The comments on previous posts are getting quite unweildy although I think there are some fruitful avenues to continue exploring. I encourage people to still post where your comment is most appropriate, but there are a number of interesting developments on related issues that I want to point out and open for discussion if you are so inclined.
(Mr. Spock, using 1,102 spools of thread by Devora Sperber)
Around the Denialosphere for your delectation:
Gavingate — it’s going strong — I think it reveals the bankruptcy of Ravetz and crew’s approach to “reconciliation” in the climate sciences, at least as it applies to the Lisbon conference. I couldn’t believe that the organizers would parade his private email around for discussion. Highly unprofessional. But also, DC’s Post Normal Meltdown in Lisbon timeline is very illuminating, especially the comments by Ravetz over at WUWT on climate science and the CRU Hack and controversy.
Here’s a Ravetz tidbit from the DC article — go over and read more:
But it was totally implausible to me that the leading UK scientists were either gullible or complicit in a serious fraud at the core of the enterprise. Even when I heard about M&M and the hockey stick scandal, I didn’t connect that dot with the others. There’s a confession for you! Jerry Ravetz, arch-critical-scientist, suckered by the A(C)GW con for years on end. That really shows the power of plausibility. Even now I’m not all the way with my critics; the distinction between incompetence and blundering self-protection on the one hand (plus agenda-driven hype) and self-conscious scientific conspiracy on the other, may still be dividing us.
Fred Pearce’s article has been updated:
Avowed non-sceptics included Hans von Storch, a lead author for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and James Risbey of CSIRO. But the leaders of mainstream climate science turned down the gig, including NASA’s Gavin Schmidt.
who said the science was settled so there was nothing to discuss. [Gavin Schmidt has asked us to clarify his reasons for not attending: see the bottom of this post.]
The Sky Dragon is still being discussed over at Climate etc. — it seems proof that we should keep some “extended peers” with their “extended data” out of the policy process!
WUWT has been nominated for Best Science Weblog of the Year and Judith Curry for Climate Scientist of the Year — I think this speaks to
the end of the world as we know it nomination processes and how awards are given rather than any objective competence or merit, but that’s just MNSHO…
And of course, since this is an open thread, please discuss whatever your little heart desires relating to climate science, climate change, global warming and the climate wars — have at it!