Bishop Hill Yeo makes the big time
Jan 30, 2014 Climate: Parliament Gallery Guido has taken it upon himself to cover the Energy and Climate Change Committee hearings and, in typically astute fashion gets the members of the panel about right:
Suffice it to say that John Robertson’s questioning would have been a credit to a clever dugong. Albert Owen nearly grasped the idea that that a Greenpeace activist in charge of an IPCC Chapter might lack objectivity. And Tim Yeo’s chairing was as good as a golf club captain in a Saturday night lock-in.
And the exchange between Lindzen and Yeo about the pause comes in for special mention:
It dawns on Lindzen the chairman has special needs. He explains how a 16-year smoothing average means one thing, how a pause and plateau means another.
The lasting impression seems to have been that most of the committee members are not up to the job:
These particular MPs are simply not up to it. Climate enthusiasts will be embarrassed by them, and sceptics contemptuous. They are treasured, however, by sketch writers.
Reader Comments (53)
"Paleo-Labour"
FTW.
Messenger:
"As someone said earlier, I really, really hope Yeo's (and Robertson's) constituency members were watching this."
Here in South Suffolk I can assure you that we have not taken our eyes off of the antics of Yeo, and await Monday's ballot result with deep interest.
Bish: I hope you are working on a book on the whole question of peer review and what has happened to science. One simple point to make to politicians would be that the quality of science today varies tremendously--and in some cases very bad science is supported by a consensus. Climate is probably not the worst--that might be behavioural psychology (Lewandowsky and others). Nutrition is pretty bad--partly because the public has gone insane about dieting while refusing to actually cut calories in order to lose weight. Anything funded by the pharmaceuticals is pretty bad. Climate may be slightly better than these. Lindzen is right: observations can be made about the competence of people in particular fields.
Steve M has commented on Lucia's site (http://rankexploits.com/musings/2014/the-meaning-of-r2-in-pictures-mann-v-steynsimbergceinro/#comment-123285) that the infamous Enron crooks were convicted for failing to make full disclosure of relevant information to investors. Some of their methods amounted to "accounting opportunism." Yet Eichenwald, who literally wrote the book on Enron, fails to see the connection to the hockey stick publications and other revered parts of climate science--which have been used to advise governments as to how to spend billions of dollars.
There may be very few reputed climate scientists who have actually lied about their work or their field of study (although the number is certainly not zero); but the famous "consensus" includes elements of incompetence, dishonest unwillingness to search diligently for the truth while admitting one's ignorance in the meantime, dishonest presentation of evidence, and unwillingness to face facts that are either complex or don't fit the narrative. (Basil Fawlty might say: "is that it, then?") The longer the "consensus" goes on, the more it demonstrates dishonesty as opposed to mere ignorance and incompetence.