מנא ,מנא, תקל, ופרסין
Verse 1: The Denier Scientists
BPSDB“you have been weighed (counted) on the scales and found wanting”
In a recent attempt to mock this site a Denier blog stated:
“My favorite part is when he links to a Wikipedia page in an attempt to convince us that there are only a “few dozen” skeptics.”
My reply was “When I make that sort of statement I include facts/evidence that show the claim is questionable, if not actually false … why haven’t you?
Since it IS Wikipedia, why aren’t you/others posting all of the names and credentials of these alleged other skeptic scientists?”
Aye, there’s the rub. The Denialosphere is constantly referring to large numbers of skeptical scientists, with more jumping off of the bandwagon all of the time. The trouble, where to find them?
First let’s clarify our terms. All scientists are skeptics by virtue of their training and to name and number the ones who are rationally poking, prodding, and challenging climate science would number into the many tens of thousands.
When the Deniers refer to “skeptical scientists” they refer to those that deny all or part of the main findings of climate science, which broadly speaking are:
- Climate change is occurring
- It is driven by CO2
- It is human caused
- It is a critical threat to humanity
- It is imminent
While most scientists may debate the details I think it is safe to say that at the level given there is agreement that this is the view supported by the current understanding of the data. Those who deny all or some of these without any credible evidence to support their claims are not skeptics, but rather Deniers.
That being said estimates of the number of Denier scientists that give high numbers have invariably turned out to be frauds and hoaxes. These would include:
Which leaves us with:
- Wikipedia: List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming : a few dozen
- The Deniers (a “skeptic” site): a few dozen
- List at RealClimate Wiki : a few dozen scientists
- Heartland International Conference on Climate Change: 19 Scientists
- Non-Governmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC): 23 individuals from 15 countries, including a handful of scientists
Of course there is Lawrence Solomon‘s The Deniers: The World-Renowned Scientists Who Stood Up Against Global Warming Hysteria, Political Persecution, and Fraud (and those who are too fearful to do so), but here again it is mostly scientists skeptical about the aspects of the details, not the core facts.
So there are only a few dozen Denier scientists, most of whom have never done any actual work on climate, many of whom work for industry funded front groups and who push ideas that have been exposed as nonsense.
Clearly the Deniers don’t expand the wikipedia list because it’s hard to add that which does not exist.
Of course reality never stopped Jame’s Inhofe, and sensing a new wind blowing in Washington he has fired off a new screed,
undoubtedly timed to coincide with the Poznan talks.
So where does he get his 650? He takes his 400 (already shown to be false) and promises a further 250 “within 24 hrs.” Why the delay? why not release them together? I think I fair guess would be that the list is going to be a lot less impressive than the promise of the list, and that the 650 will turn out to be the same few dozen we already know about.
The press release does note that:
“The over 650 dissenting scientists are more than 12 times the number of UN scientists (52) who authored the media hyped IPCC 2007 Summary for Policymakers.”
First, note the cherry pick choice of picking only the authors of the Summary report, not the 2,500 involved in creating the full report.
Second, anyone want to bet that after all the frauds, deceased and misrepresented names etc are removed from the list it won’t even number 52?
According to Hall, the core of the mood seemed to be based on a misconception of the climate models and other aspects of the science which these geologists had not examined critically, and apparently did not understand fully (see also this comment by Rasmus Benestad.
I have no question that these people are fine scientists, but until they can demonstrate specific objections to aspects of the science that they are critical of, it is nothing more than uninformed grousing at a conference. That’s cheap and counts for nothing; I have participated in enough of it myself to know.
So, IF these scientists ever see fit to sign some document or make some sort of public statement to the effect that they are skeptical of one or more of the core understandings of climate science, THEN we can count them as skeptics. Until then this is just second hand heardsay about conference gossip, and probably not even the best gossip that was going around the conference either.
So Inhofe’s 650 amounts to … Inhofe’s NOT 400, ie the few dozen as listed above, plus maybe a few more names like David Evans.
In contrast we have (courtesy of Jim Prall) the lead authors from “working group 1 of the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (‘AR4’) from 2007, as well as a longer list including other active climate science researchers. The longer list is far from complete…” Keeping in mind that the basis of climate science spans many fields and disciplines, so we are talking about far more than climate scientists.
Of course there is the very real consensus on climate, whatever the Deniers like to claim. The infamous “consensus” is not a petition or opinion poll, but rather the qualified expert validation of the science as found in the peer reviewed scientific literature, both the climate journals in particular, and the scientific literature in general; an affirmation of the facts, not a statement of beliefs.
Which makes the point that numbers actually don’t matter a damn. If Inhofe had even one scientist with actual, robust, replicable science then everything else means nothing. That will be the subject of Verse 2: The Denier Science.
Oh Deniers “You have been counted and found wanting“
Note to my editors (that’s you, the readers): I have added the, The Oregon Petition 30,000, The Inhofe 400, The Heartland 500, and the Scientific Consensus pages. Any suggestions, additions etc would be much appreciated. Thanks.
We give our consent every moment that we do not resist.
Denier “Challenge” aka Deathwatch Update: Day 59 … still no evidence.