Crackpots and false prophets

Here I am sitting in the middle of the debate between the false prophet Stephen Schneider who has put me in the team with the denialists, and the crackpots who don’t know how elementary physics works.

Sorry guys: science is not binary, I encourage you to read "Against Method" by Paul Feyerabend. Crackpots are not scientist and people who think that scary scenarios are science are also not scientists.

I’ve had it.

I’m taking a temporary break in blogging, I am going to do things that are more fun. 

But I do keep an eye on you.


Update: Stephen Schneider died from a heart attack on July 19.


I wrote on Watts up with that on June 25, 2010 at 4:31 pm:

Funny that
In Pralls list on http://www.eecg.utoronto.ca/~prall/climate/skeptic_authors_table.html
He cites my title as doctorandus (rank number 397) which is strictly correct but the international equivalent is MSc Geoph. Apparently somebody in the past did not read my online CV.

He also cites my areas of research as “Arrhenius was wrong” yup that is the title of one of my online pages, so why didn’t he choose:

Homogenisation of Uccle and De Bilt based on census data
A processing aliasing artefact in the early Quelccaya ice core record
Langley infrared observations (1890) revisited
The debatable European summer temperature since 1500 of Luterbacher et al.

http://members.casema.nl/errenwijlens/co2/index.html

His google scholar failed to find:
Dietze, Peter and Hans Erren, 2003. The Greenhouse effect should not be redefined, Energy and Environment Vol.14, No 6, pp. 921-922, December 2003

So the conclusion is that I spend at least equal time in bashing cranks as criticising alarmist fairy tales.

Furtermore I do think that scientific authors should publish their data, that’s science isn’t it? I thought everybody was convinced about that, apparently not. Schneiders scary scenarios are the tenet of ACC. But I stopped believing false prophets a long time ago. It’s a well known fact that the IPCC is severely biased.

We lukewarmers don’t share the IPCC alarmistic views, there are many shades of grey between black and white.

Dit bericht werd geplaatst in Hans Erren-2010-06 en getagged met , . Maak dit favoriet permalink.

4 reacties op Crackpots and false prophets

  1. Rob de Vos zegt:

    Hoi Hans,
    take a brake!
    Maar ik weet dat je gewoon weer terugkomt als blogger, want uiteindelijk kun je het niet laten om de vinger te leggen op foute zaken, denk ik.
    Rob de Vos
    http://www.klimaatgek.nl

  2. Baksteen zegt:

    Hans,
    Begrijp van de Climategate site dat je gaat stoppen maar wel actief blijft op die site. Bedankt voor de waardevolle en heldere stukken de afgelopen jaren.
    Blijven je "bijdragen" trouwens nog benaderbaar, want ik heb wat linkjes zoals naar dat stuk van red oost vlieland en Shishmaref echt humor, en natuurlijk naar de CO2 cyclus.

  3. Eelco zegt:

    Zonder context heb ik geen flauw benul wat dit bericht zou moeten zeggen, stellen, beweren, etc. etc. …

  4. Hans Erren zegt:

    context
    William R. L. Anderegg, James W. Prall, Jacob Harold, and Stephen H. Schneider, Expert credibility in climate change, PNAS 2010 : 1003187107v1-201003187.http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/06/04/1003187107.full.pdf+htmlhttp://climategate.nl/2010/06/23/zwarte-lijst-nieuw-dieptepunt-in-klimaatdebat/http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/06/24/global-warmings-stephen-schneider-the-light-that-failed/

Reacties zijn gesloten.