As is typical with my job, the winter and spring tend to be the busy times and this year is no exception. However I found this article so interesting that I had to share. The article, What we have and haven’t learned from ‘Climategate’, is one of the best looks at the aftermath of the stolen e-mails that I have seen. It is worth a read just for the following paragraph:
Here’s the basic question: At this point, given their respective accomplishments and standards, wouldn’t it make sense to give scientists the strong benefit of the doubt when they are attacked by ideologues with a history of dishonesty and error? Shouldn’t the threshold for what counts as a “scandal” have been nudged a bit higher?
In AGW, it is striking since there is next to no attack on the basic physical principles that govern the climate. Instead most arguments fall into one of the following categories:
- Statistical mathurbation
- Pushing doubt as a product, or
- Cherry picking .
However, the article goes beyond CRU-Hack and puts it in the context of the whole doubt industry.
The lesson we’ve learned from climategate is simple. It’s the same lesson taught by death panels, socialist government takeover, Sharia law, and Obama’s birth certificate. To understand it we must turn to agnotology, the study of culturally induced ignorance or doubt.
Read the rest. Agnotology. All my years in the trenches of the climate wars and I never came across the word agnotology before. Make sure you read the links in the article as well.