Lysenkoism is Alive and Well

mad scientist

Patrick Michaels has an article in Forbes:

Will The Overselling Of Global Warming Lead To A New Scientific Dark Age?

Will the overselling of climate change lead to a new scientific dark age? That’s the question being posed in the latest issue of an Australian literary journal, Quadrant, by Garth Paltridge, one of the world’s most respected atmospheric scientists.


Paltridge lays out the well-known uncertainties in climate forecasting. These include our inability to properly simulate clouds that are anything like what we see in the real world, the embarrassing lack of average surface warming now in its 17th year, and the fumbling (and contradictory) attempts to explain it away.


Climate scientists have been profoundly defensive about the known problems. Paltridge elegantly explains that this has to be the case, and describes the likely horrific consequences when the day of reckoning finally arrives.

That day is coming closer, because, as Paltridge notes, people are catching on:

“…the average man in the street, a sensible chap who by now can smell the signs of an oversold environmental campaign from miles away, is beginning to suspect that it is politics rather than science which is driving the issue.”

The scientific establishment has painted itself into a corner over global warming. Paltridge’s explanations for this are depressingly familiar to those who read these columns.

Science changed dramatically in the 1970s, when the reward structure in the profession began to revolve around the acquisition of massive amounts of taxpayer funding that was external to the normal budgets of the universities and federal laboratories. In climate science, this meant portraying the issue in dire terms, often in alliance with environmental advocacy organizations. Predictably, scientists (and their institutions) became addicted to the wealth, fame, and travel in the front of the airplane:

“A new and rewarding research lifestyle emerged which involved the giving of advice to all types and levels of government, the broadcasting of unchallengeable opinion to the general public, and easy justification for attendance at international conferences—this last in some luxury by normal scientific experience, and at a frequency previously unheard of.”

Every incentive reinforced this behavior, as the self-selected community of climate boffins now began to speak for both science and in the service of drastic regulatory policies. In the measured tones of the remarkably lucid and precise writer that he is, Paltridge explains how the corner got painted:

“The trap was fully sprung when many of the world’s major national academies of science (such as the Royal Society in the UK, the National Academy of Sciences in the USA and the Australian Academy of Science) persuaded themselves to issue reports giving support to the conclusions of the IPCC [the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change]. The reports were touted as national assessments that were supposedly independent of the IPCC and of each other, but of necessity were compiled with the assistance of, and in some cases at the behest of, many of the scientists involved in the IPCC international machinations. In effect, the academies, which are the most prestigious of the institutions of science, formally nailed their colours to the mast of the politically correct.

Since that time three or four years ago, there has been no comfortable way for the scientific community to raise the spectre of serious uncertainty about the forecasts of climatic disaster.”

Every year that elapses without a significant warming trend more and more erodes the credibility of not just climate science, but science in general:

“In the light of all this, we have at least to consider the possibility that the scientific establishment behind the global warming issue has been drawn into the trap of seriously overstating the climate problem—or, what is much the same thing, of seriously understating the uncertainties associated with the climate problem—in its effort to promote the cause. It is a particularly nasty trap in the context of science, because it risks destroying, perhaps for centuries to come, the unique and hard-won reputation for honesty which is the basis of society’s respect for scientific endeavour.” [emphasis added]

This is the scariest part, and it is apparent that this unravelling has already begun. Serious scholars of science, like University of Montreal’s Daniele Fanelli, and Stanford’s John Iaonnadis are publishing quantitative analyses of the proliferation of scientific errors that is malignantly invading the profession because of, in part, the funding and reward model. When this “third rail” is actively being researched by people of such quality, it is apparent that the sickness of climate science is not just confined to climate science.

Some people see science and religion as mutually incompatible. Nonetheless, they have a lot in common. Both science and religion attempt to explain the creation of the universe, the origin of life, as well as how and why nature works. Both are seen as something that should be pure and untainted by human emotion and weakness. Indeed, scientists are sort of a secular priesthood.

Science isn’t supposed to rely on popular opinion. Science isn’t supposed to compromise. Science isn’t supposed to be affected by ideology or partisanship. When religion gets involved in money or politics, it quickly becomes corrupt. Apparently so does science.

This isn’t anything new. Anyone who has studied a little history knows that science, like religion, has a sordid past. It’s the human factor. Scientists (just like priests) are human. They are greedy, egotistical, pig-headed, sneaky, dishonest and filled with lust.

Just as with religion, the worst scientists are the fanatics – the true believers. Science is supposed to be based on empirical evidence, but true believers refuse to trust their lying eyes. So what if your ship was trapped in Antarctic ice, you KNOW that the ice is disappearing!



Lysenko would be proud.

Here’s a little blurb about the author:

I am Director of the Center for the Study of Science at the Cato Institute and a senior fellow in research and economic development at George Mason University. My writing has been published in major scientific journals, including Climate Research, Climatic Change, Geophysical Research Letters, Journal of Climate, Nature and Science, as well as publications like the Washington Post, Washington Times, Los Angeles Times, USA Today, Houston Chronicle and Journal of Commerce. I have a Ph.D. in ecological climatology from the University of Wisconsin at Madison.

About Myiq2xu

I was born and raised in a different country - America. I don't know what this place is.
This entry was posted in Global Warming and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

82 Responses to Lysenkoism is Alive and Well

  1. The Klown says:

    I heard a noise so I peeked out front, then turned on the porch light for a better look. There were TWO big-ass RACCOONS fighting over a bowl of cat food on my front porch.

    • cynic says:

      Watch out. Once those critters discover food on your porch, they’ll be coming by every night. Our cat’s food bowl, outside our back door, was a real raccoon magnet. One summer we trapped eleven (and no, they weren’t the same ones.).

      The last few days, I’m dealing with a little bird, the Dark Eyed Junco, going after the food.
      He kicks it out of the bowl and it gets strewn everywhere. I covered it with a piece of light-weight cardboard, but it still manages to get to it.

  2. The Klown says:

    Like with everything else, the left tries to demonize the opposition.

    If scientific principles and evidence cause you to doubt the validity of global warming/climate change theories, you are labeled “anti-science.”

  3. wmcb says:

    The problem is that the scientists saw a maybe-problem, and began to research it – ok, so far so good. Nothing wrong with that. Then the govt and the grants and the politics got involved. The politicians saw an opportunity to grab power and a “cause” to drum up votes, fund programs, funnel jobs to cronies, pressure the UN and IMF, etc. And the scientists went along, making their predictions etc as drastic and alarming as possible, because hey, that’s their gravy train – not only of money, but of prestige and social status.

    These weren’t just scientists in some lab somewhere minding their own business doing pure research. They were coopted into a political tool almost from the get-go. When the data began to come in kinda iffy, or not-so-bad-as-predicted, or with lots of still-unknowns, they could not do what scientists normally do, which is revise and back off. Because they were already too public, too much of a “cause”. They were already a lever of political power. So instead they massaged the data a teeny tiny bit. Because hey, surely their original theory was correct, and likely the next data set will vindicate them. Um…. oops…..the next data set is off as well. But…. we can’t reverse now, we’ll look like corrupt morons! Ok, let’s massage that data a bit more, last time this time, fersure. Rinse, repeat. And eventually, you are aggressively blackballing and refusing peer review status to any scientist who might upset the apple cart. Why? Because you are basically panicked and in careeer self-preservation mode, that’s why.

    It’s the story of human nature. A little lie to cover a small mistake, which leads to another lie, then a bigger lie to cover the first two lies, and so on. And the longer it goes on, the harder it gets to admit, because now it’s a LOT of BIG fucking lies. Which may not have been at all where you intended to end up – it’s not like you planned it. But it still hapapens.

    • The Klown says:

      One thing that doesn’t get enuf attention imnsho is the predicted effect of global warming. Assuming that we are (or were) seeing a mild rise in the average global temperature, is that cause for alarm?

      • wmcb says:

        Yep. One of the things that bugged me also from early on was the insistence that climate scientists were the only ones who could weigh in. No meteorologists, no astronomers studying solar flares and sun effects, etc. (Many of them have been skeptical). There is a buttload of geological and anthropological evidence that we’ve been MUCH warmer in the past, and that we may have actually prospered at slightly higher temps. But all hail the computer-model gods, no other disciplines allowed. That always stunk to high heaven to me.

        • Propertius says:

          no astronomers studying solar flares and sun effects, etc.

          That’s a pretty odd statement, since the major climate laboratory in the United States (NCAR – the National Center for Atmospheric Research here in Boulder) has an entire division devoted to solar physics, modeling, and observation. In fact, that division (HAO) is the oldest at NCAR (it actually predates NCAR itself, having been founded during WWII to help predict disruptions in military radio communications due to solar activity).

          Disclaimer: In real life, I’m a former NCAR employee and NOAA contractor.

      • 49erDweet says:

        Since all change is logically “bad”, the answer is “Yes”.
        Don’t ask for proof, though. It is an untapped goldmine area for the next generation of Warmists.

    • Lulu says:

      I think it was taken over by scammers to make a buck on a new kind of “green”. The ad people where called in to sell it, then the nuts took over and turned into a religion. Never missing an opportunity to steal the pols and their corporate masters saw ways to beat enemies who were wealthy to make their enemies poor and powerless and themselves wealthy and powerful (think big oil and coal and the regions they come from being driven out of business by green tech crooks running the EPA or the EU bureaucrats trying to put Germany out of manufacturing). It reminds me of alchemists (frauds and religious fanatics often) who turned into the most viscous coinage officials in the middle ages and Renaissance. If you want to see what can be done to stop this green fraud look to the Aussies who are trying to rid themselves of this and reconstruct their screwed energy markets.

  4. votermom says:


  5. DeniseVB says:

    I usually have a very open mind to science and discovery, but there’s a lot of crappy scientists out there trying to grab some of that lucrative grant money, especially the Obama supporters. Just recently Pelosi’s brother-in-law (?) received millions for another Solyndra type of business. I miss the old fashioned tree and bunny huggers who were more passionate about righting the environmental wrongs than their bank accounts.

    Meanwhile President O’Breezy’s off on a sight seeing tour in Charlottesville today with the French President while these crazies are storming our maritime borders…..

    Our inept President is more a danger to us than the doomsday Gorebal Warmists. Sigh.

    • Lulu says:

      I think Bronco is part of it because he has put the green tech nuts and crooks in charge of the EPA and he is looking for a cut. It is part of his schtick in his speeches and policy. Remember the proposed carbon credit market in Chicago? Yeah, no. It was too obvious.

      • cynic says:

        People can criticize Glenn Beck all they want, but he was the one who came out to the American public with his chalk board, and introduced them to the Chicago Climate Exchange, and the links to Obama. He use to always say, “Don’t take my word for it, do your own homework.”

        What a scam, exchanging carbon credits.

        Is it any wonder why Cap & Trade (not Immigration) was one of the first things that they tried to pass in ’09, while holding a majority. Rahm said that you should never let a crisis go to waste.

        • Lulu says:

          They were copying the EU. They aren’t even original in their scams. Now the EPA wants to ban wood stoves and fireplaces. Then I guess will be barbeque grills next because fire, meat, and wood are all bad.

        • DeniseVB says:

          I remember Beck’s chalkboards about the Tides Foundation which appeared to be a giant money laundering scam with arrows connecting Obama and Gore to many in that group. He seems to have been right all along…….

        • Lulu says:

          It isn’t about just money but also shifting the power structure from regions unfriendly to Vile Progs to areas they control. It is very obvious to me. Shifting the commerce of energy from energy producing areas to Chicago who gives permission on who and how much energy anyone can use for a price. That takes gall and they have plenty of it.

        • wmcb says:

          Beck’s personality and grandstanding annoys the piss out of me. I find him often unwatchable. But honestly, when it comes to pure informational stories (not his rants), his track record of accuracy in basic facts is at least as good as if not much better than major news purveyors.

          And the journos’ major beef with Beck is almost always not disputing his facts, but merely “Why would any sane person dig those facts up or pay attention to them?” They just don’t like his areas of inquiry (NOT APPROVED NEWS! YOU CAN’T BE SERIOUSLY COVERING THAT, YOU LOON! NOT NEWS!), but they very very rarely prove him wrong on any of the particulars.

          • 49erDweet says:

            Yep. Bugs me, too.
            Tired, too, of the unprofessional jealousy journos spread around on someone who “gets it right” better than they. Little schoolkids act more responsible. Sigh.

        • cynic says:

          Prior to voting in the House on the Cap & Trade Bill, I think it was John Boehner that took the time to read all the amendments that were added to the bill, on the TV. It was shocking how much this would have affected everyone’s lives.

          There were so many energy related things that you would have had done before trying to sell your house, like putting an outlet in your garage for plugging in your car.

          Realtor’s would have to take a class on what the value was of these items. Mind you, at this point, many people were losing their homes thanks to the Govt. How on the earth were they going to come up with the money to have this stuff done before selling?
          No doubt somewhere tucked in the Bill would be something to the fact that a licensed (Union?) person has to perform these energy improvements.

          It also stated that, of course, our energy prices would be going up, and those that couldn’t afford it would have monthly deposits into their bank accounts to cover those increases.

          Mind you, I’m sitting there thinking about half of our retirement that had just disappeared and listening to them tell me that our tax money will be going in to people’s bank accounts to pay for the energy increases.

          While it’s a good thing to conserve energy, I don’t want the Govt. telling me that I have to do it, and I saw this as a really bad thing to do with the economy as fragile as it was/is.

    • DandyTIger says:

      Tell me about it. I can’t even get around town today. Idiots.

      • DeniseVB says:

        Already? He’s not even leaving the WH til about 3pm, then to Monticello for a tour with Hollande.

        • 49erDweet says:

          Better to be safe than allow peons to clutter up roadways with their unimportant dithering abouts.

        • DandyTIger says:

          I’m hearing route 29 (big N-S road through town) will be closed anywhere from 2pm to 7pm. They won’t give specifics or routes because of security. Makes sense, but irritating. Most schools got out around 1pm. I’m just avoiding the whole mess.

  6. DeniseVB says:

    LOL …. fake photos from Sochi …. darn, just can’t believe everything you see on the internet …

  7. SHV says:

    “Is it any wonder why Cap & Trade (not Immigration) was one of the first things that they tried to pass in ’09, while holding a majority. ”
    The wonder is that it didn’t pass. The carbon tax scam was worth trillions of dollars to Goldman Sachs, GE, Exelon, Climate Exchange, etc. and like “health care”, had behind the scenes support by both wings of the Uni-party. I think that the thread that got pulled that unraveled the deal was exposed when Sen. Coburn(?) said that climate change wasn’t in the Bible. That exposed the split between the Repub. “base” and the corporate oriented leadership. The same split that is going to undo the behind the scenes deal on amnesty.

    • Lulu says:

      And Big Energy pushed back HARD. They spent a lot, threatened a lot, and yanked a lot of chains. And Bronco has been trying to punish them (with mixed results) ever since.

      • foxyladi14 says:

        for sure 😦

      • SHV says:

        “And Big Energy pushed back HARD”
        Makes you wonder how much of the climate change, “save the planet” BS is AstroTurf. How better to discredit possible human based environmental change than by claiming that every weather event is “caused” by CLIMATE CHANGE!! I bet if we had honest news media who followed the money, there would be interesting connections between big energy, politicians, “scientists” and “activists”.

  8. DandyTIger says:

    We’re having a very mild warming trend. When models were getting made based on a really immature science (where they were only starting to get a glimpse of the oceans involvement at the time), they were based on a spike of the mild warming trend. They were embarrassingly wrong. And they haven’t updated models to what they’ve been learning since then, because they show a very mild trend, which is not scary at all. And when you compare that to what geologists know, it look like an insignificant blip in the history of warming and cooling trends. Of course humans have some effect, but it might be insignificant to other effects. We just don’t know. It’s so sad to see this become religion like it has.

    • wmcb says:

      Oh, yeah, the initial data did indicate a potential problem. I never disputed that. Few did. The problem is that with something on as slow a timeline as climate, you needed to wait before you took your dire predictions to !!!eleventy!!! You needed to make sure this is going to pan out over time. They didn’t wait. And no, for climate science, 10 or 20 years is not even CLOSE to enough data to begin extrapolating it longterm. Maybe, maaaaybe 50 or 100 years might be enough for a tentative hypothesis. They mistook a shortish aberration for a firm inexorable trend line.

    • Propertius says:

      It’s not scary at all, until you look at the deep ocean data. See:

  9. foxyladi14 says:

    Raining!!! 😀

  10. swanspirit says:

    Speaking of alive and well , THE INTERCEPT , new site from Glen Greenwald !

  11. SHV says:

    “It is a swamp of interconnected crooks. It is like two Mafia clans fighting over who gets what in the rackets.”
    We have gotten a little expose of what goes on behind the curtain of the political street theater with immigration “reform/amnesty”. Both parties are getting big money from the C of C, Wal-Mart, Silicon Valley corps, IBM, etc. to pass amnesty. Ted Cruz and the Tea Party are demonized by both parties who are defending the interests of their paymasters.

  12. DandyTIger says:

    Fun comments on that Forbes article include someone saying the models are accurate and have been proven. Yep, it’s a full blow religion at this point.

  13. votermom says:

    I wish these curling ladies would practice in my house.

  14. DandyTIger says:

    • DeniseVB says:

      Have the US athletes gotten their Chobani yogurt yet? Last I heard the shipment was being held up for some reason or another. But Candians figured a way to get beer to their athletes ….. 😉

  15. helenk3 says:

    I just e-mailed my two dem senators and asked this question. wonder what kind of answer I will get.

    since the new democratic talking points are lets all play and not work it is all good

    so when America is no longer productive and poverty abounds, do you think other countries will send us aid? You know like we have done my whole life to other countries? We can be the new Africa and get aid from all over the world forever. Have the resources like Africa but just do not feel like working to make good use of them

    • Lulu says:

      Or like some countries in Europe where people have short work hours, plenty of vacation, semi-full employment giving everyone lots of time to enjoy themselves. The problem then is everyone is too poor to do anything but exist and probably be in debt. As Congressman Ellison suggested most workers would have plenty of time to cook dinner every night for their families (so all those restaurant workers could be laid off too!) but fails to acknowledge all they could afford to cook is beans. What these Democratic hacks fail to acknowledge is that all of this has already been going on for 6 years.

  16. helenk3 says:

    backtrack changes the law again.

    so tell me again why we are paying congress

  17. helenk3 says:

    Brian Terry’s killer only got 30 years

  18. The Klown says:
  19. The Klown says:
  20. The Klown says:
  21. The Klown says:


  22. The Klown says:
  23. The Klown says:

    KING AND QUEEN OBAMA Flaunt Regal Power and Extravagance in Americans’ Faces

    President Barack Obama and his wife First Lady Michelle Obama rubbed their royal attitudes in the noses of long-suffering Americans today.

    While King Obama was pronouncing, ”That’s the good thing as a President, I can do whatever I want”, Queen Obama sent out a photograph of the family dogs wearing jewels, seated at a table representing Tuesday’s state dinner in honor of President Francois Hollande of France. The photo was captioned, “Bone appétit!”

    King Obama backed up his ” …as a President, I can do whatever I want”, with yet another unlawful exemption to Obamacare announced this afternoon.

    The menu for the state dinner, as reported by the Associated Press:

    “The first course will feature American Osetra caviar, farmed from the estuaries of Illinois, paired with quail eggs from Pennsylvania and a dozen varieties of potatoes from farms in New York, Idaho and California.

    “That will be followed by a salad of petite radishes and baby carrots on a bed of lettuce and splashed with red-wine vinaigrette made using honey from the beehive on the South Lawn. The salad will be served in a clear, glass bowl and resemble a terrarium.

    “The main course, dry-aged rib eye beef from a farm in Greeley, Colo., will be served with blue cheese, charred shallots, oyster mushrooms and braised chard.

    “Dessert is chocolate malted cake, described as a modern version of a layer cake made with bittersweet chocolate from Obama’s native Hawaii, Florida tangerines and served with vanilla ice cream from Pennsylvania. After dinner, guests can dip into a serving dish made entirely of sugar to sample fudge made of Vermont maple syrup, shortbread cookies made with lavender from Mrs. Obama’s garden and cotton candy dusted with orange zest.”

    Any resemblance by the Obamas to France’s King Louis XVI and his wife Queen Marie Antoinette prompted by the visit of France’s president is pure coincidence, oui? How about impeachmints for just desserts instead?

  24. DeniseVB says:

    Awwww, so sweet……

  25. The Klown says:
  26. The Klown says:
  27. The Klown says:
  28. wmcb says:

    From a commenter over at Protein Wisdom. Sorry, I’ve cycled back to “Fuck ’em all” pessimism again.

    Back when I was a database administrator I realized that if you corrupted your database you might as well destroy it. Even if you conspired to keep two sets of books, at least one set had to be the truth. Once there was no “true database” the whole thing was a waste of money.

    It came home to me — and I suppose to every other database guy — that lies are the deadliest things of all. Once you lose track of the truth, it is no longer even possible to engage in intelligent deception. For you must know the truth first before you can lie. Otherwise you’re just making random utterances.

    I’ve suspected for some time that the Western elites, in their enthusiasm for moral relativism, have long ago lost track of the truth. There is no true copy of the database any more. Nowhere the real transactions are getting posted to. There is no uncorrupted log. It’s all spin. And they believe their own spin. If so, we are truly screwed.

Comments are closed.