Cheat Seeking Missiles

Posted by: Laer at 01:40 pm

When hundreds of scientists issued a letter saying they weren’t too keen on Warmie hysterics, advocates of imminent climate doom like Andrew Dessler, professor at the Department of Atmospheric Sciences, Texas A&M, quickly got to work attacking their credentials.

What then of the UN’s top global warming cheerleading body, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change? Well …

We decided to test Dessler’s claim. So we downloaded IPCC WGII’s latest report on “Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability”. There were 380 contributors to the report [PDF of contributors]. A thorough and exhaustive analysis of the backgrounds of these experts (or were they?) was too ambitious (it’s Christmas, and we have wine to drink, and mince pies to eat, too). So, we focused on the contributors who operate in the UK.

Of the 51 UK contributors to the report, there were 5 economists, 3 epidemiologists, 5 who were either zoologists, entomologists, or biologists. 5 worked in civil engineering or risk management / insurance. 7 had specialisms in physical geography (we gave the benefit of the doubt to some academics whose profiles weren’t clear about whether they are physical or human geographers). And just 10 have specialisms in geophysics, climate science or modelling, or hydrology. But there were 15 who could only be described as social scientists. If we take the view that economics is a social science, that makes 20 social scientists.

This gives the lie to Dessler’s claim that IPCC contributors are analogous to medical doctors. There are economists working on saving that dying child!!! That’s got to be wrong, by Dessler’s own standards. (Climate Resistance)

This would be interesting, but of course the debate is over.

hat-tip: Small Dead Animals via What Bubba Knows

Share this Logic Bomb with others: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.