11–20 of 61 posts
He’s not denying climate change, he’s presenting scientific data that contradicts the narrative thst climate change results in increased losses due to weather events/disasters.
Wow. That guy attracted serious railroading and pushback by people who didn’t like that his data didn’t align with their talking points. He’s not denying climate change, he’s presenting scientific data that contradicts the narrative thst climate change results in increased losses due to weather events/disasters.
Doesn't make it right. But worth keeping in mind.
Dr. Pielke’s credentials are a BS in Mathematics and a Ph.D. in Political Science. Regardless of what you think of his points, he presents himself very much as a climate scientist in these slides, yet I don’t think that he really is one. There may be more to this than just some ties to Wikileaks, does any one else that studies the climate take him seriously?
IIRC Jeff Sessions, former GOP senator and not a scientist, quoted him extensively for congressional hearings for climate skeptics' point of view to oppose the US government panel on climate change. He complains here on twitter about extreme politics so that should make politics fair game in the discussion here - but isn't climate change denial only seriously brought up in the USA/UK by conservatives and fossil fuel…
Dr. Pielke’s credentials are a BS in Mathematics and a Ph.D. in Political Science. Regardless of what you think of his points, he presents himself very much as a climate scientist in these slides, yet I don’t think that he really is one. There may be more to this than just some ties to Wikileaks, does any one else that studies the climate take him seriously?
This is a problem in politics. He may be a completely honest actor and yet he will be weaponised against climate research altogether.
Dr. Pielke’s credentials are a BS in Mathematics and a Ph.D. in Political Science. Regardless of what you think of his points, he presents himself very much as a climate scientist in these slides, yet I don’t think that he really is one. There may be more to this than just some ties to Wikileaks, does any one else that studies the climate take him seriously?
Credentialism is one of the worst forms of intellectual laziness. Judge a person's ideas by their quality, not the piece of paper some institution saw fit to sign.
Wow. That guy attracted serious railroading and pushback by people who didn’t like that his data didn’t align with their talking points. He’s not denying climate change, he’s presenting scientific data that contradicts the narrative thst climate change results in increased losses due to weather events/disasters.
These people are (justifiably) concerned that any evidence contrary to the "sky is falling" story will promote denial, inaction, and eventual disaster. Doesn't make it right. But worth keeping in mind.
Wow. That guy attracted serious railroading and pushback by people who didn’t like that his data didn’t align with their talking points. He’s not denying climate change, he’s presenting scientific data that contradicts the narrative thst climate change results in increased losses due to weather events/disasters.
Wow. That guy attracted serious railroading and pushback by people who didn’t like that his data didn’t align with their talking points. He’s not denying climate change, he’s presenting scientific data that contradicts the narrative thst climate change results in increased losses due to weather events/disasters.
He's one scientist pushing against the consensus scientific view, and the people most keen to promote him to the general public are those who want any excuse to deny climate-change. He himself may be honest, but it essentially doesn't matter, such is politics.
Attempting to get people fired is just politics?
The prediction people do have a point. The older predictions we have about peak oil [0] suggest our problems are about to be solved by virtue of running out of oil to burn. Quite hard to sustain our hydrocarbon emissions if we run out of hydrocarbons by 2050. A lack of hydrocarbons could easily cause more problem then continuing to emit them.