.
He is using the word "authority" in a different way to normal, so there is perhaps less cause for alarm than you might at first think. He defines it as a combination of "expertise" and "fairness". By the latter term I think he he means something like "objectiveness" - not being an advocate - and he spends quite a lot of the post discussing expertise, describing the complexities and the judgement calls involved in climatology - it's a post-normal science you see.
His demand to have his authority recognised is not, I think, a demand to accept his arguments.
Having authority does not protect against the duty of explaining how and why you arrive at this or that conclusion, and it does not guarantee anyone that all what you say is right.
What it seems to boil down to is this: if you front to Prof Crucifix and tell him he is wrong, he will not engage. If you ask him to explain he will do so.
I'm not sure that whether this is special pleading or merely a demand for courtesy. Either way, I think it's quite interesting.
Reader Comments (96)
Now then, an uncanny echo of the sentiments....... of a certain self styled 'expert' who hails from Penn State University.
Yet some like Peter Gleick, will refuse to even substantiate claims they make. why should respect this behaviour, and be grouped into a denier for merely asking question..
Peter (a very vocal, public facing climate scientist & communicator) find me offensive, because i discuss 'Hide the Decline'
I tend not to bother reading anything that has denier or any other form of abuse, a reason why I stopped reading Delingpoles blog. As far as I am concerned Michel is just another abusive waste of space.
Someone should explain that respect needs to be earned and not given automatically because you are a member of a club for scallywags!
Michel is Belgian (not French). His posts on Tamsin's blog - and his own post referred to here - are not the lightest reading - but very interesting. The Belgian Mike Hulme??
[BH adds: Thanks - fixed]
The D word is also used in the headline of this article by James Delingpole. If it's good enough for Mail headline writers it should be good enough for everybody else.
You really are the head of the Richard, Hengist. You, of all people should know that context is everything. Perhaps you'd like to re-parse the headline and try to explain how you came up with the conclusion you did: Delingpole said: "How green zealots are destroying the planet: The provocative claim from a writer vilified for denying global warming"
He was not using the label in the way you would like it to mean. So another fail for you.
Reminds me of some French waiters I have met
Arrogance? From the French? I'm shocked! ;)
@Hengist
Your non sequiturs are often entertaining and I'm glad to know that you regard Daily Mail headline writers as your standard for sound judgment.
Re: Hengist
The headline you refer to is:
No matter how hard I look I can not see the noun denier. I do see the verb denying, but as I am sure you known verbs and nouns are completely different.
Perhaps a bit to full of academic self importance: (earlier (only other) blog post
"I got my first serious research grant two years ago, from the European Research Council. Suddenly, from an independent but lonely researcher, I became –in the facts– a project manager and a staff manager. Two jobs for which I have not formally been trained."
AND
"What's more? Scientific staff do not expect to be managed the same way as in the industry (well, don't they? We'll come back to that). They hate 9 to 5. They hate having to say where they are. They hate filling time sheets. They like to have time, but my experience has also been that most of them need pressure.
Managing your career, your utopia, your staff, the wishes of the administration, your students, your lectures, your family, .... this is all what I want to tell you about in this blog. "
-----
out of touch?, pressure.? Life in academia is VERY cosy the world over.
if that is his idea of industry (9-5 !!) well sorry no.. I've manged multil million dollar projects, been a project manager, and director, hired/fired recruited teams of cross dicipline, multi-discipline PHD's and the like.
The blog post has some interesting elements, he may be a 'deep thinker' but most of the time broad thining is required as well.
Respect is earned..
Terry, Hengist
I don't think this is terribly interesting for other readers. Take it to the forum if you want to continue.
He says:
"A very different situation occurs where an individual asks 'what you say seems to me in contradiction with what I have heard or read. I am confused and because of this I am in doubt with the reality of climate change. Can you explain your point of view ?'. "
----
sorry no. I am not confused, I might say to a scientist that a statement or slide or graph seems wrong (I am not confused) and ask them to substatiate it.. and if they can't or won't or try and/or give it some flannel, they are off the project.
Looking at his bio, just a young chap, I've hired and fired chaps like him, why do academics thing they are so special, and industry somehow beneath them or easier...
It's a lot tougher in industry with paying clients. I'm all for politeness, but not obsequiousness
(though the French do have a thing for academic prestige)
Dr Crucifix might like to explain the correlation of previous solar cycle length with average temperature in the following cycle. Which explains half the temperature rise during the 20th C. I have seen no explanation of this from a climate scientist who works within the IPCC process.
Yet I, a scientist with some statistics experience, can recognise that leaving out such a variable will cause the multiple regression process to ascribe the variance incorrectly to CO2. Not to mention other covarying variables such as ocean cycles, which the GCM's also do not include.
But I would settle for a hard science explanation of the pSCL correlation.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/royal-wedding/8480506/Power-surges-How-the-royal-wedding-compares-with-other-events.html?image=7
Can anybody find the list of the other 9 top ten power surges
Euro 96 England penalty shoot has to be one of them
I suppose Professor Crucifix should make be cross; but I find people who sniffily stand on their dignity rather amusing.
Apart from some words that are used non-idiomatically I think Crucifix's English is pretty damn good. His thinking is certainly clear. I say that because I've had a few interesting exchanges with him at Tamsin's new gaff.
***
He says this -
I have a couple of minor issues with this - one is that the climate isn't primarily a biologically-controlled system, and the claim that natural flows are being changed by a factor of more than 1000 needs some justification.
My biggest disagreement - and this gets close to the heart of my issue with CAGW - is that he calls his conclusion of unavoidably dangerous an argument It is no such thing - it is a feeling, or a worry, or a belief produced by imagination. Danger is a value judgement and an argument is value-free. And this where I would claim that climate scientists have no special authority. Some relevant insights and information - but only one vote.
***
While I'm here, can someone aid my ignorance by telling me how I get to comment on a blog like Crucifix's? Do I need a special kind of email? A website?
Crucifix has an ironical name for he comes over sounding like the Parish Priest telling his flock that only he has the inside knowledge and truth.
I am surprised that having spent four years at the Met Office in Exeter, he didn't learn how to use a spelling checker. A part of his Bio
Belgium is an amazing place - they have that eyesore silver ball sculpture thing, the European Commission and NATO and the terrorist Operation Gladio headquarters, inveterate exaggerator Jean-Pascal van Ypersele, a pathological aversion to democracy, Herman Van Rompuy, dogs eating in restaurants, serial child-murderer Marc Dutroux jumping out of the back of a police van while two of his victims starve to death in his torture dungeon despite a thorough police search of it and now Monsieur Crucifix.
It's the country that just keeps on giving.
"I believe, as a climate scientist, that there is not benefit to be gained from engaging discussion with an individual or with a group if my authority is not acknowledged."
Well, how refreshingly frank, someone who insists on his superiority. Well, Michel, don't engage with me. Though your attitude is going to make things a little weird on your colleague Tamsin's brand spanking new website. I wonder if others will "out" themselves?
jamspid - I think just after we found out who shot JR in Dallas might be one of them. It is a while ago (1980's)
In his post linked by the Bish, Michel writes:
"Having authority does not protect against the duty of explaining how and why you arrive at this or that conclusion, and it does not guarantee anyone that all what you say is right. Simply, experience tells us that eliciting authoritative opinions increases one chance's of success in decision-making."
Michel, your authority has to be earned not assumed. The authority of climate scientists has to be earned not assumed. At this point in history, the authority of climate scientists is roughly the same as the authority of Al Gore. If you would start nailing some of the climate scientists who engage in violations of scientific method or who make exaggerated claims, you would win some respect. We need to know that you respect science more than you do your conclusions.
I recommend reading Michel's post linked by the Bish. The post reveals more than you might want to know about the person.
FergalR
Belgium is one of the more interesting countries in Europe because everybody (except apparently Mikey) speaks excellent English as a compromise for not having to speak the "other" language of that country.
You can, for example, get off a plane in Brussels and not realize that you are NOT in Pittsburgh PA until you get outside of the airport.
Hi Andrew,
T'was a tiny bit of levity at a French stereotype - given you post Josh's cartoons on a regular basis I didn't think you were opposed to humor now and again. Apologies for messing up your blog by posting, it definitely won't happen again.
He comes across as a bit of a prat . He has worked for a few years in what many people have concluded is pseudo science - yet he demands that his "authority" should be acknowledged.
To give him the benefit of the doubt, because of language differences, maybe he is unaware that the term denier is often taken as implying that someone is equivalent to those who deny that the genocide of Jews during World War II occurred. Is he aware of this?
Incidentally, holocaust denial is illegal in Belgium, with a punishment of a prison sentence of eight days to one year, plus a fine. So it's not something treated lightly there.
Oy - I missed the TerryS / Hengist post - if that was the direction, apologies for mistaking the ambiguity.
Barry Woods writes:
'I am not confused'
Personally I find it hard to learn anything without going through a stage of confusion. If I'm not somewhat confused I am not learning, and probably devoting my intellectual energies in the wrong direction. Usually asking questions about things you understand perfectly well is a wasted opportunity. Better, I find, to ask about things that are not yet understood.
I was using a specific example. - ie 'Hide the Decline'
As I'm still waiting for Tamsins and Richards thoughts on that.... as well
Jonathan Jones was very specific, here at Bishop Hill
this issue is about influence on policymakers, not that it was explained (in the basement,stairs gone, locked filing cabinet) in the literature
yet no comment
Don Pablo...there are 3 countries in Belgium - Flanders, Wallomia and Brussels. Do not rely on English apart from in Brussels...however using English will at least mean you do not cause offence by guessing wrongly whether to speak French or Flemish
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/news/releases/archive/2009/science-community-statement
signing this ultimately meant, to defend 'hide the decline' etc.. why else was t rushed around the universities. how many that signed it have ever looke at just one issue, or justified it..
This was politics, not science..
Guys
Please can I ask you to give Michel Crucifix a chance, and not draw all kinds of conclusions from a forensic analysis of just one second-laguage post? Having worked with Michel when he was at the Met Office Hadley Centre, I can tell you he's an extremely nice guy and a good, objective scientist. I look forward to some great insights from him at Tamsin's blog (or any others where he shows up).
Barry, look like I've missed a post from you somewhere? Sorry about that - too many interesting blogs, not enough time.... :-)
Cheers
Richard
u scratch my back....
4 Feb: Independent: Steve Connor: Science behind the big freeze: is climate change bringing the Arctic to Europe?
A loss of sea ice could be a cause of the bitter winds that have swept across the UK in the past week, weather experts say
"The current weather pattern fits earlier predictions of computer models for how the atmosphere responds to the loss of sea ice due to global warming," said Professor Stefan Rahmstorf of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research. "The ice-free areas of the ocean act like a heater as the water is warmer than the Arctic air above it. This favours the formation of a high-pressure system near the Barents Sea, which steers cold air into Europe."...
Studies by scientists at the Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research have confirmed a link between the loss of Arctic sea ice and the development of high-pressure zones in the polar region, which influence wind patterns at lower latitudes further south...
Professor Rahmstorf said the Alfred Wegener study confirms earlier predictions from computer models by Vladimir Petoukhov of the Potsdam Institute, who forecast colder winters in western Europe as a result of melting sea ice...
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/science-behind-the-big-freeze-is-climate-change-bringing-the-arctic-to-europe-6358928.html
I think it is appropriate to question the validity of the title 'climate scientist'. It may be generic, but it surely it not specific or descriptive. I would propose no-one at all is an authority on all of the component disciplines. Which relegates everyone, including the high priests, to the same humble stalls, rather than the little royal box of their speciality.
Feb 5, 2012 at 11:21 PM | Richard Betts
Be careful of your good name. I praised you on Tamsin's website and you most definitely deserve praise. I praised Tamsin's website in part because of your association with it. One of your outstanding qualities is your candor (reasonable candor within the confines of a professional position). I take it that Michel has just announced that candor is beneath him. Worse, I take it that he has just announced that responses to criticisms are beneath him. You need to have a talk with your colleagues.
A provocative thought perhaps, but many of the sceptics of the mould posting here on this blog, with an obvious compelling interest in the subject, might well have chosen a career in climate science, but saw no practical commercial market for it. Had they done so, the debate might have progressed to a somewhat less contentious conclusion.
I've met more than a few Flemish folk, they are polite, industrious, good fun and excellent jovial all round great company, though I cannot speak for the French speaking half.
Ahh - the "we are climate scientists and you're not" card.
Who does he mean when he writes "We, climate scientists..." ?
"I believe, as a climate scientist, that there is not benefit to be gained from engaging discussion with an individual or with a group if my authority is not acknowledged."
As a one time sponsor of research work both in industry and academia I can tell you that Michel is being economical with the truth. To a man and woman researchers will bow to the whims of anyone with who can authorize grants, and if that means the potential donor doesn't give a fig for their "authority" and tells them the moon is made of green cheese and they're to prove it. They'd take the money and run without demur.
Theo -
I accept that there is something that rankles about the authority thing with Michel C. But if he's willing to come out and engage with sceptics and respond to criticism, I think he's worth giving a break to. How many climate scientists bother?
I don't know how he'll react to the kind of comments on this thread, but many a neutral reader might think even if his attitude seems overly haughty - which to most independent-minded sceptics is akin to being Michael Mann's identical twin - the reactions would justify him not bothering to engage any further in this kind of environment.
This guy belongs on Southpark along with Cartman - Respect my authoritah!!
Richard Betts,
Your camaraderie is impressive but don't put a Belgian technocrat on your babysitter list.
A concerned heads-up.
Experts being human, are likely to produce a variety of responses. Medical practitioners are a case in point. Some will recommend a second opinion before you accept their own. Some will get upset if you indicate you will be doing this. Back in the '70's I was told I *had to have* a tonsillectomy. When I questioned the need for a surgical procedure for what just turned out to be a run of colds, I was met, to my surprise, with a very superior 'attitude'. I sought a second opinion without mentioning the first diagnosis and the doctor prescribed me antibiotics and let me out the door 10 minutes later. (Antibiotic prescriptions were fairly routine back then for head colds.) I was a little surprised by the opposite response, and asked why he didn't think I needed surgery on my tonsils. This second expert laughed at the suggestion and pointed out that the problem would fix itself in a month or two. And it did.
Moral of the story: we are all dependent on experts, but that doesn't mean we give them a free pass either.
Feb 6, 2012 at 1:48 AM | Anteros
"Having authority does not protect against the duty of explaining how and why you arrive at this or that conclusion, and it does not guarantee anyone that all what you say is right. Simply, experience tells us that eliciting authoritative opinions increases one chance's of success in decision-making."
I do not want to benefit from eliciting his authoritative opinion. I want him to engage in debate. I read him as saying that he is beyond criticism. The Bishop reads him the same way. Given that he is beyond criticism, why would I read what he writes?
Bish:
Barry is right, this attitude would not last long in the private sector and when manifested during a selection interview guarantees rejection. That said, one email in a second language hardly merits the attention and I am willing to take Richard Bett's character reference pending further evidence.
I do have to agree with the gentleman, any discussion that does not acknowledge the abilities or expertise of one of the people is bound to fall into a name calling spat. At the same time being dismissed as a "no nothing amature" has exactly the same result. A professional discuss/debate should allow all views to be entered, discussed and dismissed as required. Anything else is simply forwarding propaganda
"Michel Crucifix leads the project. He holds a PhD in physics and worked four years as a modeller at the Met Office Hadley Centre. He has been a member of the academic staff of the Georges Lemaitre Institute for Earth and Climate Centre since 2006. His interests span the philosophy of modelling, algorithms of Bayesian inferrence, palaeoclimate data and bifurcations in climate models."
The Met Office... oh yes, the same that predicted winters so successfully?
Finally Crucifix working for teh catholic University of Louvain is like a guy named Coal at University of Newcastle...
[Venting]
diogenes, Athelstan I quite agree the Brussels is separate from the rest of Belgium and while out in the country, the older folks tend to speak their native language, I find that the younger people, particularly those with a college education, speak excellent English. This is also true of Holland and Switzerland as well.
Richard Betts I think you should take Theo Goodwin advice.
Anteros Sorry, I stopped kissing rings a long time ago. He certainly has not earned any respect from me, nor do I see any indication that he deserves it. At least Richard Betts is a proper and polite young gentleman.