Honest climate scientist found

Posted on by Paul MatthewsIn Uncategorized1 Minute Read

A few weeks ago, Al Gore made the untrue claim that “climate-related extreme weather events have grown far more numerous and far more destructive” in the time between his original film and the sequel. This claim was widely reported, by the BBC, the Guardian, News24, and in Gore’s Conversation with Mark Maslin.

Since then, I’ve been asking for a climate scientist to have the integrity to call out Gore for his falsehood.

I didn’t see any climate scientists doing this, although many of them were piling onto Nigel Lawson (who rightly called Gore’s statement nonsense) for mistakenly saying that temperatures had slightly fallen in the last few years.  Worse still, one climate scientist from the UK Met Office actually defended Gore on Radio 4, giving a deceptive and misleading answer to a question from John Humphrys.

Well, I’m pleased to be able to say that I have found that there is at least one honest climate scientist on the planet. He wrote an e-book in response to Gore’s film remarkably quickly, but I have only just become aware of it.

Better still, Roy Spencer’s An Inconvenient Deception: How Al Gore Distorts Climate Science and Energy Policy is currently the #1 bestseller in Amazon’s Environmental Science category.  In fact at the moment it’s even #1 in the whole of Science and Math:

There’s also a brief video interview with Spencer (“Al Gore’s favourite technique is to show all kinds of things that happen in nature naturally, and then blame them on mankind”).

 

Tags: , ,

18 Comments

  1. But, but, but Spencer is a kkkkkristian and paid by big errr oil, errr tobacco, errrr Trump to denialize the science…..

    Liked by 1 person

  2. You tricked me with that title.
    OK, I know Roy Spencer is both honest and a climate scientist. Everyone knows that. But I thought you meant an alarmist climate scientist being honest. One of the alleged 97%ers. You really had me going there for a few moments. Trickbait.

    Liked by 4 people

  6. Beth,

    If I know my Classical Civ—and I don’t—that’s the unmistakable visage of Emperor Robert E Pluribus I (best known from the BBC series ‘I, Unum’), who went to his deification-bed without ever renouncing the institution of slavery.

    It’s incredible that such public monuments still haven’t been torn down to protect them from reappropriation by racists. But then, the Italians have always been a couple of steps behind cultural superpowers like America, haven’t they?

    Liked by 1 person

  7. Paul,

    I wonder how Tamsin Edwards would fare in your ethics challenge.

    She’s a female climate scientist, of course, so to make the experiment valid you’d probably need to tone down the somewhat confrontational bait text. Apparently, women don’t “do” the language of epic struggle between good and evil. (Apologies in advance to those who defy the statistics—I admit it’s a bit of a generalization.)*

    Maybe try:

    “Will someone please speak out to say that inaccurate statements like Gore’s are really not helpful?”
    _________________
    *I got this factoid from the fascinating backstory of the 1977 Star Wars film, which Lucas was under a lot of pressure to rename after focus-grouping showed that the distaff half of the population wouldn’t watch anything with “War” in the title.

    Like

  9. Things go missing… Medieval Warming Period, Hot Spot, Missing Ocean Heat,
    Temperature Data, honest cli-scientists, say, Brad, what’s with a few graven images?

    Liked by 4 people

  10. Graven images Bethll – you mean like Mike’s hockey stick? Or the photo-shopped polar bear on a photo-shopped bergy-bit?

    Liked by 1 person

  11. I have noted this morning that once again at Real Climate and ATTP, there is discussion about extreme events and their attribution to climate change. Note how this always happens when there are high profile extreme events. It looks completely superficial to me. We don’t really know what the main effects on weather patterns will be of warming given how poor GCM’s are at predicting regional climate. So climatists, like moths to a flame, wave their hands and cite the Clausius Clapeyron relationship. They ignore that in fact convection strength is dependent not on absolute levels of temperature but on temperature gradients. Does anyone here know of any credible work analyzing this issue at a detailed weather level?

    Liked by 1 person

  12. Good point. It is interesting how the climate crisis kooks claim on the one hand that CO2 is now controlling the climate but on the other hand only make this claim when thecweather is bad.

    Liked by 1 person

  13. ‘Bethll,’ Alan? Lol.
    Images? Yikes!

    Arctic ice melted
    and polar bears starving,
    New York under water,
    an image alarming,
    hockey stick graphics
    with sudden upswings,
    these are a few
    of their iconic things.

    tra la.

    Liked by 2 people

  14. David, yes, it is absolutely gobsmacking that so many climate ‘scientists’ seem to think that weather is driven by temperature, when of course anyone who has taken any elementary meteorology course (or even anyone who hasn’t but owns a brain) knows that weather is driven by temperature differences.

    Like

  16. ATTP,
    When will you be as open to skeptics posting and permit us to do at your site what yoyvdo here: post freely?
    As to the article you posted, thanks for confirming that weather is formed by differences in temps and pressure.

    Liked by 1 person

  17. For ATTP’s benefit, I did a quick read of the relevant section of Holland and Imanuel’s writeup and I would characterize it as thermodynamic handwaving, so it doesn’t really address my question. I noted that a key ingredient of calculating the thermodynamic efficiency of a storm is the vertical temperature gradient. Shouldn’t that get smaller with warming? If lapse rate theory is correct, it should decrease. But I am not convinced lapse rate theory is correct. In any case, the methods only give upper bounds on intensity, not average intensity, frequency of storms, etc. It seems to me like an area where there is rather profound ignorance.

    Like

  18. Hunter, I think the answer to your question is that a younger and less mature person like ATTP has less experience dealing with sharp intellectual disagreements and thus often gets an emotional stress reaction rather than a clear thinking reaction. That also comports with his own reflections on his “engagement.” Running an echo chamber is vastly less stressful. That’s understandable but not really helpful for the rest of us. That’s why I tend to pay more attention to very senior people, they are more likely to have the maturity to think clearly.

    Like

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.