The climatemongers of the world continue the mantra that there are no legitimate, reputable scientists who are skeptical about man made global warming. Anyone who disagrees that the planet is in peril of imminent destruction if trillions of tax dollars are not fed into the crony capitalist machine, and politician’s coffers, is simply, anti-science.
Every time a qualified, reputable scientist even hints, that the current “political” consensus on climate change may be faulty, they are not met with meaningful debate and discussion. No, they are attacked, discredited and dismissed as a conspiracy theorists or anti-science quack. Well, they just look ridiculous, again.
Such is the case with Professor Judith A. Curry.
- former Chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology.
- President of Climate Forecast Applications Network (CFAN) LLC
- 140 scientific papers on climate change.
- member of the National Research Council’s Climate Research Committee.
- PhD degree in Geophysical Sciences from the University of Chicago in 1982
- serves on NASA Advisory Council Earth Science Subcommittee
- recent member of the NOAA Climate Working Group
- former member of the National Academies Space Studies Board and Climate Research Group
- Henry G. Houghton Research Award from the American Meteorological Society in 1992
Clearly, Curry’s qualifications and reputation are second to non, until she made the mistake of critiquing the data supporting the “political” consensus known as man made, Co2 driven global warming.
In January of 2014 Professor Curry presented testimony to the COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE Hearing on “Review of the President’s Climate Action Plan. Curry’s testimony was not in agreement with the political organization, (IPCC) Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Her testimony was damaging to could potentially threaten the trillions of dollars slated to fill the pockets of third world politicians, global investors and climate related global conglomerates.
Someone had to speak up. That someone was Michael Mann. You may remember Mann, as he was at the center of climate-gate, when climate data manipulation was leaked, not hacked and given to media outlets. It was Mann’s “trick” Philip Jones of the Climate Research Unit used to “hide the decline” in temperature, turning it into a steep rise in temperature. Subsequently, Mann produced the famous “hockey stick” graph.
So, how did Michael Mann, a supposed climate scientist, oppose Curry’s testimony? Debate the data, no, rebut her data and conclusions with superior data and findings? no, Mann accused this published scientist with 30 plus years experience, of being anti-science.
On her website, Curry oulines what constitutes anti-science;
Anti-science proponents often attack science through:
May I add, this is a common practice in evolution science as well when decrying Intelligent Design Theory. Mann calling a published scientist with such impressive credentials anti-science only discredits himself and weakens the cause he is trying to defend.
Curry call’s Mann out on his ridiculous and may I say, “anti-scientific” accusation:
- “Since you have publicly accused my Congressional testimony of being ‘anti-science,’ I expect you to (publicly) document and rebut any statement in my testimony that is factually inaccurate or where my conclusions are not supported by the evidence that I provide.”
- “If you want to avoid yourself being labeled as ‘anti-science’, I suggest that you are obligated to respond to my challenge.”
- Curry Interviewed by David Rose at the Spectator, about Mann’s Comments. “Her record of peer-reviewed publication in the best climate-science journals is second to none”: HERE
- Curry Responds to Mann: HERE
- Judith Curry’s Senate Testimony: HERE
- Judith Curry’s website: HERE
PODCAST: New Study out of Victoria BC Canada Published in Nature shows predictions not supported by evidence
CLIMATE CHANGE PART 1, 2, 3