Om Plimers kritik av vetenskapen

Har inte läst Ian Plimers bok Heaven and Earth, men såg just en kommentar på Niche Modeling. (Plimers bok ska jag nog läsa, och givetvis även Berns och Thauerskölds Chill Out - sanningen om klimatbubblan.)

What surprised me was the frequency and intensity of vitriol directed at “Global Warmers”. This is an old-school geologist who is absolutely appalled at the sloppy methodology and opportunism that climate alarmism embodies. He wants empirical proof, independent verification, but sees strong similarities with creation science, the subject of another of his books. For example:

"Climate science lacks discipline.

We live in a time when the methodology of science is suspended.

How many examples of failed predictions, discredited assumptions, evidence of incorrect data and evidence of malpractise are required before the idea of human-induced climate change loses credibility?

In many fields of science, this [Mann's hockey stick and subsequent inquiry] would be considered a fraud."

We are aligned in many ways, particularly the role of sloppy science in fostering AGW. Plimer recounts my experiences in field after field. Being a statistical modeler, my realignment began with horror at the methods used in the alarmist papers to support AGW. They were so obviously flawed, the results should never be taken seriously by anyone with any quantitative science training. And over time rebuttals have come out, proving my first impression right, but they are almost entirely ignored, by those who continue to report massive effects of climate change. As the measure of the quality of science in these fields is the magnitude of climate alarmism, science is dead in those areas.

Plimer’s diagnosis, as he treks through the debris, is “human stupidity”.

Man kan bara instämma i detta.

Ett annat viktigt exempel på fraud anser jag att livslängd för CO2 i atmosfären är. Tom Segalstad gjorde en inventering av vad forskning sagt om den och fann i över 30 studier perioder på cirka 5-10 år. IPCC anger cirka 200 år (Bern carbon cycle), men ger ingen förklaring till varför tidigare rön så markant avviker från detta.

Detta exempel finns förresten i Lawrence Solomons utmärkta bok The Deniers, som verkligen kan rekommenderas!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andra bloggar om: vetenskap, global warming, klimat, klimatet, klimatalarmism, böcker, boktips, skeptiker, geologi, koldioxid