Re: [asa] AGW discussion

On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 3:11 PM, Cameron Wybrow <wybrowc@sympatico.ca>wrote:

> Judy Curry, an actual specialist in climate science, who presumably knows
> the issues as well or better than you and Rich Blinne do, has said as much,
> as I indicated in my previous post. As long as you can't say even that much,
> I find it hard to regard you as the voice of balance and moderation in the
> debate.
>
> Cameron.
>
> I agree that Judy Curry is a good source of showing why the people acted
the way they did. Continuing to falsely accuse of political motivations when
none exist will only decrease the transparency that's needed. The wagons
will only be circled tighter and letting your hair down and being brutally
honest in electronic communication will stop not only in climate science but
throughout the entire scientific enterprise. What I haven't seen yet is the
equivalent of her on the skeptic side that distinguishes the true skeptics
from the politically-motivated disinformation machine and would for example
distinguish a Tim Ball from a John Cristy. Here's what she said:

 As a result of the politicization of climate science, climate tribes
(consisting of a small number of climate researchers) were established *in
response to the politically motivated climate disinformation machine that
was associated with e.g. ExxonMobil, CEI, Inhofe/Morano etc*. The reaction
of the climate tribes to the political assault has been to circle the wagons
and point the guns outward in an attempt to *discredit misinformation from
politicized advocacy groups*. The motivation of scientists in the pro AGW
tribes appears to be *less about politics and more about professional ego
and scientific integrity* *as their research was under assault for
nonscientific reasons* (I’m sure there are individual exceptions, but this
is my overall perception). I became adopted into a “tribe” during Autumn
2005 after publication of the Webster et al. hurricane and global warming
paper. I and my colleagues were totally bewildered and overwhelmed by *the
assault we found ourselves under*, and associating with a tribe where others
were more experienced and savvy about how to deal with this was a relief and
very helpful at the time.

She then went on to how describe how this morphed into the circular firing
squad. She then was critical of here own community and their overreaction to
the outside slander. She can continue to try to gain as much transparency as
possible there and I wish here well. My concern is the misbehavior in my
community that isn't the climate science one. The environment of easy
suspicion of people who had nothing to do at all with these e-mails takes my
breath away. So, Christians in the sciences will not mention they
are Christians because Christians are closely associated with the
politically motivated disinformation machine. And scientists will not
mention they are such in a Christian context because so many of their
brothers and sisters have bought the message of the politically-motivated
disinformation machine. When I noted how this whole environment was
unnecessarily hurting ASA members this is what I had in mind. I was met with
derision and had the motivations of our members questioned in that they were
just advancing their careers. This is the damage wrought by misconstruing
motives. Sure, the climate scientists have their dirty laundry but this one
is ours.

Rich Blinne
Member ASA

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Nov 30 20:04:47 2009