Reply To: Take Back Control

[Siderite]

Yes, of course, disagreeing with someone who agrees with Bucks is wrong and duplicitous. Being a leading figure in his field means little if his work is flawed. Good science is allowed to be critiqued. Seemingly the Bucks-proclaimed leader of his field’s isn’t. That’s the mindset of an authoritarian and is highly anti-scientific.

There have been many critiques of his work. Here is one*. But, of course, because he dares to disagree with Bucks it has to be in bad faith and wrong to rubbish. If Christy’s work was worthwhile it would be able to answer these questions, and the ones I have put. Simply moaning about it being ‘rubbishing’ fails to understand the point of science. Science is about being open to question. You frequently accuse climatologists who support anthropogenic climate change of this, so it’s ironic and amusing that any questioning of the sacred cow, John Christy, gets dismissed. All he has to do is not distort data and draw misleading conclusions, but seemingly questioning that is out of bounds. God forbid us question and critique. We need to blindly accept the proclamations of those Bucks agree with.

*https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpSEXCQ9U6c&t=202s

No, Bucks, feedback mechanisms exist, both positive and negative, so the observed temperature record will not be a direct relationship with CO2. Expecting to see the temperatures correlate perfectly from modelled temperatures and expecting it to correlate perfectly with CO2 rise will fail, as it would with any variable, because feedback mechanisms exist. This tells us nothing about the cause, because these feedback mechanisms can only happen because of changes to the climate. We have evidence for what they are, such as oceans absorbing CO2 as a response and dampening temperatures, so they cannot be used as evidence against the anthropogenic nature of climate change. All the empirical evidence suggests recent warming (i.e. from 1800s onwards) is CO2 induced. We know the CO2 is human sourced due to isotopic signatures, we know that CO2 is trapping heat from tropospheric osbervations of radiation being captured by CO2, we know that there is a statistically significant relationship between CO2 and temperature rise (paper posted by me, but roundly ignored by Bucks; not doing so again, because it’s futile) and the models aren’t even that far off if you look at non-cherry picked/non-manipulated data.

There really is no point in me saying any more. It is quite clear from your reaction, that you cannot handle anyone disagreeing with you. You have poured scorn on me daring to criticise your disciple. It’s ok for you to rubbish highly respected scientists, but when I do it it’s wrong. Typical hypocrisy.

I will leave it at that.