Bloomberg Businessweek threw a few litres of petrol on the blazing climate-change debate with this week's cover story, less-than-subtly entitled: "It's Global Warming, Stupid."And just in case Business Week still has any readers (did it every have any readers?), here's the subtle and nuanced cover:
"Yes, yes, it's unsophisticated to blame any given storm on climate change," the article begins, quite correctly. "Men and women in white lab coats tell us – and they're right – that many factors contribute to each severe weather episode."
The next line, however, is more acusatory. "Climate deniers exploit scientific complexity to avoid any discussion at all," it reads.
Oh, hum. Oh, and bias? How's this:
While Bloomberg Businessweek's article attempted to remain even-handed in its arguments concerning the need to take climate change seriously, its editor, Josh Tyrangiel, attempted no such subtlety in his opinion of global warming skeptics. "Our cover story this week may generate controversy," he tweeted, "but only among the stupid."Stupid Deniers. Pig headed. No doubt ignorant of the science, like Dr. Judith Curry, chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at Georgia Tech. She has a new article that has been accepted for publication, one that's worth your read - No Consensus On Consensus:
The IPCC consensus findings on attribution have been echoed in position statements made by many scientific organizations. The IPCC consensus is portrayed as nearly total among scientists with expertise and prominence in the field of climate science. The idea of a scientific consensus surrounding climate change attribution has been questioned by a number of people, including scientists and politicians. Much effort has been undertaken by those that support the IPCC consensus to discredit skeptical voices, essentially dismissing them as cranks or at best rebels, or even politically motivated ‘deniers’.So get ready for the know-nothing Press to hyperventillate about this time it's really happening!!!eleventy!! Business Week is just one of many that you'll see over the next months in an orchestrated campaign by the IPCC to keep relevant. When people sneer at you for being a skeptic, ask them what they think of Dr. Curry's article - No Consensus On Consensus. And as a follow up, ask them who they think knows more about the science, the (biased) Press, or the chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at Georgia Tech.
Students of science are taught to reject ad populam or ‘bandwagon’ appeals, a sentiment is articulated by the motto of the UK Royal Society: ‘nullius in verba’, which is roughly translated as ‘take nobody’s word for it’. How then, and why, have climate scientists come to a scientific consensus about a very complex scientific problem that the consensus-supporting scientists themselves acknowledge has substantial and fundamental uncertainties?
And show them this - Global Warming, the Musical.
I mean, it's Peer-Reviewed and everything! Hey Bustah!
Oh, and all the "teh Stormz are gettinz moar destructive" that's going to flood the airwaves to your annoyance, oh no they're not. I know that math is hard, but they really should teach at least a little in J-School.