Friday
May162014
by 
Bishop Hill
Bishop Hill Bengtsson speaks to the Telegraph
May 16, 2014 Climate: Sceptics Climate: sensitivity The Telegraph has further comments from Lennart Bengtsson, clarifying his position:
Last night Professor Bengtsson, said: “I do not believe there is any systematic “cover up” of scientific evidence on climate change or that academics’ work is being “deliberately suppressed”, as The Times front page suggests. I am worried by a wider trend that science is being gradually being influenced by political views. Policy decisions need to be based on solid fact.
This seems similar to the position advanced by Benny Peiser in his radio interview (see last post), who said that he thought that the problems were caused by a small group of activist scientists.
Reader Comments (7)
The BBC seems to be closing ranks with the consensus, at least on Radio 4 news, saying that the referee's comment about the sceptic media was a bit of a throwaway remark at the end, and that because of the internet referees will now have to BE MORE CAREFUL ABOUT WHAT THEY SAY.
Does that mean "carry on promoting The Cause, but be careful about what you write"?
IMO it's good to see Bengtsson say this and disassociate himself somewhat from the climate wars or special pleading. That symbiotic media spin is usually welcomed by the alarmists, maybe it should best be left with them?
I think from the layman's point of view you can throw out all the technical issues of merit and just point to that statement
Pure politics and spin. No science is being served there.
That's climate peer review folks.
A layman can easily see the problem with that attitude. Any layman can recognise self-serving PR speak.
IMHO looking on twitter the technically minded seem to suffer from a scotoma and miss that. They defend or attack the science missing that elephant in the room.
Telegraph seem to have churnalised the SMC, Prof Bengtsson's full statement is there
http://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-claims-climate-research-was-suppressed/
where Mike Hulme nails the 'real' story
"This is the real story here: why certain climate scientists believe it’s their role to pass public judgement on whether a scientific colleague should offer advice to political, public or a campaigning organisations and to harass that scientist until they ‘fall into line’.
“This episode tells us a lot about how deeply politicised climate science has become, but how some scientists remain blind to their own biases.” Hulme
small POWERFUL group of activist scientists, the prophets of the cause.
And who can blame them, can anyone see Mann given any actual job outside of selling his 'special statistics ' complete with smoke and mirrors? So has they are all it with hand of sh*t all they can do is double down and hope.
...Benny Peiser in his radio interview (see last post), who said that he thought that the problems were caused by a small group of activist scientists...
...LARGE group of activist scientists...
They ALL need to be activists, or at least activist-supporting. If they want to keep their jobs...
Of course the entire problem originates in a small group of (violent) activist scientists. It's no mystery.
The truth is that this is just one more example of the difficulty average humans have dealing with aggressive individuals, i.e., bullies.
It happens around us every day and it is easy to criticize from the outside and accuse others of cowardice for not standing up.
However, if you are unfortunately involved in any of these situations, most of us shut down and try to make ourselves invisible.
And when I say "most of us", I mean upwards of 97%.
Real story is ol Bengt tossing the newspaper he fed his original story to under the bus. GWPF wouldn't want this guy around anyway. He panics at the first sign of trouble.