Bishop Hill More climate McCarthyism
Jun 13, 2014 Climate: Sceptics Climate Depot reports another sad case of climate McCarthyism, this time from the USA:
Dr. Caleb Rossiter was “terminated” via email as an “Associate Fellow” from the progressive group Institute for Policy Studies (IPS), following his May 4th, 2014 Wall Street Journal OpEd titled “Sacrificing Africa for Climate Change,” in which he called man-made global warming an “unproved science.” Rossiter also championed the expansion of carbon based energy in Africa. Dr. Rossiter is an adjunct professor at American University. Rossiter holds a PhD in policy analysis and a masters degree in mathematics.
In an exclusive interview with Climate Depot, Dr. Rossiter explained: “If people ever say that fears of censorship for ‘climate change’ views are overblown, have them take a look at this: Just two days after I published a piece in the Wall Street Journal calling for Africa to be allowed the ‘all of the above’ energy strategy we have in the U.S., the Institute for Policy Studies terminated my 23-year relationship with them…because my analysis and theirs ‘diverge.’”
“I have tried to get [IPS] to discuss and explain their rejection of my analysis,’ Rossiter told Climate Depot. “When I countered a claim of ‘rapidly accelerating’ temperature change with the [UN] IPCC’s own data’, showing the nearly 20-year temperature pause — the best response I ever got was ‘Caleb, I don’t have time for this.’”
There are many issues swirling round here - the good intentions of the "progressives" and the evil that flows from it, their startling ability to turn a blind eye to the suffering of Africans, their inability to deal with dissent, their closed minds. What a depressing scene with which to start the day.
Reader Comments (24)
Because, in general, calling them progressive is as accurate as calling them liberals.
I wonder, from my total ignorance of what goes on behind closed doors at the institute, if they themselves are not acting out of fear rather than any kind of political belief.
Is the Institute for Policy Studies institutionally racist? Given a choice between the welfare of Africans and (supposedly) combatting climate change the leaders of the IPS have clearly shown that they regard the latter as far more important.
What a depressing scene with which to start the day.
Exactly, another packet of valium gone and the health service isn't free in france. :)
It's a bit like speaking out against slavery. Interferes with a big industry, therefore you must expect to be unpopular.
India may be having none of it. Link from GWPF;
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/06/12/uk-india-projects-idUKKBN0EN1CV20140612
The website uses the strapline
to advertise the IPS news letter.Perhaps they should consider changing it to "Unconventional Wisdom in less than two days."
Climate justice in action.
Ignorance is bliss......
O/T, but another depressing scene on this nice sunny day - motionless wind turbines:
National Grid at 10am, of total load 37.43GW, wind supplying .15GW (0.40%).
Green energy you can rely on.
Who has time for this? Well, this is the time.
============
The level of ignorant bigotry displayed by these people sometimes beggars belief. Praise anyway to Dr. Rossiter for trying to stand up to them.
The distinguished Professor harried out of the GWPF just weeks ago. Now this. There will be more. Lots more. The cliamte kooks are destroying themselves. Only the ignorant politicians who are so compromised by the moral hazard and rent seeking will be left in the not too distant future.
Yep. Or amen, which means the very thing.
This is not McCarthyism. McCarthyism was suppression of political views.
This is Lysenkoism, suppression of scientific views based on science dogma.
From the Ecclesiastical Uncle, an old retired bureaucrat in a field only remotely related to climate with minimal qualifications and only half a mind.
Without any access to facts and as it is of periphral interest only, being foreign, in this familiar series of events I merely guess we see that familiar ogre - the power of money. 90% certain IMHO.
To elaborate IPS overtly embraces science but is funded by bodies wedded to CAGW and the good Assoc Prof (must be very junior in the US academic firmament?) has declared for science and a contrary policy on CAGW. Being eminently disposable, he has been disposed of to show the funders that IPS toes the line..
(1) If he's miffed, I can't think why.
(2) It seems that, in them parts, they have the same difficulties funding science as we do in the UK.
Anybody actually know anything about what actually happened, and why?
Ecc Unc:
Having looked at the IPS website, it's clear that their view of things is very far from Dr Rossiter's, so I feel a bit surprised he was ever associated with them.
I put it down to kack-handedness on the part of the IPS. (Very similar to the case of Maquarie University and Dr Salby.)
What should have happened is that the management of the organisation, in each case, had a discussion over lunch with the person involved, point out the misalignment of views and work out how to go their separate ways (glowing references for new appointments with organisations better suited etc etc), with minumum of hurt feelings, agreed press statement if necessary, and both coming out looking good.
(I think that a US Assoc Prof is/was about the same rank as Lecturer/Senior Lecturer in UK)
Is it really mccarthyism? The IPS seems to be a private body with its own agenda and financial supporters. As such it is surely its own business whom it employs and who speaks for it. If Dr R disagrees with his employer the honourable thing would be to resign and find an employer he likes better rather than effectively to attack it in a hostile newspaper.
As he is worried about African poverty, maybe he could join one of the many conservative charitable organisations that raise funds to provide free generators and fuel to African villages. In fact maybe we could consider setting up such a charitable fund in the UK. I'm sure readers of this blog will be generous donors to such a good cause. Note also that we should encourage government to create a temporary workers scheme to draw people from poor parts of Africa. Remittances are a major part of poor country incomes and will help enormously to relieve poverty.
They need to change their name to Institute For Policy Groupthink.
I'm not sure McCarthyism was "suppression" of political views. It was more "outing" of views considered incompatible with American values and subsequent shunning of those holding them. What is quite clear, given the current administration in the US, is that it didn't cut deeply enough.
Well, in any case, Climate is and Climate does its climate thing, and we have thermometers to measure the facts – and as Alexius Meinong reminds us: “Truth is a purely human construct, but facts are eternal.” So I thought hmmm…, temperature arises from the zeroth law of thermodynamics and all the rest is nothing but energy shovelling around. What happens, therefore, if I try measuring ‘Climate’ in energy terms, like kWh or joule -- even treating the IPCC forecast of a 4°C temperature rise by 2100 as ‘gospel’?. I tried, with the result at http://cleanenergypundit.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/eating-sun-fourth-estatelondon-2009.html . I think we simply should take King Canute more seriously.
On the way there, I thought I have a look at how best to keep a level head myself in this Orwellian Newspeak age we’re in. Might be worth a look: http://cleanenergypundit.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/brainology-101-midwives-hold-thenewborn.html
Rather than McCarthyism, I think it is the modern equivalent of "Fahrenheit 451". Busy as bees getting rid of all writings that do not follow the party line.
I propose the term McClimatism, it's shorter and punchier.
Most people will get it.
His 'view' was diverging from their 'VIEW'....
Oh - theirs were not 'facts' or 'evidence' then...
What evidence do you have that the "greenies" intentions are good. That would seem to be an assumption not based on facts. And, certainly their outcomes belie that assumption as does their unwillingness to acknowledge bad outcomes.