Climate Etc.

by Judith Curry

On Jan 28, a group of climate scientists supporting the IPCC consensus wrote a letter to members of the U.S. House of Representatives and Senators.

On Feb 8, a group of scientists skeptical of the IPCC consensus countered with their letter to members of the U.S. Congress.

Continue reading →

by Judith Curry

Renewed attention (e.g. Tamino) is being given to Chris Colose’s comment that was originally posted on the thread Education versus Endocrination:

Continue reading →

by Judith Curry

Prior to the Lisbon Workshop, the participants were asked to write a 2 page essay with their thoughts on the topic of the Workshop.  There were some very interesting and provocative statements.  Ross McKitrick has published his statement here (h/t Bishop Hill).  The section headings are:

• The Key to Intellectual Freedom in Economics:  No Society Statements
• The Unintended Consequences of the IPCC

Continue reading →

Just in from Tallbloke:

Jerry [Ravetz] has written a new, short, clear essay to try to clarify some issues of misunderstanding of what he is philosophising about on my blog concerning truth and PNS [Post Normal Science].

Continue reading →

by Judith Curry

The recent dust-up between Eric Steig and O’Donnell et al. is an interesting case study as we ponder the issue of reconciliation.   This dust-up is in regard to the analysis of temperatures on Antarctica:

• Steig’s Nature (2009) paper
• O’Donnell et al. critique

Continue reading →

by Judith Curry

Fred Pearce’s article in the New Scientist is creating a stir in the climate blogosphere.  Fred, a participant in the Workshop, wrote:

But the leaders of mainstream climate science turned down the gig, including NASA’s Gavin Schmidt, who said the science was settled so there was nothing to discuss.

Across the spectrum, participants were mostly united in disagreeing with Schmidt. Climate science, they said, is much less certain than the IPCC mainstreamers say, and peace can be found only if all accept what they dubbed “the uncertainty monster”.

Continue reading →

by Judith Curry

Here are some reactions from the Lisbon Workshop on Reconciliation in the Climate Debate.  These are my personal reflections, and include some of the perspectives and statements made by others (without any attribution of names).  First, I would like to thank  Jerome Ravetz and Angela Pereira for organizing this Workshop.

The first issue is what exactly is meant by reconciliation, and who actually wants it?  Reconciliation is defined (wikipedia) as re-establishing normal relations between belligerents: re-establish dialogue, reinstate balance,  restore civility.  It is not clear that there has ever been normal relations between, say, the mainstream IPCC researchers and  the skeptical climate blogosphere. Consensus building was not seen as having any part in a reconciliation.  Rather there was a desire to conduct impassioned debates nonviolently, and to create an arena where we can fight a more honest fight over the science and the policy options.

Continue reading →

Update:  WUWT has posted the rationale statement prepared by the workshop organizers, Jerome Ravetz and Angela Pereira

by Judith Curry

This week, I will be in Lisbon attending a Workshop on Reconciliation in the Climate Change Debate.  The Workshop was conceptualized by Jerome Ravetz, Silvio Funtowicz, Angela Pereira, James Risbey, and Jeroen van der Sluijs.

Continue reading →