Feed on

Here is David Friedman on the state of science and debate, using examples from Climate:

I believe I have shown that John Cook, lead author of the article commonly cited for the claim that 97% of climate scientists support AGW, has lied in print about his own work. My argument assumed that Cook et. al. 2013 was itself honest, but other people have offeredgood evidence that it is not.
It is not surprising if there are some dishonest people on one side, or the other, or both of the climate controversy. A more interesting question is whether there are any honest people. Can anyone point at a prominent supporter of action to prevent warming who has publicly rejected Cook et. al. 2013 or its author?
The same question can be asked of the other side. Are there prominent articles criticizing the campaign to prevent warming that are clearly dishonest, clearly enough so that someone with no commitment to either side of the controversy would recognize them as such? If so, have they been publicly rejected by anyone on that side?
Believe it or not, I found this bit from Vox to be germane to the climate wars too (and to labor market regulation in general):
  • Reproductive rights activists oppose ASC requirements, arguing that abortion clinics are safe as is, and that the requirement places an unbearably expensive burden on clinics.

    [Center for Reproductive Rights]

Leave a Reply