*Follow the link for much more * * http://judithcurry.com/2013/08/20/scientists-and-motivated-reasoning/#more-12579 *
** *Once the UNFCCC treaty was a done deal, the IPCC and its scientific conclusions were set on a track to become a self fulfilling prophecy. The entire framing of the IPCC was designed around identifying sufficient evidence so that the human-induced greenhouse warming could be declared unequivocal, and so providing the rationale for developing the political will to implement and enforce carbon stabilization targets. National and international science programs were funded to support the IPCC objectives. * *Were [these] just hardworking scientists doing their best to address the impossible expectations of the policy makers? Well, many of them were. However, at the heart of the IPCC is a cadre of scientists whose careers have been made by the IPCC. These scientists have used the IPCC to jump the normal meritocracy process by which scientists achieve influence over the politics of science and policy. Not only has this brought some relatively unknown, inexperienced and possibly dubious people into positions of influence, but these people become vested in protecting the IPCC, which has become central to their own career and legitimizes playing power politics with their expertise.* *When I refer to the IPCC dogma, it is the religious importance that the IPCC holds for this cadre of scientists; they will tolerate no dissent, and seek to trample and discredit anyone who challenges the IPCC. Some are mid to late career middle ranking scientists who have done ok in terms of the academic meritocracy. Others were still graduate students when they were appointed as lead authors for the IPCC. These scientists have used to IPCC to gain a seat at the big tables where they can play power politics with the collective expertise of the IPCC, to obtain personal publicity, and to advance their careers. This advancement of their careers is done with the complicity of the professional societies and the institutions that fund science. Eager for the publicity, high impact journals such as Nature, Science, and PNAS frequently publish sensational but dubious papers that support the climate alarm narrative.* *Especially in the renascent subfields such as ecology and public health, these publications and the media attention help steer money in the direction of these scientists, which buys them loyalty from their institutions, who appreciate the publicity and the dollars.* *Further, the institutions that support science use the publicity to argue for more funding to support climate research and its impacts. And the broader scientific community inadvertently becomes complicit in all this. While the IPCC proponents loudly cry out against the heretical skeptical scientists and the dark influences of big oil and right wing ideology that are anti-science, we all join in bemoaning these dark forces that are fighting a war against science, and support the IPCC against its critics. * *So do I think IPCC scientists are policy advocates? They seem mainly concerned with preserving the importance of the IPCC, which has become central to their professional success, funding, and influence. Most dont understand the policy process or the policy specifics; they view the policy as part an parcel of the IPCC dogma that must be protected and preserved at all cost, else their success, funding and influence will be in jeopardy.* . On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 4:00 PM, Larry C. Lyons <[email protected]>wrote: > > ++Snicker++ Anyone who has ever attended a scientific meeting knows the > impossibility of that. > > > On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 3:48 PM, GMoney <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Do you really think it's an intentional hoax (somehow coordinated by > > thousands of scientists in hundreds of countries the world over)? > > > > Or do you think science is simply mistaken? > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Sam <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Didn't you admit global warming was a hoax a few weeks back? They > dragged > > > you back in heh? > > > > > > . > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 3:38 PM, Cameron Childress <[email protected] > > > >wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 1:20 PM, Sam wrote: > > > > > > > > > You really think you're above it all because the UN says so. > > > > > > > > > > > > Indeed. The UN's other paper was just posted to the Onion. "UN > declares > > > > some guy on internet is above it all". > > > > > > > > -Cameron > > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:366567 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
