the Air Vent

Because the world needs another opinion

Eric Steig Wears no Clothes

Posted by Jeff Id on February 1, 2009

Eric Steig, the author of the recent Antarctic is now warming paper, put this in his comment thread over at real climate. I love how he pretends to not have an opinion on the politics.

[Response: Mike. Thanks for your thoughts. We don’t have much to say here about taxes vs. cap and trade, etc., because we’re scientists, not economists. I will say that I think this is a really difficult problem, and solving it is going to involve ideological clashes about *how* to solve it. That’s inevitable. We’re seeing it right now in a small way with the debate in congress and the senate over Obama’s stimulus package. I have no reason to doubt that opinions on both sides of the aisle are sincere, and that the vast majority want to do what is right. My own inclination is to agree with you on taxes vs. cap-and-trade, but I don’t know. There are a lot of problems that will arise with either one. But that’s not a reason to sit idly buy. My advice is stop reading about the “debate” because there isn’t one. Instead, get involved in the policy debate. Help the world figure out what to do.

As for your not being able to tell “which side is right and which side is wrong” in the global warming debate, consider this: When you go to the dentist, and he tells you to put fluoride on your kids teeth, do you do it? If not, why not? The reason some people don’t is that they live in a world where dentists are part of a vast conspiracy to poison our kids minds, or at the very least are complete idiots. Me, I live on a planet where dentists actually want to help me and my kids have healthy teeth. Maybe I’m wrong, and the members of the National Academy of Sciences, the leadership of the American Geophysical Union, etc. are all deluded, and the people that publish papers in professional scientific journals are frauds, and I make up data and enter it into my computer in my sleep while preparing my work for publication. On the other hand, maybe the money groups like Heartland Institute and the folks they list as part of their personnel are influenced by the money they get from Exxon Mobil. If you care about your kids, you probably need to think this out, and then go and make your voice heard on the right solution (either buy a Hummer, or get involved in efforts to get the right solution (carbon taxes, carbon trading, whatever) to happen.–eric]

His coauthor Mann was the lead author on a 2008 hockey stick paper which in my opinion was deliberately in error, something anyone who can do a bit of math realizes right away. He really exposed his leftist tendencies at the end though(either buy a Hummer, or get involved in efforts to get the right solution (carbon taxes, carbon trading, whatever) to happen.–eric]

His concept that there’s nothing to discuss is asinine on a good day and a lie if you are honest. There are over 31,000 scientists who disagree directly and 650 who just presented their case to congress. I was willing to look openly at his paper but when he promotes false information in a public setting the way he does here and blocks my request for data, I think less of him than I care to express.

He then pulls the biggest piece of bull and claims Exon mobile, any scientist who disagrees is employed by oil. Horse shit sir. Naming a few government agencies who need this issue to keep their funding as though they would somehow be unbiased then followed by the claim of consensus, it is bogus in an extreme. How can there be consensus if disagreement is cut from the discussion? I don’t even care a whit if the antarctic is warming. It is nothing far left extremism no longer hidden behind the surface, I’m guessing that when this data is released it will be another case of the scientists believing the ends justify the means, we’ll find a pile of it underneath.


14 Responses to “Eric Steig Wears no Clothes”

  1. page48 said

    Steig says (in part):

    “As for your not being able to tell “which side is right and which side is wrong” in the global warming debate, consider this: When you go to the dentist, and he tells you to put fluoride on your kids teeth, do you do it? If not, why not? The reason some people don’t is that they live in a world where dentists are part of a vast conspiracy to poison our kids minds, or at the very least are complete idiots.”

    This man is scary. Wants to command absolute authority by educational hierarchy. Demands blind acceptance and obedience from the public. Has no respect for the informational capacity of the public (in his dental analogy, he doesn’t even suggest that poor JQ Public check out the facts of fluoride treatment for himself). Implies that only idiots ask questions. What a jerk!

    Sorry this post is so disjointed. Hope it makes some sense. I’m tired.

    Have a pleasant evening, everyone!

  2. Tim L said

    Wow!!! It never ends.
    A disaster is coming but not from CO2. these nar-do-wells will cause the disaster. self fulfilling profitcy.
    more… they can not see there hand in front of there face!
    we are heading for trouble… I do not want to be negative,But.
    Good day.

  3. Phillip Bratby said

    I try not to look at RealClimate too often, because I don’t like the tone in the responses; the way the moderators and certain other commenters gang up on anyone with a slightly dissenting view. There is no genuine discussion allowed. There are some “nasty pieces of work” who comment over there, who I wouldn’t want to meet after dark. But no names for who they are.

  4. Here what full of crap sounds like:

    “Hello. I’m apolitical.
    Dunno much about politics.
    Either side has good points and bad points.
    But one thing I do know, the Democrats are full of wonderful ideas that I agree with and those darn Republicans are out to kill us all…”

  5. James Mayeau said

    Steig’s name is mud. He’s no scientist. He’s just another malthusian pretending to be human.
    Unlike Phillip, I would dearly love to meet one of those “nasty peices of work” in a dark alley. Bunch of flabby office sitting pansies out to defraud the pubic.
    Sending one of those types to the hospital would be a service to the world.

  6. Matt Y. said

    I tried following real climate for a while, but couldn’t take it anymore. It didn’t take long for it to become clear they are more interested in crushing dissent than spreading information and answering legitimate questions. Anyone who is skeptical on that site and doesn’t automatically defer to the experts is immediately attacked and ridiculed. The arrogance and condesention that drips from that site is disgusting. If they really wanted to convert skeptics to supporters, they couldn’t go about it in a worse way. My conclusion was they are more concerned about keeping the appearance of consensus and settled science up than anything else.

    I would be the first to admit those guys know more about climate than me. And I have never produced any original work in the field of climatology. Or even attempted to. But I do have a masters degree in mechanincal engineering from a top school, have taken numerous classes on statistics, and have worked for over a decade in computer modelling. Yet the RC folks think they are so brilliant, and what they do is so complex, that me feeble little brain can’t even understand the issues involved. Those guys need to get over themselves.

  7. Matt Y. said

    As a follow up, I really would like to follow the pro-AGW side on a regular basis. Getting one side of the story is never a good thing. Can anybody recommend a quality pro-AGW site that is not hostile to skeptics?

  8. page48 said

    Matt Y.(comment #7) – I think of Climate Audit as a neutral site.

  9. David Jay said

    I agree with Page48 on the BLOG CONTENT (not necessarily the comments) of CA. I think Steve is doing just what he says he is doing, auditing statistical issues vis-a-vis climate.

    His open policy (and clear snipping when appropriate) allows a wide range of views in the comments.

  10. daveB said

    Say what you will about Steig, but one thing is for sure, he’s rich in his use of propagandistic devices. See Roy Spencer’s write-up on the http://www.drroyspencer.com/category/blogarticle/
    where he lists ten techniques titled “Al Gore’s Propaganda.” I’m no psychologist, but it seems as though Steig uses no less than 6 of these devices. His dentist analogy alone uses three: Ad Hominem; Stereotyping; and Black-and-White fallacy. He continues with the famous Bandwagon and Appeal to authority. And for his finale, Appeal to Prejudice. Ah, the art of presenting information!

  11. C3H Editor said

    Eric Steig is one of too many scientists that flat out doesn’t understand the public. I’d like to think that this list of scientists and prominent personages (listing their anti-global warming quotes) view the public with less contempt:

    http://www.c3headlines.com/quotes-from-global-warming-critics-skeptics-sceptics.html

    Also, if you’re into charts that challenge the global warming crusade, here ya go:

    http://www.c3headlines.com/chartsimages.html

    C3H Editor

  12. DJA said

    From CA latest it appears Eric Steig could be in trouble because Harry has had a sex change to Gill.

  13. James Mayeau said

    Matt Y

    Try desmogblog, gristmill (a group blog – depending on the author they might let through an antagonistic post), or deltoid.

    These guys haven’t banned me outright yet (and when I go there I’m not my usual charming and congenial self like I was here) ;).

  14. Matt Y. said

    James,

    Thanks for the suggestions.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: