31 ms·

If I had a persistent gadfly like Stephen McIntyre who would use every opportunity to twist my data and words to his own political ends -- and the media accordi

If I had a persistent gadfly like Stephen McIntyre who would use every opportunity to twist my data and words to his own political ends -- and the media accordingly -- I might also behave in such an untoward manner regarding the release of data and internal communications. I find the theft of internal communications abhorrent, the politicalization of the issue uninteresting, and I seriously doubt there's any real science to be gleaned from this entire sophomoric debacle.

mru 17y ago
That's the point. It's not science.
- skorgu 17y ago
  It's not just science. There is science being done but the shouting^Wpolitics more than drowns it out.
efaith 17y ago
"If I had a persistent gadfly like Stephen McIntyre..." ...or Socrates... You do realize that "gadfly" is how Plato described his beloved teacher Socrates. "Gadfly" has a two thousand year old positive connotation. Is that the word you want to use? Though, granted, gadfly he is. And persistent, too, like Socrates. "...who would use every opportunity to twist my data and words to his own political ends" This, at any rate, is the view taken by those upon which McIntyre is a gadfly. It's completely understandable: the Athenians felt approximately the same way about Socrates, so strongly that in the end they executed Socrates. There are emails in which these guys express similar attitudes - at least one in which one of these guys wishes he could punch out the lights of one of the gadflies (not sure if it referred to McIntyre). But as third parties, onlookers, we need not adopt the attitude of the Athenians/climate scientists toward their respective gadflies.
arvinjoar 17y ago
Well, what this showed us is that some respected climate researchers are just making shit up. So it's not science, no.
- antonovka 17y ago
  Well, what this showed us is that some respected climate researchers are just making shit up. What proof?
jacoblyles 17y ago
How dare he ask for data series and attempt to reproduce analyses on his blog! How dare he uncover faults and discrepancies which are subsequently acknowledged in published research! If science and data are not interpreted by the right people, how can we be sure that the world is getting the right message? I can't believe people would defend deleting data rather than responding to a FOI request. Well, actually, I can. You just did. Which is sad.
- antonovka 17y ago
  He has a clear political agenda. He's not an independent scientist (he's not even a scientist). What possible good can come of interacting with someone who -- in addition to being grossly underqualified -- has a consistent history of applying a political agenda without fail to their "science"? This is the equivalent of Fox News factual reporting. Sometimes they get the facts right, but that doesn't mean they aren't twisting them.
  - jacoblyles 17y ago
    So who does have a right to look at the data, assuming we first disqualify anyone that antonovka thinks has the wrong political opinions? Isn't the scientific ideal all about openness and reproducible analyses? These emails make it look like the new ideal is supporting the "correct" political agenda.
    - antonovka 17y ago
      If Stephen McIntyre is all about openness and taking advantage of the abhorrent disclosure of internal communications, why doesn't he follow suite by posting all of his personal e-mail correspondence, unedited for external review? I'm sure there are more than a few gems. Isn't the scientific ideal all about openness and reproducible analyses? Yes, but when someone applies such a strong political ideology to twisting those analyses, how do you propose scientists respond? Climate change has been so politicized by unqualified ideologues that I can hardly blame scientists for wishing to defend themselves from the worst of them. If anything, these e-mails demonstrate that the data IS shared independently evaluated, but that the community has established political defenses to deal with political -- not scientific -- opponents. To do otherwise would be naive. Complex topics fall easily to those who would politicize them. These emails make it look like the new ideal is supporting the "correct" political agenda. No, they demonstrate a clear interest in defending against the attacks of a very specific set of ideologues. As someone who has had to defend engineering projects and people from angry corporate politics, I don't envy these climate change scientists in the least, and I certainly don't begrudge them their defensive positions.
nkurz 17y ago
Stephen McIntyre who would use every opportunity to twist my data and words to his own political ends I read McIntyre's site regularly, and find very little evidence of this. His 'political ends'? By design, there's very little political discussion on his site. But one of few times this veil was dropped was after Obama's election, where he allowed it to be known that he was rooting for Obama: http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=4265 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=4265 "I don't often talk about my political views - though I've sometimes taken pains to point out that I do not share the political views of many readers. In American terms, Canada would be a blue state along the lines of Massachusetts; Toronto would be a liberal city in a blue state; and I live downtown in one of the most liberal constituencies in the city. None of this is unrelated to my political views. I realize that many Climate Audit readers have opposite political views, but we try to get along." "I think that Obama's election is also very healthy for the U.S. in world terms. The U.S. stands for both good and bad in world terms. While U.S. economic dominance has faded, it is still the leading world nation and leadership from the U.S. is important. Obama is in a position to provide such leadership in a way that would have been impossible for McCain." You might argue successfully that his pedantic insistence on sources, data, and algorithms gets in the way of 'progress', but to say that this is because of his political views is a gross error. Like most of the 'skeptics' on his site, his goal is to insure that we are basing our decisions (whatever they may be) on sound science rather than on propaganda. Certainly he has some readers who do not share this goal, but I feel very certain that his personal goal is good science.
- antonovka 17y ago
  I read McIntyre's site regularly, and find very little evidence of this. His 'political ends'? McIntyre spent 30 years in the oil/gas exploration business ("mineral exploration"). You don't think there are some vested politics here? You might argue successfully that his pedantic insistence on sources, data, and algorithms gets in the way of 'progress', but to say that this is because of his political views is a gross error. There's plenty of room to distort the facts while reporting them. Fox News consistently claims to present "the facts" in a "fair and balanced" manner.
  - nkurz 17y ago

mru 17y ago

That's the point. It's not science.

skorgu 17y ago
It's not just science. There is science being done but the shouting^Wpolitics more than drowns it out.

efaith 17y ago

"If I had a persistent gadfly like Stephen McIntyre..." ...or Socrates... You do realize that "gadfly" is how Plato described his beloved teacher Socrates. "Gadfly" has a two thousand year old positive connotation. Is that the word you want to use? Though, granted, gadfly he is. And persistent, too, like Socrates. "...who would use every opportunity to twist my data and words to his own political ends" This, at any rate, is the view taken by those upon which McIntyre is a gadfly. It's completely understandable: the Athenians felt approximately the same way about Socrates, so strongly that in the end they executed Socrates. There are emails in which these guys express similar attitudes - at least one in which one of these guys wishes he could punch out the lights of one of the gadflies (not sure if it referred to McIntyre). But as third parties, onlookers, we need not adopt the attitude of the Athenians/climate scientists toward their respective gadflies.

arvinjoar 17y ago

Well, what this showed us is that some respected climate researchers are just making shit up. So it's not science, no.

antonovka 17y ago
Well, what this showed us is that some respected climate researchers are just making shit up. What proof?

jacoblyles 17y ago

How dare he ask for data series and attempt to reproduce analyses on his blog! How dare he uncover faults and discrepancies which are subsequently acknowledged in published research! If science and data are not interpreted by the right people, how can we be sure that the world is getting the right message? I can't believe people would defend deleting data rather than responding to a FOI request. Well, actually, I can. You just did. Which is sad.

antonovka 17y ago
He has a clear political agenda. He's not an independent scientist (he's not even a scientist). What possible good can come of interacting with someone who -- in addition to being grossly underqualified -- has a consistent history of applying a political agenda without fail to their "science"? This is the equivalent of Fox News factual reporting. Sometimes they get the facts right, but that doesn't mean they aren't twisting them.
- jacoblyles 17y ago
  So who does have a right to look at the data, assuming we first disqualify anyone that antonovka thinks has the wrong political opinions? Isn't the scientific ideal all about openness and reproducible analyses? These emails make it look like the new ideal is supporting the "correct" political agenda.
  - antonovka 17y ago
    If Stephen McIntyre is all about openness and taking advantage of the abhorrent disclosure of internal communications, why doesn't he follow suite by posting all of his personal e-mail correspondence, unedited for external review? I'm sure there are more than a few gems. Isn't the scientific ideal all about openness and reproducible analyses? Yes, but when someone applies such a strong political ideology to twisting those analyses, how do you propose scientists respond? Climate change has been so politicized by unqualified ideologues that I can hardly blame scientists for wishing to defend themselves from the worst of them. If anything, these e-mails demonstrate that the data IS shared independently evaluated, but that the community has established political defenses to deal with political -- not scientific -- opponents. To do otherwise would be naive. Complex topics fall easily to those who would politicize them. These emails make it look like the new ideal is supporting the "correct" political agenda. No, they demonstrate a clear interest in defending against the attacks of a very specific set of ideologues. As someone who has had to defend engineering projects and people from angry corporate politics, I don't envy these climate change scientists in the least, and I certainly don't begrudge them their defensive positions.

nkurz 17y ago

Stephen McIntyre who would use every opportunity to twist my data and words to his own political ends I read McIntyre's site regularly, and find very little evidence of this. His 'political ends'? By design, there's very little political discussion on his site. But one of few times this veil was dropped was after Obama's election, where he allowed it to be known that he was rooting for Obama: http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=4265 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=4265 "I don't often talk about my political views - though I've sometimes taken pains to point out that I do not share the political views of many readers. In American terms, Canada would be a blue state along the lines of Massachusetts; Toronto would be a liberal city in a blue state; and I live downtown in one of the most liberal constituencies in the city. None of this is unrelated to my political views. I realize that many Climate Audit readers have opposite political views, but we try to get along." "I think that Obama's election is also very healthy for the U.S. in world terms. The U.S. stands for both good and bad in world terms. While U.S. economic dominance has faded, it is still the leading world nation and leadership from the U.S. is important. Obama is in a position to provide such leadership in a way that would have been impossible for McCain." You might argue successfully that his pedantic insistence on sources, data, and algorithms gets in the way of 'progress', but to say that this is because of his political views is a gross error. Like most of the 'skeptics' on his site, his goal is to insure that we are basing our decisions (whatever they may be) on sound science rather than on propaganda. Certainly he has some readers who do not share this goal, but I feel very certain that his personal goal is good science.

antonovka 17y ago
I read McIntyre's site regularly, and find very little evidence of this. His 'political ends'? McIntyre spent 30 years in the oil/gas exploration business ("mineral exploration"). You don't think there are some vested politics here? You might argue successfully that his pedantic insistence on sources, data, and algorithms gets in the way of 'progress', but to say that this is because of his political views is a gross error. There's plenty of room to distort the facts while reporting them. Fox News consistently claims to present "the facts" in a "fair and balanced" manner.
- nkurz 17y ago