It turns out that the right-wing media was right: Muller was never an anthropogenic global warming denier. But they still despise him.
For most people who believe that scientists are best able to speak on scientific matters, the global warming debate was pretty much over 20 years ago. Except for a few skeptics, anthropogenic global warming (AGW) was and is accepted as fact in the scientific community. It's interesting to note that in the political world as well, AGW was a bipartisan issue; even John McCain vowed to fight global warming in his 2008 campaign.…
Article comments
26 - pablo
Glenn 22
First of all you didnt ask me a question, which I may or may not have chosen to reply to. You made a statement. I chose not to engage you on that stament. Pardon me!
ElBicho
I chose to to respond to your query as your a royal pain in the ass. So why should I? Nuff said.
Igor 24
Did I say something about flourishing rightist sites? Nope, and for the record I cant stand the right. You like Glenn live in your left/right delusion, where all political debates boil down to that. It is a most immature and superficial approach to the politics of the day.
Your reference to the great dictator I will respond to however. I thought g w bush was a monster, as well as his dad, and his grand dad Prescott who collaborated with the Nazis in WW2 with the Union Banking Corporation, with his step dad Herbert Walker. I just want to preface my statements to that you have no illusion how repugnant I find the right, and neo cons in particular.
As to Obama being a dictator, anyone who can create federal law by fiat, is a dictator. Executive orders were meant to administer Federal Agencies, not to create binding law for American citizens.
Furthermore when you have a president who now named american citizens as enemies of the state to be killed on site, I call that dictatorial, as well as inhuman, and unconstitutional.
All you have to do is look at the stories on here for the last year or so and look at how few comments there are, and those that do comment almost invariable are the usual suspect, Dread, Glenn, Igor, etc etc. There is little to no new blood. And in my humble opinion it is a combination of the lame stories that are written by the usual suspects, as well as the usual commenters that amost invariably lack any depth whatsoever.
I could give a rats ass if any of you like me or dont like me, either as a human being or a writer. I do know lame when I see it however, and this site is LAME.
27 - pablo
By the way, I do internet marketing for a living, and that is my bread and butter, and my day job. There is only one real criteria when it comes to making money online, which I have no doubt that that is what the owner of blogcritics is trying to accomplish due to the plethora of advertisements on this site. It is called TRAFFIC. I would bet my bottom dollar, that the political section of this site loses money, because there is very little traffic, and the proof of that is in the lack of new and many commenters, as well as the fact that several years ago they changed the formatting so that only 25 posts would show up on a page. They did this so that the user would have to open the next page of comments, thus creating more traffic. A feeble attempt at best.
28 - Igor
All scientists take a position of skepticism toward any theory.
I, like my friend Jim, a professional physicist for 40 years, am skeptical of the Special Theory Of Relativity.
Skepticism is normal. It is required in Science for the peer review system to work. But at the same time, a theory one is skeptical of may still be used for valid calculations, if it is the best working hypothesis around. Thus, Jim, whose entire career is in optics, occasionally uses GTR in his work simply because it produces the best result.
I know that this is hard for non-scientists to understand, because so many such innocents imagine a sharp line between proof and un-proof.
29 - pablo
Skepticism may be the norm in a strictly neutral environment for scientists, however when vast grants become available to them if they align themselves with a particular scientific viewpoint, it ceases to be scientific and moves in the the economic realm.
30 - Dr Dreadful
when vast grants become available to them if they align themselves with a particular scientific viewpoint
And your evidence that this has been a condition of any grant in the field of climate research is...?
31 - pablo
My evidence is of the most elementary basis Dread, human nature and greed. It doesn't take a rocket scientist, or a climatologist to figure that out. I thought you had more brains that that.
32 - Dr Dreadful
That's not evidence, Pablo, just your own prejudice.
33 - pablo
Now that is funny, common sense and intelligence is now deemed to be prejudice by the mighty Dr. Dread! That made my day, thank you. :)
34 - pablo
I refer you back to comment 19 Dread. Hahaha
35 - pablo
I forgot however that scientists due to their rigorous disciplines are immune from the temptations for us mortals. Scientists greedy, unethical, abandoning principle for dough? Preposterous and prejudicial. :)
If nothing else Dread you are indeed amusing for me today.
36 - Dr Dreadful
I asked a simple factual question, Pablo.
Can't say I'm surprised that you couldn't answer.
Can you imagine what would happen if you were a prosecuting attorney in a courtroom, and when asked for your evidence that Mr X had robbed the convenience store the only thing you had to offer was "human nature and greed"?
37 - pablo
We are not in a courtroom Dread, and it doesnt take a rocket scientist to understand how economics, ie huge grants to support a given scientific debate, would sway many professionals from acting professional. Just look at the banking sector. :)
The fact of the matter is billions of dollars have been given to scientists from advocates of man made global warming due to carbon dioxide. I also am not saying that the reverse is not true, ie that alot of money have been given to certain climatologists to espouse the opposite position. I do find it highly ironic as I have said before that the two biggest proponents of man made global warming are both oil men. That's a fact.
Yet I have never heard one peep out of Al Gore about nitrgen oxides, carbon monoxide, or other forms of toxic substances being spewed out into the atmosphere due to the product that he sold, OIL.
I most certainly am not going to get into a debate about the science of climate, as I am a layman, but I most certainly will debate the political side of it.
In any event they are losing the public debate, the warmer mongers I mean. You can go onto almost any website about it, particularly political ones, and the comments are usually about 90% against the warming mongers.
Money and greed have always got in the way of neutrality, in all of the endeavors of man.
I must say again however Dread, your naivete in this matter is amazing.
38 - Zingzing
With such a hefty majority in the books, one would think the good money would be on the other side, and should have been so for the last decade or more. It's amazing how conspiracy theories based on human nature don't follow human nature any further than they want to. Maybe it's because human nature dictates that once you form an opinion, it's hard to stop believing it, even as we break records for highest temperatures everywhere around the world for the third time in as many years and the poles are breaking up and the idea that pumping tons of shit into the air does not decrease in fucking stupidity or noticeable changes and we get ridiculously extreme weather... Meh, it must be all some joke scientists are playing on us for grant funds, yeah.
Pablo, the only reason people deny global warming is because they want the global conspiracy to continue. You are their tool. You know the conspiracy I speak of. Don't act like you don't. You know you're working for big industry and the powerful, but do you know you're working for? It sorta rhymes with cock, which is what you've allowed squarely up your back end while you weren't watching...
39 - Dr Dreadful
We are not in a courtroom Dread
Add to the lengthy list of things that Pablo does not understand: What an analogy is.
40 - pablo
Thanks gents, I will leave you to your usual mindless drivel. Have fun boys.
41 - Christopher Rose
Pablo, re your #27, just for the sake of accuracy, unless you have changed tack, you don't actually do internet marketing for a living, you do affiliate marketing. In other words you sell other people's products for a sales commission.
Again for the sake of accuracy, it isn't traffic that matters, it is relevant traffic.
Despite numerous attempts to find out, I've no more idea what the current owners' business plan for this site is than I did the previous owners. Perhaps they don't have one, which would be odd.
Nobody is talking to me about it, even though I have a lot of creative and commercial input I'd like to see implemented that would make the place more interesting and more profitable.
As far as I know changing the number of comments displayed on the page happened years ago under the previous regime. That doesn't actually change the traffic levels of course, it changes the number of page views.
Sure there are adverts on each page but I doubt most commenters even notice them and if anyone found them particularly annoying they could easily use an ad blocker plugin to get rid of them completely.
With regard to the site content, it is easy to be critical of course, but not that much more difficult to actually become engaged and write something yourself, so why don't you put up for a change? Of course, that does require a coherent point and some basic writing skills but surely such a skilled and knowledgeable person as yourself can manage that?
As to your political point, which boils down to the succinct point that there isn't much difference between the left and right in contemporary politics, I think, bar the party political hacks and the victims of dogma, most people would agree with that, which is probably why democratic engagement levels are so low.
Whilst agreeing with your general position with regard to politics, I don't agree with your views towards science, which largely seem to consist of a sneering distrust.
Whilst a strong bias against the status quo is often a good thing, it doesn't really make sense to try to dismiss all scientists in the way you do.
With regard to the topic of climate change, even if we disregard all the scientific evidence, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to notice that weather patterns are changing.
If this is almost entirely due to natural changes in the planet's climate, it doesn't make sense to reinforce that trend by the heat given out by human activity and regard that as inconsequential, so doing what we can to reduce that heating seems prudent at least.
If the human contribution to climate change is greater, then all the more reason to do what we can to reduce it before conditions become too dangerous and pose a genuine threat to the species.
As you are a salesman by trade, Pablo, perhaps you are assuming that all people have that same basic motivation, but it may well be the case that you have become excessively cynical about people. You certainly come across as someone with an excessive amount of the once bitten twice shy syndrome at the very least. However, there is more to life and human nature than greed...
As a pimp for the big companies through your affiliate marketing work, is it possible that this excessive loathing you display has a source much closer to home than you seem willing to contemplate? Enquiring minds want to know!
42 - Dr Dreadful
IIRC Pablo has written at least one piece for BC, but swore he'd never do so again after one or two of his submissions ran up against the previous regime's brief list of taboo topics, namely:
1. No cat blogging;
2. No 9/11 conspiracy articles.
No prizes for guessing which one Pablo fell foul of.
43 - Dr Dreadful
I myself came a cropper to this policy, after I penned an article that demonstrated conclusively that the 9/11 attacks were planned and executed in their entirety by a shadowy band of radical jihadist cats.
44 - Igor
26-Pablo: you're right: Obama has assumed dictatorial privileges, like assassination, etc. It was wrong when others did it and it's wrong now. The result , I suppose, of Americans obsession with vigilante justice. We granted the president implicit assassination powers when we didn't demonstrate in the streets against it's use when it was done before; now it is a permanent fixture of American rule. Too bad.
We used to believe that the Republicans stood for moderation and restraint and observance of some kinds of righteous behavior (and we thought the democrats to be scoundrels) but the reps have demonstrated that all propriety must be abandoned for political power. Now THEIR scoundrelry makes the dems look insipid.
Everything is permitted. Ethics are only useful as campaign slogans. Even obeying the law is considered naive.
45 - El Bicho
Pablo, most internet blowhards who get called out on their nonsense find me to be a royal pain. Glad to see you keep the streak alive. Guess that explains why you didn't name those sites of great discourse in your original comment.
46 - Dr Dreadful
And also why he didn't name any of the climate research grants that were conditional on the recipient espousing the desired belief.
47 - pablo
Chris,
One aspect of my online income derives from affiliate marketing. I also council for money various individuals about online income, as well as promoting numerous offline (brick and mortar) businesses.
Yes I do believe that money particularly large amounts of it, oftentimes sways professionals from being professional, and selling out.
I was in Berkeley California the night Obama was elected. I will never forget it. The people went crazy, thinking that their savior had arrived. I knew then, just as I know now that he was a complete sellout. He does not have one ounce of integrity and serves his masters dutifully.
Dread, If I wrote a piece for blogcritics about how 19 hijackers from Saudi Arabia conspired with Osama Bin Laden to take down the twin towers, it would be published in a heartbeat. I only say this to show you your incorrect use of the English language. 9-11 was a conspiracy, of that there can be no doubt. I just don't happen to subscribe to the governments theory, that is published as fact.
El Bitch, the day that you act civilly to me is the day that I will show you any respect. I know that day will never come. Your name however is perfect.
48 - Christopher Rose
Hey Pablo, it's good you are doing more than just affiliate marketing. As I'm sure you know, having multiple income streams gives people more protection against life's volatility and more freedom and control over their lives.
It is obviously true that anybody is potentially vulnerable to corruption, but it doesn't follow that an entire cadre of people in a particular discipline dispersed in multiple countries and institutions are all collectively being corrupted to produce false data and that that conspiracy is being completely hidden from view.
As all the data is open to public view and anyone anywhere in the world can see climate change for themselves, I personally struggle to believe in such conspiracy theories.
On the subject of the climate, these are the main possibilities.
1. Not happening at all. The available data seems to contradict this view and the risks of doing nothing are potentially mass extinctions.
2. There is climate change happening and it is entirely caused by human activity. If this is the case then due to the latency in the system we are probably going to see (amongst other things) crop failures and massive rises in sea levels and consequentially everything from massive population movements and war on a scale we can only imagine and fear.
3. Climate change is a natural part of the planetary atmosphere and we are currently in a warming phase. If this is true, and I tend to think it is, then any additional heat output is going to reinforce the trend and amplify its effects. If so, then it seems to make sense to do what we can to reduce our contribution to that trend. The new ideas and technologies that effort creates will also have other spin-off benefits, many unexpected, just as any major push in any area of human activity always does.
I know you believe there are large scale hidden powers and secret conspiracies controlling the world. It is possible of course but as even you know about them and they aren't attacking you, is it actually true? Maybe, but if so they are doing a really shit job of implementing their grand schemes.
I think you are mischaracterising Obama and people's reaction to his election. It was a significant if ultimately minor moment in US culture and politics and there is much that is wrong with the political process in the USA and many other countries. However to depict people's excitement about that moment as you do just seems cynical.
As to writing for the site, which I would encourage you or anyone else for that matter to do, consider this: it is a fact that "19 hijackers from Saudi Arabia conspired with Osama Bin Laden to take down the twin towers"; your point about the nature of the conspiracy is lacking in evidence and so comes down to a matter of opinion/speculation and the site doesn't publish unsupported theories. Come up with some actual new evidence and write a coherent, articulate article and perhaps it would be published. Or write about something else - expat life, local events, help people to earn multiple streams of income, there are many possibilities for someone in your situation to tell us about...
El Bicho is amusingly named, doubly so if you speak Spanish, and seems to delight in squabbling with everyone outside of his little clique. He specialises in drive by commenting and rarely engages in actual dialogue, but then he is far from alone in that...
49 - Igor
Researchers are not very sensitive to policy results, but rather to the "publish or perish" syndrome. A regular measure of the quality of a grant is how many good papers result from it. "Good" here often means citation counts in other papers.
Researchers, their advisors and grant committees are often lured toward subjects that are popular, but they are not attracted by specific results.
Thus, String Theory attracts a lot of grant applications because it's in the news and on TV. Perhaps, if an army of physicists and mathematicians attack String Theory they will produce some really good results, but surely they will attract a lot of grants in the next wave of applications .
I, of course, like so many others, am a String Theory skeptic.
50 - Dr Dreadful
Pablo, I'm well aware that 9/11 according to the commonly accepted narrative was a conspiracy. My use of the term "conspiracy theory" refers to the definition, also commonly accepted, of a vast, coordinated and highly organized plot to deceive the public as to the true nature of the attacks.
For the record, I didn't agree with the prohibition on publishing 9/11 "conspiracy" articles, nor with that on cat blogging, for that matter. Ethically I don't think any subject should be off-limits, although like every publication, online or off, we have clearly defined parameters for what we're about (we don't publish fiction or poetry, for example). Editorially I can see where there might sometimes be a case for not publishing essentially the same article over and over again (hi Warren!), or for putting a lid on a topic if the ensuing debate in comments had a tendency to descend into pointless acrimony.
51 - Dr Dreadful
I, of course, like so many others, am a String Theory skeptic.
It's said that there are only perhaps two or three people in the entire world who truly understand string theory, so that shouldn't be surprising. Like most of what happens in the quantum universe, it is rather mindblowing for we lumbering macro entities who don't operate on that level on a day to day basis.
It kinda sorta maybe possibly theoretically starts to make a teeny tiny bit more sense if you stop thinking of space in terms of, well, space.
52 - Dr Dreadful
3. Climate change is a natural part of the planetary atmosphere and we are currently in a warming phase. If this is true, and I tend to think it is
While it's true that the climate does change without human intervention, it doesn't change spontaneously, and this is a point that AGW "sceptics" usually overlook.
Natural causes of climate change are numerous and may include such factors as volcanic activity, solar activity, tectonic movement, large-scale releases of greenhouse gases like water vapour and methane, changes in the Earth's axial tilt, and the whereabouts of the Solar System in its orbit around the galactic centre.
However, none of these appears to be a significant contributor to the current warming episode. Volcanism has not been at an atypically high level in recent centuries, solar activity is low, the continents are changing positions orders of magnitude more slowly than the climate is warming, etc. The only phenomenon that is consistent with and accounts for what we are seeing now is the large-scale release of fossil CO2 from industrial era mineral combustion.
53 - Igor
@51-DrD: I'm not impressed when you claim that only a few people could comprehend string theory. Back in the 50s J.Presper Ekhert claimed that binary arithmetic was so difficult that only a half-dozen people would be able to program computers. So IBM and UNIVAC set about to design and build computers that would do decimal arithmetic instead. The result was the IBM 560 bi-quinary machine and the UNIVAC XS-3 machine. At great expense. All unnecessary: millions of ordinary humans understand binary arithmetic and use it daily.
I know it sounds romantic and mysterious to suppose such things, but that makes it pretty useless to science, which seeks to explain, not entertain.
54 - Dr Dreadful
Not my claim, Igor. I saw it made by an eminent quantum physicist (can't remember who, but it might have been Hawking), who didn't count himself among that number.
Ekhert was an idiot to make that prediction, since a choice between two states is one of the simplest concepts humans know.
String theory is not by any stretch of the imagination a simple concept, and ascends into esoteric areas of mathematics that are not at all intuitive, so citing an early computer pioneer's spectacularly unimaginative assessment of binary arithmetic is a poor comparison.
55 - Igor
Mitch Jeserich had an excellent interview with Muller today on KPFA: Muller.
56 - Glenn Contrarian
Igor -
Like you, I'm a string theory skeptic. It seems to me that every time the fabric of spacetime throws the string theorists a loop, they add something else to the theory. Personally, I like MOND - Modified Newtonian Dynamics - better, but that doesn't feel quite right, either.
But I'm certainly neither educated nor well-read enough to speak with any authority on the subject, so I'll wait and watch.
57 - Dr Dreadful
MOND might work pretty well as far as predicting the movements of very large and distant bodies is concerned, but saying you "prefer" it to string theory is a bit nonsensical, since it doesn't describe the same class of phenomena. It's a bit like saying you're skeptical of weathering but like plate tectonics.
58 - Glenn Contrarian
Which just to goes I don't know what the heck I'm talking about, doesn't it? Now if you'll excuse me, I've got to get back to my Monty Python marathon.
Every once in a while I take an extra dose of stupid pills - I was once very conservative, you know....