Caleb Rossiter: nieuwste slachtoffer van klimaatMcCarthyisme
De heksenjacht gaat door.
Na Lennart Bengtsson en vele andere wetenschappers die kritiek dorsten uit te oefenen op de AGWmantra (AGW = 'Anthropogenic Global Warming') was het nu de beurt aan Caleb Rossiter, die in een opinieartikel in 'The Wall Street Journal', onder de titel: 'Sacrificing Africa for Climate Change', kritiek uitte op het klimaatbeleid dat de westerse landen aan Afrika opdringen. Hij werd geëxcommuniceerd.
Onder de titel, 'Climate McCarthyism has claimed another victim', schreef James Delingpole:
Dr Caleb Rossiter - an adjunct professor at American University, Washington DC - has been fired by a progressive think tank after publicly expressing doubt about man-made global warming.
Rossiter, a former Democratic congressional candidate, has impeccably liberal credentials. As the founder of Demilitarization for Democracy he has campaigned against US backed wars in Central America and Southern Africa, against US military support for dictators and against anti-personnel landmines. But none of this was enough to spare him the wrath of the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) when he wrote an OpEd in the Wall Street Journal describing man-made global warming as an "unproved science."
Two days later, he was sacked by email. The IPS said: "We would like to inform you that we are terminating your position as an Associate Fellow of the Institute for Policy Studies...Unfortunately, we now feel that your views on key issues, including climate science, climate justice, and many aspects of US policy to Africa, diverge so significantly from ours."
In the WSJ OpEd entitled Sacrificing Africa for Climate Change, Rossiter argued that Africans should benefit from the same mixed energy policy as Americans rather than being denied access to fossil fuels on spurious environmental grounds by green activists. He wrote: "The left wants to stop industrialization - even if the hypothesis of catastrophic, man-made global warming is false."
But the Institute for Policy Studies ("Ideas into Action for Peace, Justice, and the Environment") is ideologically committed to ensuring that Africans only enjoy the benefits of expensive, intermittent, inefficient renewable energy such as wind and solar.
Lees verder hier.
Onder de titel, 'Academics Worldwide Condemn Dark Age Intellect Of Institute For Policy Studies', verzamelde Pierre Gosselin op zijn blog een aantal reacties van internationaal bekende klimaatsceptici op deze nieuwe affaire.
Ik pik er een aantal passages uit.
Willie Soon (USA), Professor of Astrophysics, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics.
For any objective reader and citizen of the world, this sort of bullying ought to inform everyone that science and its practice are now no longer free and willing. In fact, we are constantly being terrorized and threatened by the research funding gravy trains and large resources needed for science to progress and prosper. This is a scientific dark age we are living in because no more scientists of Professor Rossiters caliber are speaking out and telling the whole truth on any matters scientific. ...
For any objective reader and citizen of the world, this sort of bullying ought to inform everyone that science and its practice are now no longer free and willing. In fact, we are constantly being terrorized and threatened by the research funding gravy trains and large resources needed for science to progress and prosper. This is a scientific dark age we are living in because no more scientists of Professor Rossiters caliber are speaking out and telling the whole truth on any matters scientific. ...
Lennart Bengtsson (Sweden), Professor of Meteorology, climate scientist.
As I myself have experienced recently, the ceiling of tolerance in climate change has become depressingly low, I might say almost non-existent. This is most worrisome for the health of science. I find Prof. Rossiters comments highly reasonable and it is obvious that without a healthy economical development of Africa along the lines we have seen in China, there is neither much hope for the people of Africa nor is there much hope that humankind will ultimately solve its environmental problems. .
As I myself have experienced recently, the ceiling of tolerance in climate change has become depressingly low, I might say almost non-existent. This is most worrisome for the health of science. I find Prof. Rossiters comments highly reasonable and it is obvious that without a healthy economical development of Africa along the lines we have seen in China, there is neither much hope for the people of Africa nor is there much hope that humankind will ultimately solve its environmental problems. .
Fritz Vahrenholt (Germany), Professor of Chemistry, co-author of The Neglected Sun.
The right to free expression and the freedom of science are the very foundation of democratic societies. When it comes to the ideology of climate alarmism, this obviously does not count for institutions like the IPS. This is regrettable. Caleb Rossiter is right: International climate policy has so far produced more damage than good for the people of the world.
The right to free expression and the freedom of science are the very foundation of democratic societies. When it comes to the ideology of climate alarmism, this obviously does not count for institutions like the IPS. This is regrettable. Caleb Rossiter is right: International climate policy has so far produced more damage than good for the people of the world.
Judith Curry (USA), Professor of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Georgia Tech.
Wikipedia describes IPS as a left-wing think tank. It is not clear whether Rossiter had a paid position there or not? It isnt surprising to me that a think tank with a clear agenda would want to get rid of someone who ran counter to that agenda. If Rossiter lost a government funded position because of his views, well that would be a different story.
Wikipedia describes IPS as a left-wing think tank. It is not clear whether Rossiter had a paid position there or not? It isnt surprising to me that a think tank with a clear agenda would want to get rid of someone who ran counter to that agenda. If Rossiter lost a government funded position because of his views, well that would be a different story.
S. Fred Singer (USA), Professor of Atmospheric Physics.
I know Prof. Rossiter. Several years ago he invited me to deliver a talk on climate science to his students at American University. I got the impression that he had an open mind on the issue and simply wanted to know the evidence, both pro and con, about human influence on climate change. ...
I know Prof. Rossiter. Several years ago he invited me to deliver a talk on climate science to his students at American University. I got the impression that he had an open mind on the issue and simply wanted to know the evidence, both pro and con, about human influence on climate change. ...
Lubos Motl (Czech Republic), Professor of Physics.
As in so many cases, I am troubled to hear such news about scholars who are fired for their opinions. But in this case, I am not surprised or impressed because its some left-wing think tank really an intellectually flavored organization of activists of a sort so of course that they dont tolerate someone who disagrees with some basic orthodoxy of a similar ideological color. ...
As in so many cases, I am troubled to hear such news about scholars who are fired for their opinions. But in this case, I am not surprised or impressed because its some left-wing think tank really an intellectually flavored organization of activists of a sort so of course that they dont tolerate someone who disagrees with some basic orthodoxy of a similar ideological color. ...
Klaus-Eckart Puls (Germany), Veteran meterologist, European Institute for Climate and Energy,
His fellowship was terminated because he had a diverging view. They said it themselves. Thats dogmatism, and not science or solution finding. This leads us to question if the IPS is a serious organization at all.
His fellowship was terminated because he had a diverging view. They said it themselves. Thats dogmatism, and not science or solution finding. This leads us to question if the IPS is a serious organization at all.
Dr. Sebastian Lüning (Germany), Specialist for Geology of Africa, Co-author of The Neglected Sun.
The Institute for Policy Studies should change its name to Church for Policy Studies if the directors restrict freedom of opinions to its scientists. Prof. Rossiter addresses a very valid point in his commentary that deserves detailed discussion. Africa suffers from a great number of current problems among which climate change is only near the end of the list.
The Institute for Policy Studies should change its name to Church for Policy Studies if the directors restrict freedom of opinions to its scientists. Prof. Rossiter addresses a very valid point in his commentary that deserves detailed discussion. Africa suffers from a great number of current problems among which climate change is only near the end of the list.
Tim Ball (Canada), Professor of Geology.
I have no sympathy for Caleb Rossiter. He is not a victim. He got thrown into a small club of people who have been demonized for daring to question, for daring to practice skeptical science, for daring to speak out by default. The sad part is we wouldnt be hearing about him now if it wasnt for the termination of his fellowship. ...
I have no sympathy for Caleb Rossiter. He is not a victim. He got thrown into a small club of people who have been demonized for daring to question, for daring to practice skeptical science, for daring to speak out by default. The sad part is we wouldnt be hearing about him now if it wasnt for the termination of his fellowship. ...
Nicola Scafetta (Italy), Professor of Physics, Duke University.
In science issues are solved by applying the scientific method. Those who believe that a proposed theory is wrong, present their arguments and a discussion follows. The scientific method is structured in such a way that science can fix itself of the wrong theories. Therefore, the promoters of the anthropogenic global warming theory have nothing to worry if they are interested in science and are on Natures side, as they claim to be. They just need to practice their patience and the scientific method to rebut the critiques.
On the contrary, the campaign to silence dissent to the anthropogenic global warming theory has nothing to do with science. It is just a political plot finalized to intimidate scientists with the goal to prevent them from doing their job.
In science issues are solved by applying the scientific method. Those who believe that a proposed theory is wrong, present their arguments and a discussion follows. The scientific method is structured in such a way that science can fix itself of the wrong theories. Therefore, the promoters of the anthropogenic global warming theory have nothing to worry if they are interested in science and are on Natures side, as they claim to be. They just need to practice their patience and the scientific method to rebut the critiques.
On the contrary, the campaign to silence dissent to the anthropogenic global warming theory has nothing to do with science. It is just a political plot finalized to intimidate scientists with the goal to prevent them from doing their job.
Hans Labohm (Holland). Economist/publicist.
This is the umpteenth example of a scientist being excommunicated by his colleagues because he refuses to ignore facts and is not willing to toe the party line. Throughout the years I have witnessed many similar cases in my own country, The Netherlands, and have been familiar with many other cases abroad. It is part of a hideous tendency of Lysenkoism in the field of climate science. It is inconsistent with the spirit of truth-seeking which should be the main driving force behind science. Every scientist, whether he or she is a climatologist or not, whether he or she is pro AGW or not, should speak up loudly against this kind of practices and should condemn them unequivocally.
This is the umpteenth example of a scientist being excommunicated by his colleagues because he refuses to ignore facts and is not willing to toe the party line. Throughout the years I have witnessed many similar cases in my own country, The Netherlands, and have been familiar with many other cases abroad. It is part of a hideous tendency of Lysenkoism in the field of climate science. It is inconsistent with the spirit of truth-seeking which should be the main driving force behind science. Every scientist, whether he or she is a climatologist or not, whether he or she is pro AGW or not, should speak up loudly against this kind of practices and should condemn them unequivocally.
Dirk Maxeiner (Germany), Veteran science journalist/publicist.
The handling of Caleb S. Rossiter is an expression of a peculiar new worship of stars that stops at nothing. [...] Attention is being shifted from the concrete problems of todays living people and over to future generations. Many people in Africa are suffering from horrendous conditions, dirty water, and polluted air. These are among the leading causes of death for children. They could be helped today. But the public is more concerned about the Africans as possible climate victims 100 years in the future. The simplest rules for sustainable action seems to have been forgotten. It is called: Whoever wants to survive tomorrow must first survive today.
The handling of Caleb S. Rossiter is an expression of a peculiar new worship of stars that stops at nothing. [...] Attention is being shifted from the concrete problems of todays living people and over to future generations. Many people in Africa are suffering from horrendous conditions, dirty water, and polluted air. These are among the leading causes of death for children. They could be helped today. But the public is more concerned about the Africans as possible climate victims 100 years in the future. The simplest rules for sustainable action seems to have been forgotten. It is called: Whoever wants to survive tomorrow must first survive today.
Lees verder hier.
Voor mijn eerdere DDSbijdragen zie hier.
Ga verder met lezen
Dit vind je misschien ook leuk
Laat mensen jouw mening weten
