Click images for more details



Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing
  • Jun 21 - Mark Hodgson on
    COP 23
  • Jun 20 - Mark Hodgson on
    COP 23

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace
« Nurse accuses Lawson of cherrypicking | Main | Diary date »

The new president

Roger Pielke Jr has had an interesting exchange of views with the new president of the American Meteorological Society:

Roger Pielke Jr: In briefing to US Senate AmerMetSoc Prez links increasing costs of disasters with climate change. OK, I'll bite, evidence?

Marshall Shepherd‏: i try to be measured on such issues. Even some of your own work noting coastal growth adds cost as coastal haz like sandy hap...btw annual meeting in 2014, my theme will address links to soc infrastructure and hopefully you are willing to participate

Roger Pielke Jr: Thx -- I have not been on the AMS Xmas Card list for some time now ;-) I'm always ready to discuss/debate science and policy

Roger Pielke Jr: our track record of measured-ness is why I am very surprised by your briefing remarks, and why I'm asking for evidence now. Leaders in the climate science community have a horrible record in presenting accurate testimony/briefings to US Congress. BTW here is the Congressional briefing text of @DrShepherd2013 that we're discussing and I think widely misses mark …

Marshall Shepherd ‏:  but how to move forward with tenor of tweets i view ams and discourse as bigger tent open for all views no attacks

Roger Pielke Jr: Thx ... Members of Congress can cherrypick their experts as they see fit. AMS Prez however should play things straight.

Marshall Shepherd ‏: Agree,view my role as AMS President to give a position based on our AMS statement and the most current literature, no agenda...have no agenda which is why in testimony I chose not to answer the question from the Senator about Keystone, no AMS basis

Roger Pielke Jr: Not to dwell, but citing your spouse and Cheerios on XE are not a good substitute for bottom line findings of IPCC SREX! ;-) Yes, tenor is important. But not to get distracted, will you be sending me the references on disaster claims in yr briefing?

Marshall Shepherd ‏: AMS statement (2012), Lubchenco and Karl (2012), Bouwer (2012), Kapphan et al (2012), Peterson et al. (2012) Munich Re report

Roger Pielke Jr: Thx..but here's the problem: none of those papers/grey lit support your claims about extreme events and disaster costs.

Marshall Shepherd ‏: I had wind of this info. but deemed it inapropriate to present but would have been persuasive

Roger Pielke Jr: Good thinking. Better would be new NOAA peer reviewed study which explains why their billionz index is no good for climate.

Marshall Shepherd: not inappropriate because it is flawed, I know there are pre-conceived about sources (even IPCC), so tried to avoid...

Roger Pielke Jr: You lost me. You avoided IPCC because of preconceptions, so you instead cited The Guardian and EarthZine?? Come on ;-)

Marshall Shepherd: no, not what I was suggestion, I cite IPCC for example in upcoming paper we have coming out on Floods. context lost in tweets...sources being the links I just shared with costs for 2011 and 2012 disasters....and context give us the ability to say some things, this is what I mean about context, intent, etc.

Marshall Shepherd: We can quibble on it, but just understand that my intent was to be objective

Roger Pielke Jr: AMS Prez gets science of extremes/disasters 100% wrong before US Congress. I think it matters, so hardly a quibble ;-)

Marshall Shepherd:  think we just will have to agree to disagree,not trying to take shots. I hope we can work together in future, no agenda

Marshall Shepherd:  and hope you will take up offer to interface at next AMS via some mechanism, we need all viewpoints in the Society

Roger Pielke Jr: Please do send those supporting references to your claims, I am v interested in why you chose them over SREX. Thanks.

Marshall Shepherd: very serious about u attending/engaging in 2014 meeting. Theme synopsis written last year

Roger Pielke Jr: I am happy to discuss .. Thx!

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

Reader Comments (20)

Oh dear, is this Marshall Shepherd to be added to the swollen list of Climate Oafs in High Places Who Ought to Know Better? Sure looks like it.

Feb 15, 2013 at 4:53 PM | Unregistered CommenterJohn Shade

In other words, I have my opinion and there are references which support that opinion, and I'm going to ignore all the references which don't support that opinion. He's a natural for the IPCC SPM.

Feb 15, 2013 at 5:03 PM | Registered CommenterHaroldW

I read Piekl jnr's blog each morning. He is a lukewarmist and IMO puts too much weight on technologically advanced mitiigation. However, he is that rare bird among climate scientists; in that he knows what he is talking about and he is neither a liar nor a scoundrel.

Feb 15, 2013 at 5:06 PM | Unregistered CommenterGordon Walker

Mark another name on the wall of shame.

Feb 15, 2013 at 5:14 PM | Unregistered CommenterStuck-Record

Gordon Walker -
I agree, but I would not describe Pielke Jnr as a climate scientist. (His father is, though.) He's more of a political / policy analyst with a special interest in climate change. I often disagree with his perspective, but he is an "honest broker".

Feb 15, 2013 at 5:17 PM | Registered CommenterHaroldW

Yes HoroldW
Quite so, but nobody is, or is not a climate scientist, or any kind of scientist. Science is an open book and we do not have need of experts to tell us what it means.

Feb 15, 2013 at 5:44 PM | Unregistered CommenterGordon Walker
Feb 15, 2013 at 5:47 PM | Registered CommenterPaul Matthews

According to Roger, "there is more than just horsemeat in Shepherd's lasagne"

I'm sorry, but surely that should be "shepherd's pie".

Feb 15, 2013 at 6:16 PM | Registered Commentersteve ta

Peilke's exchanges are very similar to mine with Shepherd. Very little of subtance, and would not refute IPCC data. Or even acknowledge, for that matter. Note the name change when I confronted him about being the voice of the AMS.

Feb 15, 2013 at 6:34 PM | Unregistered CommenterLes Johnson

The phrase "caught with his pants down", comes to mind.

Feb 15, 2013 at 8:58 PM | Unregistered Commenterphil and keith's career trick


Yeah, well, same number of letters at least.

Feb 15, 2013 at 9:19 PM | Unregistered CommenterJEM

,' I cite IPCC for example in upcoming paper we have coming out on Floods'

Start the results you want and design the research 'well enough ' from that and you will always find the 'evidenced ' to support it .

Feb 15, 2013 at 10:12 PM | Unregistered CommenterKnR

The only way for him to keep the gravy funding train rolling is to keep the hysteria alive, keep the fearmongering going.

He best be carefu, he isn't hit by a piece of falling sky.

Feb 15, 2013 at 10:15 PM | Unregistered CommenterFred from Canuckistan

Marshall Shepherd sounds like another crooked activist.

Feb 16, 2013 at 3:51 AM | Unregistered CommenterSean

Once a scientist starts to sound like a politician you know they have lost their objectivity.

Feb 16, 2013 at 8:44 AM | Unregistered CommenterSteve Jones

AMS Prez gets science of extremes/disasters 100% wrong before US Congress. I think it matters, so hardly a quibble ;-)

That's a scientists (of sorts) not sounding like a polititian. Nice one, Rog.

Feb 16, 2013 at 10:56 AM | Unregistered Commentersteveta_uk

If they carry on like this perhaps the AMS 2014 will be a hoarse meet. More likely Shepherd will continue to sell out and it will be a whores' meet.

BTW: I'm no expert but isn't shepherd's pie made from lamb?

Feb 16, 2013 at 3:56 PM | Unregistered CommenterJeff Norman

Marshall Shepherd,
I note your reference a list of natural events, but you DO NOT provide any evidence of a link to man's activities.

Is this you standard of science?

Please show us the evidence that man’s CO2 is the cause of “climate destruction”.


Feb 16, 2013 at 11:06 PM | Unregistered Commenterjim karlock

Well Marshall Shepherd obviously has no agenda as he says!!!

- when you tell complete untruths related to weather and its empirical history you can only be on the Kool-Aid or the funding gravy train.

It is amazing stuff that CO2 - perhaps he has breathing too much of it?

O/T - I interacted with a well educated member of the believers recently and at one point. I said to him we now have 400ppm CO2 in the atmosphere. That is 4 molecules in every 10,000 air molecules. Lets assume that all the increase since 1850 (circa 100ppm) is due to man. That is 1 CO2 molecule in 10,000 of air.

And you are telling me that caused Hurricane Sandy?

After a longish silence we didn't have a sceptic, but a least a man who was prepared to think more critically about what he was told. I find keeping it simple gets better results.

Feb 17, 2013 at 11:21 AM | Registered Commenterretireddave

"Agree,view my role as AMS President to give a position based on our AMS statement and the most current literature, no agenda"

A lesson in circular reasoning: The Mandarins of the AMS concoct an alarmist statement at odds with the opinions of a great number of members, which is then used as justification by the AMS president to present unsubstantiated and wrong alarmist statements.

This is the way they work. It defines who they are.

Feb 17, 2013 at 4:46 PM | Unregistered CommenterNoblesse Oblige

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>