Monday
Apr142014
by 
Bishop Hill
Bishop Hill Deniers no more
Apr 14, 2014 Climate: Sceptics Media In the pub on Friday night a pal mentioned that he'd seen my name mentioned in the Independent a few days ago. I think this may have been this article by Tom Bawden responding to the SciTech committee's report on climate change communication, which cites me as saying something eminently sensible about sea-level rise.
What struck me about the article was that Mr Bawden eschewed the use of the d-word, something he has not felt constrained about in the past.
Perhaps we are having an effect.
Reader Comments (15)
Guardian article: "Bob Ward, policy director of The London School of Economics’ Grantham Institute, who gave evidence for the report, welcomed its conclusion."
So, what does James Delingpole have to say on the subject:
"Here is Ward's dismissive verdict on "sceptics":
…They write newspaper articles and go and appear on the media because what they are really interested in is influencing public debate rather than debating the intellectual basis of their objections.
But isn't this exactly what Bob Ward does all the ruddy time, popping up like a bad smell on TV and radio whenever a rentaquote spokesman is needed to talk about 'Climate Change'? He's a PR man, let us remind ourselves, not a scientist (although he can claim an unfinished PhD thesis in Palaeopiezometry)."
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100058818/what-on-earth-is-bob-ward/
And at least James acknowledges his skillful use of irony as well as being "right about everything".
Some silly kid called Alvin from NZ stopped communicating on RW after people asked for details on who the deniers were and what they were denying
(Sir Mark) said it was “obviously completely ridiculous” to deal with the reality of climate change by denying the science.
Well in a sense he's right because 'the science' is just a cover for political action, its truth or not is an irrelevance. While you can argue about sea level rises here, the effects of UHI there, its a conversation for hobbyists. It would be as though one wanted to confront some other major leftist lie, say "criminals are victims of capitalism, forced into their misdemeanours by uncaring blah blah blah" -- how would arguing the toss about the veracity of crime stats serve as a rebuttal to that nonsense?
Maybe Mr Bawden has just paid an electricity bill, and the penny's dropped.
"The climate has always changed and it always will – there is nothing unusual about the modern magnitudes or rates of change of temperature, of ice volume, of sea level or of extreme weather events,”
Since this statement is true and easily verifiable I'm not sure what the problem is.
I think the journalist probably felt that name calling might be seen as churlish since the report was a victory for his side. My opinion was that the committee was supposed to work out how the science could be better conveyed to the public and yet the main thing they identified was that sceptics get too much air time and space in the media. Pathetic.
Do the authorities worry about flat earth discussions? Are those who believe 911 was a conspiracy really a threat? No. The places where significant opposition arises is where widespread public concerns are un-addressed. That resistance arises most often where the scientific or governmental bodies involved 'have form' to quote Richard Betts.
Scientists blame anti vaxers for the public lack of faith in vaccines but because of past failures in procedures, there have been major issues with vaccines. Vaccines are never 100% safe and the public need to know the scientists have balanced one risk against the others properly. Left to their own devices scientists and professionals become too certain of their own cleverness. There is a debate raging at the moment about an antiviral that may or may not be effective. There is no doubt that it does have side effects. The problem could have been resolved before it started if pharma companies were required to disclose all drug trials and not just those that the company decides to present. People put a lot of trust in doctors but who could deny that problems like North Staffs exist? I'll bet the public were concerned and complaining long before the authorities admitted there was a huge problem. Look at Hillsborough. The issues involved were so carefully suppressed by media, police and government that it's only recently that I worked out what the families were saying.
If large numbers of the public are against something for any length of time you can guarantee that there's a genuine problem or at the very least a potential problem. Instead of trying to suppress the issue, it would be better to bring it out into the open and let critics express their version of what they see wrong, rather than have others frame it for them.
I do wonder sometimes of journalists actually read the works they write.
If so, what does he think he meant by "well-respected scientists arguing for climate change"?
Denying our right to democratic free speech.
Denying the right to deniers to deny.
From an ironically titled Newspaper called "THE INDEPENDENT".
Strange how The Independant is owned by a 30 year old Russian Oligarch who is the son of the former Head of the KGB in London during the cold war.He obviously never grew up with the threat of Nuclear Armageddon ,a New Impending Ice Age ,a Population Bomb or telephones with dials ,Charlies Angels ,Flares, Tank Tops and Punk.
So Lebevov whose got British Citizenship just like his mate Chelsea Chairman Roman Abranavitch has he got Gas and Oil interests in his birth home Mother Russia .So where does The Independant stand on Fracking ,Shale Gas debate in the UK.
Rupert Murdock with a Russian accent.
Instead of calling us unfriendly" Climate Change Deniers" call us very Climate Change Dissidents much more PC more worthy.
Bottomline - one swallow doesn't make a spring.
..we are not on the side that jumps to conclusions / certainties
..bear in mind the big picture that the Indy is owned by Russian oligarch friend of oil oligarchs.
In fairness, the d noun was in the strapline of the linked article.
I've been told that this is not always the responsibility of an author.
It must be some Heap Big Powerful Persuasive And Attractive Message the sceptics are touting if if the establishment response is to prevent it being heard!
Note too the subtle langauge changes over the past year. Sceptics are no longer 'deniers'. And their standpoint is not 'wrong', but 'misinformed', 'misguided' or 'distorted'. Trans: 'They're right be we can't be seen to agree'.
With a nod to recent events I suspect it will not be long till the sainted triumvirate of Sir Andrew Montford, Lord McIntyre and Anthony Watts will be received as Guests of Honour at Windsor....by the future King Charles III. It should prove to be an 'interesting' evening.
Sorry to hog the board im on a roll.
Putin has got his tanks massing on the Ukrainian border .
The Independent with a Russian owner backed by Russian Gas and Oil money .Climate Change alarmists financed by by Big Oil ( actually big Russian Oil and Gas ) thats irony.
So shares in Chelsea FC have taken a hit.So have shares in the Independent and The Evening Standard have they took a hit too.
The European Union wins a Nobel Peace Prize invites Ukraine to join it and Nato and then stupidly Recognizes a rag tag coalition that includes neo Nazi thugs that unseated a democratically elected government that threatens Russia and reignites the Cold War in a country that is supposed to be securing and looking after the ruins of the wrecked Chernobyl Reactor now that is another Irony.
The Estate Agents and Luxury supercar dealers in Mayfair are shi..ting themselves
On the plus side the skeptics quotes give a good account of the truth and are verifiable. On the minus side the MP's are not listening. The following quote tells me we are not making any difference at all:
"The use of climate sceptics has often resulted in an argument between science-based fact and belief-based opinion, the report by the cross-party Science and Technology Committee found."
Models are not fact! The fact that most climate scientists ritually say things that are not supported by any real world evidence nor even by their inadequate models is obviously too unbelievable to be true. But then these are the same clowns who though that an entire economy could be based around ever-rising house prices. Surely, they thought, the vast majority of economists (and their models) can't be wrong!
jamspid:
'Irony' is surely a misnomer given the past hundred years Ukraine has had to suffer, with perhaps more mass slaughter, of different forms, than anywhere on the planet. Those unnamed millions are more important than the 'Estate Agents and Luxury supercar dealers in Mayfair'. Today's instability doesn't have to turn into something far worse. I pray for those trying to resolve the situation.
Shaun Lovejoy didn't get the memo.