The greenhousers endlessly propose that the consensus of "scientists" on anthropogenic climate change is overwhelming. By "scientists" they actually mean computer modelers. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and their computer-modeling coterie include very few real climatologists or atmospheric physicists. Among qualified climatologists, meteorologists and atmospheric physicists, there are plenty who do not accept the greenhousers' propositions. Many others have been intimidated into silence by the pressures of grants, tenure and kindred academic garrotes.
[...]
...............
Did you catch it?
It zipped by so quickly you might have you missed it.
Let's have a closer look:
"By "scientists" they actually mean computer modelers."
And there it is, the moment when Mr. Cockburn crosses the line separating the grumpily skeptical from the vaingloriously dumb.
This reminds me of one of David Horowitz's anti-Chomsky outbursts. Not satisfied with calling Chomsky a "communist" a terrorist sympathizer and, in so many words, a self hating Jew, Horowitz affixed Icarus' wings to his back and tried to go for the sun: he attempted a critique of Chomskyian Linguistics.
Of course, not being a linguist - or particularly clever - his non-peer review effort failed. Surely only the uninformed, the ideologically blind and the stupid were the least bit impressed (and even they might have just shrugged).
Which brings me back to Mr. Cockburn.
He uses the phrase "computer modelers" as if he's writing about a group of people attending a Nintendo Wii party. Of course, the fact that these "computer modelers" are, in fact, scientists - indeed, most of the scientists in the climate science field - is a minor point for Ace.
It's always a pity to watch a once sharp person fall prey to unproductive obsessions.
.d.