After His First Article, FiveThirtyEight Apologizes for Controversial Climate Science Writer

Who could have seen this coming?
Media • Views: 18,793

Well, that didn’t take long. Recently, Nate Silver’s new media venture FiveThirtyEight hired one of the most notorious “climate skeptics,” Roger Pielke Jr., as their science writer. Today, Silver is apologizing for Pielke, after Pielke’s very first article was severely criticized by climate scientists and he responded by sending them emails threatening possible legal action: FiveThirtyEight Apologizes on Behalf of Controversial Climate Science Writer.

NEW YORK — Two prominent climate scientists say Roger Pielke Jr., a controversial writer at Nate Silver’s FiveThirtyEight site, sent emails threatening possible legal action in response to their criticism of his findings for the data-driven news site.

Pielke says it’s “ridiculous” to characterize the emails as threats against Michael Mann, director of the Earth System Science Center at Pennsylvania State University, and Dr. Kevin Trenberth, a distinguished senior climate scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research. FiveThirtyEight, however, apologized to both men.

“Roger is a freelance contributor and his private communications do not represent FiveThirtyEight,” Silver said in a statement to HuffPost. “We had candid conversations with Michael Mann and Kevin Trenberth. We made clear that Roger’s conversations with them did not reflect FiveThirtyEight’s editorial values.”

Revelations of the private correspondence are particularly poorly timed for FiveThirtyEight, which has been dogged online throughout most of its 11-day existence by the climate change dispute. The controversy was given increased exposure Thursday night on “The Daily Show.”

Also see

Jump to bottom

89 comments
1 Fairly Sure I'm Still Obdicut  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 12:28:46pm

A good reminder that competence in one area doesn’t mean competence in another.

2 Justanotherhuman  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 12:31:18pm

Do you think Pielke will last another month?

3 thedopefishlives  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 12:31:59pm

re: #2 Justanotherhuman

Do you think Pielke will last another month?

They’re already looking to counterbalance his article with one from someone else. I don’t think he’ll be coming back.

4 Charles Johnson  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 12:33:19pm

Hiring Pielke to write about climate science is astoundingly clueless and wrong. I can’t imagine what Silver was thinking.

5 Political Atheist  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 12:36:35pm

re: #4 Charles Johnson

Lots of good people that are wonderfully smart have their blindspots, or just bad days. He did the right thing, kudos for at least stepping up and fixing it. Lesson learned presumably.

6 kerFuFFler  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 12:38:05pm

So which is it, is “Roger is a freelance contributor,” or their regular science writer? Calling him a freelancer seems to suggest that he will not be contributing frequently.

7 Fairly Sure I'm Still Obdicut  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 12:42:54pm

re: #5 Political Atheist

Lots of good people that are wonderfully smart have their blindspots, or just bad days. He did the right thing, kudos for at least stepping up and fixing it. Lesson learned presumably.

He hasn’t actually done the right thing or fixed it yet.

8 Political Atheist  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 12:49:50pm

re: #7 Fairly Sure I’m Still Obdicut

He hasn’t actually done the right thing or fixed it yet.

That would be what in your view?

9 Justanotherhuman  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 12:50:39pm

“But what does it actually mean to be against economic growth? I argue that to be anti-growth actually implies keeping poor people poor.”

Well, it doesn’t if you substitute meaningful education and work for people instead of constant consumption of natural resources. And that’s not “anti-growth” as you describe it. It’s just “growth” of a different type.

rogerpielkejr.blogspot.com

What Does it Mean to be Anti-Growth?

This guy really shoots from the hip without much thought.

10 jaunte  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 12:53:32pm
[Dr. John Abraham, a thermal science professor at the University of St. Thomas famous for his formation of the Climate Science Rapid Response Team] …also added that it wasn’t clear what Pielke meant when he said the IPCC hadn’t found evidence for a “spike” in extreme weather intensity. “If it means a statistically significant increase, then [Pielke] is wrong,” he wrote. “The report has identified changes to extreme weather including the intensity of Atlantic hurricanes, regional droughts and floods.” Pielke asserts those are not significant drivers of disaster costs. thinkprogress.org

Absurd. Are there no editors at FiveThirtyEight?

11 Political Atheist  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 12:56:05pm

re: #10 jaunte

Absurd. Are there no editors at FiveThirtyEight?

They their explanation, for what it’s worth. Validity will be in the eye of the beholder. Or not.

We’re much more sympathetic to the other three categories of criticism, however.

As I mentioned, the central thesis of Roger’s article concerns the economic costs associated with natural disasters. But we also allowed a number of peripheral claims into the piece. For instance, Roger made a number of references to the overall incidence of natural disasters, as opposed to their economic cost.

We think many of these claims have support in the scientific literature, specifically including the 2013 IPCC report. But there is a range of debate among experts about others. Either way, these claims shouldn’t have been included in the story as offhand remarks. We should either have addressed them in more detail or scrubbed them from the article.

Roger’s article also contained an implicit policy recommendation in its closing paragraph. Whether or not the recommendation was justified by Roger’s thesis and evidence, we generally prefer to avoid these kind of recommendations, and instead allow readers to draw any policy conclusions for themselves. Furthermore, there was some loose language in the article. We pride ourselves on precise, matter-of-fact language. These things reflect a poor job of editing on our part.

12 Fairly Sure I'm Still Obdicut  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 12:57:38pm

re: #8 Political Atheist

That would be what in your view?

Admitting the scientific in the original article, admitting that Pielke is a ‘soft’ denier in the vein of Lomborg, and that getting a political scientist to lead off writing about climate change was not a good idea.

They have said they’ll publish a rebuttal and they have a specific dude in mind, who’s ‘travelling’ and can’t do it, but one of the main problems is something they actually allude to in their note to the readers: The entire article was missing the forest for the trees. There is some debate about the extent to which the energy added to the climate system through AGW has already affected natural disasters. There is no debate that it will, in the future.

Good journalism on Climate Change doesn’t involve political scientists nitpicking at the edges of the claims; this is a classic soft denier tactic, one Peilke is well-known for, and 538 appears to still somehow be in the dark about that.

13 Kragar  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 12:58:54pm

HUZZAH! I’m actually getting a refund this year!

14 Fairly Sure I'm Still Obdicut  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 12:58:57pm

re: #11 Political Atheist

Did 538 have any actual climate scientists vet the article? It really sounds as if they did not, which is hugely disappointing.

15 Political Atheist  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 1:00:26pm

BRB grocery run…

16 Justanotherhuman  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 1:01:00pm

re: #11 Political Atheist

They their explanation, for what it’s worth. Validity in the eye of the beholder.

It’s as though 538 just got desperate and allowed some random from-the-right professor (a busy guy already) to establish their climate change policy over there.

Turns out it was a quick look at the wrapper which concealed a lot of bias.

17 The Ghost of a Flea  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 1:01:06pm

Data-driven analysis is not magic. It’s only as good as the sample and the model. Stat, like research design, is validated by other people taking apart how you achieved your results, criticizing it, suggesting changes to conditions, repeating it, et cetera.

A quick back-track of links leads to some stat people talking in more depth about Pielke, Jr:

The article focuses on Pielke’s math w/r/t his 538 article, but it provides a profusion of links to other criticism of Pielke’s use/abuse of models.

It’s also notable that Pielke, Jr spends a lot of time invoking conspiracy and “climate orthodoxy.”

18 jaunte  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 1:03:34pm

A Letter From John Holdren Regarding Roger Pielke Jr’s Statements

“…In the rest of this response, I will show, first, that the indicated quote from the US Climate Change Science Program (CCSP) about U.S. droughts is missing a crucial adjacent sentence in the CCSP report, which supports my position about drought in the American West. I will also show that Dr. Pielke’s statements about global drought trends, while irrelevant to my comments about drought in California and the Colorado River Basin, are seriously misleading, as well, concerning what is actually in the UN Panel’s latest report and what is in the current scientific literature.”

19 Targetpractice  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 1:05:08pm

re: #13 Kragar

HUZZAH! I’m actually getting a refund this year!

Drinks on Kragar!

20 EPR-radar  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 1:05:09pm

re: #11 Political Atheist

IMO, 538 is going to need to do better than this to clean up this mess. This isn’t just an issue of editorial oversight.

An analysis of how soft-denialism selectively uses factoids (lies and/or misleadingly stated truths) to spin would be on point.

21 Kragar  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 1:06:14pm

re: #19 Targetpractice

Drinks on Kragar!

WATER ALL AROUND!

22 wrenchwench  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 1:09:03pm

Parallels with Steve Pearce’s press secretary: People with a written, publicly available record, hired to create some more written, publicly available record, but the hiring people either didn’t read the previous record, or read it and failed to analyze the record properly. And then hired the wrong person for the job.

This reflects on the person doing the hiring. Badly, as if I needed to add that.

23 Aqua Obama  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 1:14:12pm
24 jaunte  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 1:20:22pm

re: #23 Aqua Obama

“missing a crucial adjacent sentence”

Classic quote-mining.

25 Mattand  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 1:20:29pm

re: #12 Fairly Sure I’m Still Obdicut

Good journalism on Climate Change doesn’t involve political scientists nitpicking at the edges of the claims; this is a classic soft denier tactic, one Peilke is well-known for, and 538 appears to still somehow be in the dark about that.

Seriously. Quite frankly, it’s basically the “Teach the Controversy” idiocy that creationist use, only with climate change in its place.

26 Justanotherhuman  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 1:21:24pm

These attacks on the science (and other scientists) have been going on for a long time.

Like father, like son: Roger Pielke Sr. also doesn’t understand the science of global warming — or just chooses to willfully misrepresent it.

thinkprogress.org

27 gwangung  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 1:21:37pm

re: #25 Mattand

Seriously. Quite frankly, it’s basically the “Teach the Controversy” idiocy that creationist use, only with climate change in its place.

Where did you think they honed the tactic?

28 Mattand  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 1:22:35pm

re: #4 Charles Johnson

Hiring Pielke to write about climate science is astoundingly clueless and wrong. I can’t imagine what Silver was thinking.

re: #20 EPR-radar

IMO, 538 is going to need to do better than this to clean up this mess. This isn’t just an issue of editorial oversight.

An analysis of how soft-denialism selectively uses factoids (lies and/or misleadingly stated truths) to spin would be on point.

I’m really trying to give Silver the benefit of the doubt and chalk it up to inexperience.

29 wrenchwench  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 1:23:11pm

I had to fire a guy I hired once. Couldn’t judge his (in)competence until I saw him work. That’s why there was a 30 day probationary period. Was much easier to let him go than to picture continuing to work with a guy who wasn’t what he claimed to be, and trying to train him to be that.

30 Fairly Sure I'm Still Obdicut  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 1:25:54pm

I’m going to include a note in my “Statistics Saturday” post today about how waving around statistics can be used to make an area of discussion look important. But I’m mostly going to stick to explaining the awesomeness of standard deviation.

Right after I finish these papers.

31 Amory Blaine  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 1:30:43pm

Given Mr. Silvers passion of truth through numbers, it is astonishing that their science writer wouldn’t be given extra scrutiny.

32 b_sharp  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 1:32:10pm

re: #30 Fairly Sure I’m Still Obdicut

I’m going to include a note in my “Statistics Saturday” post today about how waving around statistics can be used to make an area of discussion look important. But I’m mostly going to stick to explaining the awesomeness of standard deviation.

Right after I finish these papers.

Waiting with baited bated breath.

33 Political Atheist  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 1:32:11pm

re: #12 Fairly Sure I’m Still Obdicut

admitting that Pielke is a ‘soft’ denier in the vein of Lomborg, and that getting a political scientist to lead off writing about climate change was not a good idea.

Trying to square that the above with this part-Unless untrue of course.

Some of the criticisms of Roger have been unfair. For instance, Roger is not a climate “skeptic” or “denier.” He has written at FiveThirtyEight — and he has testified before Congress — that he believes in the thesis of anthropogenic global warming (AGW), that he considers it a serious problem, and that he thinks society should make efforts to mitigate it.

Another line of criticism is that Roger is unqualified to write about climate change because his training is as a political scientist rather than a climatologist. However, the scientific consensus on the climate — as embodied in the extensive list of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) authors — is formulated not only by climatologists, but also statisticians, meteorologists, engineers, economists, ecologists, physicists and those from many other disciplines in the hard sciences and the social sciences. Most have expertise within some relatively narrow part of the literature. Roger has published dozens of peer-reviewed articles on estimating the incidence of climate-related disasters and their associated costs. That was the subject of his FiveThirtyEight piece.

34 FemNaziBitch  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 1:37:57pm

My Old Man Dog

I am now going to bed, finally.

35 Fairly Sure I'm Still Obdicut  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 1:39:50pm

re: #33 Political Atheist

Trying to square that the above with this part-Unless untrue of course.

It’s not true. He’s a ‘soft’ denier. He doesn’t directly deny AGW, but he does deny that CO2 is the overwhelmingly main forcer, and he denies that reduction efforts are the best way to combat it, instead parroting the incredible unwise and unscientific ‘adaptation’ idea that is popular in right-wing circles.

You get the difference between a ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ denier, right? And that this guy is not a scientist?

36 klys  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 1:39:52pm

re: #34 FemNaziBitch

My Old Man Dog

I am now going to bed, finally.

{{ggt}}

37 b_sharp  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 1:41:09pm

re: #33 Political Atheist

Trying to square that the above with this part-Unless untrue of course.

Pielke is well known as a denier in the climatologist community. Like Lomborg he pretends to support AGW research but then does his best to minimize its effect.

38 jaunte  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 1:42:05pm

re: #33 Political Atheist

Here’s an example of soft denial. Pielke used this reference in his Congressional testimony:

Similarly, long-term trends (1925-2003) of hydrologic droughts based on model derived soil moisture and runoff show that droughts have, for the most part, become shorter, less frequent, and cover a smaller portion of the U.S. over the last century (Andreadis and Lettenmaier, 2006).

Here’s the very next sentence, which he buried in the footnotes, because it doesn’t support the ‘shorter, less frequent’ story:

The main exception is the Southwest and parts of the interior of the West, where increased temperature has led to rising drought trends (Groisman et al., 2004; Andreadis and Lettenmaier, 2006).

39 b_sharp  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 1:42:46pm

re: #34 FemNaziBitch

My Old Man Dog

I am now going to bed, finally.

I’m so sorry. {{{ ggt }}}

40 simoom  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 1:43:04pm

The opening paragraph to First Look’s write-up on their latest leaking to SPIEGEL:

Der Spiegel: NSA Put Merkel on List of 122 Targeted Leaders

Secret documents newly disclosed by the German newspaper Der Spiegel on Saturday shed more light on how aggressively the National Security Agency and its British counterpart have targeted Germany for surveillance.

That’s sort of an odd way to frame it as it’s actually First Look’s employees that “disclosed” the documents and wrote the SPIEGEL article (Poitras’ name leads the SPIEGEL story byline). In a way they’ve laundered their story through SPIEGEL so they can afterward appeal to it’s authority.

politico.com

“We do the reporting first… I vet the stories,” Greenwald said. “We come with the story already formed. We work on drafts of the story. We always edit the story. We have approval rights.

Greenwald, who is an attorney, acknowledged insisting on freelance contracts in order to supply the stories. However, he said that is itself a legal precaution aimed at ensuring that authorities treat him as a journalist and not as a source. Traditionally, sources have sometimes been subject to prosecution for disclosing secret documents, while the government has shied away from prosecuting those who act as journalists or publishers.

41 wrenchwench  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 1:43:42pm

re: #34 FemNaziBitch

{{{GGT}}}

42 Weet  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 1:43:58pm

Nate Silver should have used this opportunity to dump the guy.

I don’t follow that many people on twitter, but Nate was one of my first follows. I unfollowed him over this, and let him know why.

(Edited for typos. I should use the preview.)

43 Fairly Sure I'm Still Obdicut  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 1:46:19pm

re: #42 Weet

Nate Silver should have used this opportunity to dump the guy.

I don’t follow that many people on twitter, but Nate was on the my first follows. I unfollowed him over this, and let him know why.

I’m still kind of baffled by this ‘rebuttal’ thing. The responsible action would to have had the article looked at by actual climate scientists prior to publication—especially since they knew this was coming from a political scientist, not a climate scientist.

Skewed articles from non-scientists on scientific subjects is hardly breaking new media ground.

44 The Ghost of a Flea  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 1:47:15pm

re: #34 FemNaziBitch

{{{GGT}}}

45 b_sharp  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 1:47:34pm

re: #42 Weet

Nate Silver should have used this opportunity to dump the guy.

I don’t follow that many people on twitter, but Nate was on the my first follows. I unfollowed him over this, and let him know why.

Nate’s credibility certainly takes a hit from publishing Pielke’s stuff.

46 wrenchwench  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 1:50:02pm
47 Justanotherhuman  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 1:51:25pm

re: #40 simoom

The opening paragraph to First Look’s write-up on their latest targeted attempt to disrupt our ongoing diplomatic efforts:

Der Spiegel: NSA Put Merkel on List of 122 Targeted Leaders

That’s sort of an odd way to frame it as it’s actually First Look’s employees that “disclosed” the documents and wrote the SPIEGEL article (Poitras’ name leads the SPIEGEL story byline). In a way they’ve laundered their story through SPIEGEL so they can afterward appeal to it’s authority.

politico.com

I doubt that approach is going to keep him from being considered a source. : )

48 Kragar  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 1:53:20pm

No matter how many times she does it, my wife still manages to annoy the hell out of me doing this:

Me: “Are you ready to go?”

Wife: “Yes. I need to take a shower first.”

THEN YOU’RE NOT READY!

Bugs the shit out of me

49 b_sharp  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 1:54:24pm

re: #48 Kragar

No matter how many times she does it, my wife still manages to annoy the hell out of me doing this:

Me: “Are you ready to go?”

Wife: “Yes. I need to take a shower first.”

THEN YOU’RE NOT READY!

Bugs the shit out of me

Maybe she has a different definition of the word ‘yes’ than you.

50 Kragar  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 1:55:09pm

re: #49 b_sharp

Maybe she has a different definition of the word ‘yes’ than you.

I think its a Japanese thing.

51 thedopefishlives  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 1:56:42pm

re: #48 Kragar

No matter how many times she does it, my wife still manages to annoy the hell out of me doing this:

Me: “Are you ready to go?”

Wife: “Yes. I need to take a shower first.”

THEN YOU’RE NOT READY!

Bugs the shit out of me

She’s ready to go take a shower. DUH.

52 b_sharp  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 1:57:21pm

re: #50 Kragar

I think its a Japanese thing.

Not necessarily. My wife does the same thing, although she does it less now than when she was young.

53 jaunte  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 1:58:06pm

re: #48 Kragar

It’s like that Jamaican phrase “soon come.”
No matter how long it takes, it’s on the way.

54 wrenchwench  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 1:59:49pm

re: #53 jaunte

It’s like that Jamaican phrase “soon come.”
No matter how long it takes, it’s on the way.

Here, if someone says ‘right now’, it doesn’t mean right now. If you mean right now, you say, ‘right now right now’.

55 Kragar  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 2:01:16pm

The good news: Games Workshop finally makes a Storm Trooper army

The bad news: This is their transport

Seriously? This is the best they could do? And I had been looking forward to this release.

56 b_sharp  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 2:02:24pm

re: #55 Kragar

The good news: Games Workshop finally makes a Storm Trooper army

The bad news: This is their transport

[Embedded image]

Seriously? This is the best they could do? And I had been looking forward to this release.

I like it.

57 Kragar  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 2:05:33pm

re: #56 b_sharp

I like it.

Meh. They should have made it a half-track if they were going that route.

Here is the other version

58 Kragar  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 2:06:36pm

And now that she is done is the shower, she’s wondering why I’m not instantly ready to go.

BBIAB

59 Varek Raith  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 2:07:48pm

re: #58 Kragar

And now that she is done is the shower, she’s wondering why I’m not instantly ready to go.

BBIAB

You fell for the trap.
:P

60 Ace-o-aces  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 2:10:29pm

re: #4 Charles Johnson

Hiring Pielke to write about climate science is astoundingly clueless and wrong. I can’t imagine what Silver was thinking.

Trying to provide “balance”.

61 RealityBasedSteve  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 2:10:45pm

re: #34 FemNaziBitch

{{{GGT}}}

RBS

62 Charles Johnson  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 2:10:57pm
63 Varek Raith  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 2:12:37pm

re: #34 FemNaziBitch

My Old Man Dog

I am now going to bed, finally.

*Salutes Old Man*

64 Justanotherhuman  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 2:15:10pm

I don’t think they’re so much “killing each other” as they are trying to kill the rest of us.

Christie says Republicans must ‘stop killing each other’

washingtonpost.com

He’s also pretty clueless about other stuff…

“Christie was well received by a crowd of a few hundred donors and pro-Israel activists, many of whom strongly backed Mitt Romney in the 2012 presidential contest. He spoke only briefly about foreign policy, but during a question-and-answer session said he was moved by his recent trip to Israel.

“Christie said he had dinner with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and was “extraordinarily taken by his strength and resolve.” But he drew murmurs from some in the audience when he referred to a helicopter ride he took over the “occupied territories.”

“Comfortable and loose on stage before many donors who backed his gubernatorial campaigns, Christie joked that he likes traveling to Israel because the country is “about the same size as New Jersey.”

65 Decatur Deb  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 2:18:23pm

re: #62 Charles Johnson

Sooo… you’re a bot, right?

Ask her if she would reach down and flip the tortoise on its back.

66 Justanotherhuman  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 2:19:25pm

Is 8 yrs long enough? None of them have a clue.

Influential Republicans working to draft Jeb Bush into 2016 presidential race

washingtonpost.com

LAS VEGAS — Many of the Republican Party’s most powerful insiders and financiers have begun a behind-the-scenes campaign to draft former Florida governor Jeb Bush into the 2016 presidential race, courting him and his intimates and starting talks on fundraising strategy.

“Concerned that the George Washington Bridge traffic scandal has damaged New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie’s political standing and alarmed by the steady rise of Sen. Rand Paul (Ky.), prominent donors, conservative leaders and longtime operatives say they consider Bush the GOP’s brightest hope to win back the White House.” More

67 Killgore Trout  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 2:22:04pm

re: #66 Justanotherhuman

Is 8 yrs long enough? None of them have a clue.

Influential Republicans working to draft Jeb Bush into 2016 presidential race

washingtonpost.com

LAS VEGAS — Many of the Republican Party’s most powerful insiders and financiers have begun a behind-the-scenes campaign to draft former Florida governor Jeb Bush into the 2016 presidential race, courting him and his intimates and starting talks on fundraising strategy.

“Concerned that the George Washington Bridge traffic scandal has damaged New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie’s political standing and alarmed by the steady rise of Sen. Rand Paul (Ky.), prominent donors, conservative leaders and longtime operatives say they consider Bush the GOP’s brightest hope to win back the White House.” More

Bush v Clinton! We are a country that’s run out of ideas.

68 Decatur Deb  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 2:23:38pm

re: #67 Killgore Trout

Bush v Clinton! We are a country that’s run out of ideas.

Herman Cain, Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Bobby Jindal, and Paul Ryan are all new ideas.

69 Killgore Trout  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 2:26:02pm

WaPo concludes there was indeed a phone call
White House and Kremlin seem to have different recollections of Obama-Putin call

In fact, it seems that there’s only one thing the pair might agree on: They exchanged views on the phone.

70 Eventual Carrion  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 2:29:13pm

re: #38 jaunte

Here’s an example of soft denial. Pielke used this reference in his Congressional testimony:

Here’s the very next sentence, which he buried in the footnotes, because it doesn’t support the ‘shorter, less frequent’ story:

Yes, it’s not happening except where it is happening.

71 RealityBasedSteve  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 2:29:30pm

re: #65 Decatur Deb

Ask her if she would reach down and flip the tortoise on its back.

What’s a tortoise?

RBS

72 Decatur Deb  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 2:30:04pm

re: #71 RealityBasedSteve

What’s a tortoise?

RBS

You know what a turtle is? Same thing.

73 AntonSirius  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 2:38:33pm

re: #16 Justanotherhuman

It’s as though 538 just got desperate and allowed some random from-the-right professor (a busy guy already) to establish their climate change policy over there.

“Establish their climate change policy?” WTF are you talking about?

Pielke’s was a stupid piece, but it was one piece. The site’s been up for less than two weeks. Slow your roll.

74 RealityBasedSteve  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 2:42:54pm

Of Course!!!!

75 A Mom Anon  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 2:44:59pm

Is there a reason why this site couldn’t have hired an actual climate scientist? You know, someone who has studied and understands the actual subject matter? Science? Anyone? Really? Come on.

This stuff gives me a headache. Down here in regular world, if I messed up that big in my job I’d be fired. Especially if my bosses had to apologize or make public excuses for me. Not to mention I couldn’t get hired in the first place if I didn’t have the credentials in the field. It must be nice to be educated and privileged.

76 Rev_Arthur_Belling  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 2:46:21pm

Of course this dude’s a scientist! It says it right in his descriptor: Political scientist. //

77 ObserverArt  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 3:00:54pm

re: #34 FemNaziBitch

My Old Man Dog

I am now going to bed, finally.

Awww, Sorry for your loss.

78 A Mom Anon  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 3:02:27pm

re: #34 FemNaziBitch

I’m so sorry to hear about this. What a lovely doggie. (((many hugs))) to you. Sigh.

79 Political Atheist  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 3:04:04pm

re: #35 Fairly Sure I’m Still Obdicut

It’s not true. He’s a ‘soft’ denier. He doesn’t directly deny AGW, but he does deny that CO2 is the overwhelmingly main forcer, and he denies that reduction efforts are the best way to combat it, instead parroting the incredible unwise and unscientific ‘adaptation’ idea that is popular in right-wing circles.

You get the difference between a ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ denier, right? And that this guy is not a scientist?

I get there is a spectrum of opinion on exactly what he is. Does a soft denier say what I quoted above? He may be more of a heretic than denier from where I sit. But these terms are fairly subjective. 538 denies he is a denier, soft or hard. I get that he is not a hard science scientist, What do you call a political scientist besides well political scientist?

It appears your opinion of the man is significantly more critical than those at 538. I don’t know who is right.

80 Backwoods_Sleuth  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 3:09:14pm

re: #34 FemNaziBitch

My Old Man Dog

I am now going to bed, finally.

{{{hugs}}}

81 Mattand  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 3:12:26pm

re: #34 FemNaziBitch

My Old Man Dog

I am now going to bed, finally.

So sorry about your loss. Deepest condolences.

82 Rev_Arthur_Belling  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 3:13:03pm

re: #79 Political Atheist

What do you call a political scientist besides well political scientist?

I was actually thinking along these lines earlier. It is a confusing name for a field of study that isn’t a “hard” science.

83 Fairly Sure I'm Still Obdicut  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 3:21:10pm

re: #79 Political Atheist

I get there is a spectrum of opinion on exactly what he is. Does a soft denier say what I quoted above?

There’s a spectrum, but the truth is that he’s a soft denier. And yes, a soft denier does say what you quoted above.

He may be more of a heretic than denier from where I sit. But these terms are fairly subjective. 538 denies he is a denier, soft or hard. I get that he is not a hard science scientist, What do you call a political scientist besides well political scientist?

No real clue what you mean by ‘heretic’, since we’re not talking about a religion. Again, is the concept of ‘soft denier’ new to you, do you need it explained?

He’s not a climate scientist. It really doesn’t matter that ‘the kind of sociologist who studies politics’ is called ‘political scientist’. It’s not, as you say, a hard scientist. Who cares that it has ‘scientist’ in the name?

It appears your opinion of the man is significantly more critical than those at 538. I don’t know who is right.

Well, if not me, why not trust the climate scientists on this one? Like the dude who wrote the rebuttal 538 decided not to publish, or the other ones who are criticizing him?

I kind of don’t get why you wouldn’t believe me on this, either: when have you known me to be wrong on climate change stuff?

84 freetoken  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 3:32:59pm

re: #83 Fairly Sure I’m Still Obdicut

Pielke junior is what I’ll label a concern-professional.

Pielke senior is straight out of the denier industry.

Junior, as a student of politics and society, not climatology, has shown himself quite adept at line-walking. It’s quite the profession, and I suppose demonstrates some level of skill, in the field of politics.

85 Interesting Times  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 3:38:06pm

This group:

Forecast the Facts is a grassroots human rights organization dedicated to ensuring that Americans hear the truth about climate change: that temperatures are increasing, human activity is largely responsible, and that our world is already experiencing the effects. We do this by empowering everyday people to speak out in the face of misinformation and hold accountable those who mislead the public.

…has an online petition addressing 538’s fiasco:

Tell Nate Silver: Fire Confusionist Roger Pielke

Goal is 10,000 signatures; they have 7,096 so far.

86 Fairly Sure I'm Still Obdicut  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 3:46:35pm

re: #84 freetoken

Pielke junior is what I’ll label a concern-professional.

Pielke senior is straight out of the denier industry.

Junior, as a student of politics and society, not climatology, has shown himself quite adept at line-walking. It’s quite the profession, and I suppose demonstrates some level of skill, in the field of politics.

Well, he’s tipped his hand severely at several points.

He’s denied that the climate models are consistent with recent history:

julesandjames.blogspot.com

Which, of course, is wrong.

He’s regularly huffed about while he admits CO2 is a driver in climate change, it may not be the primary driver.

And he’s attacked every single carbon dioxide minimization strategy except for carbon capture, which involves doing nothing about our output of CO2, just capturing it out of the atmosphere. Since CO2 is non-reactive, this is the hardest and most inefficient way to go about CO2 reduction.

87 Political Atheist  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 3:46:59pm

re: #83 Fairly Sure I’m Still Obdicut

There’s a spectrum, but the truth is that he’s a soft denier. And yes, a soft denier does say what you quoted above.

No real clue what you mean by ‘heretic’, since we’re not talking about a religion. Again, is the concept of ‘soft denier’ new to you, do you need it explained?

He’s not a climate scientist. It really doesn’t matter that ‘the kind of sociologist who studies politics’ is called ‘political scientist’. It’s not, as you say, a hard scientist. Who cares that it has ‘scientist’ in the name?

Well, if not me, why not trust the climate scientists on this one? Like the dude who wrote the rebuttal 538 decided not to publish, or the other ones who are criticizing him?

I kind of don’t get why you wouldn’t believe me on this, either: when have you known me to be wrong on climate change stuff?

Maybe you should explain what soft denier means to you in this context. It’s not that I don’t believe you it’s that I’m looking at contrary data and stepping back to see what else becomes apparent.

So a person can admit humans are causing warming, and we should change our ways and still be a denier?

88 Fairly Sure I'm Still Obdicut  Sat, Mar 29, 2014 3:52:07pm

re: #87 Political Atheist

Maybe you should explain what soft denier means to you in this context. It’s not that I don’t believe you it’s that I’m looking at contrary data and stepping back to see what else becomes apparent.

What contrary ‘data’?

Soft deniers are a category of people who say, “Yes, human-caused climate change is occurring, BUT…”

And after the but may be,

“We shouldn’t do anything about it, because it’s beneficial.”
“We can adapt to it.”
“CO2 is not the main forcer.”
“Only this particular strategy will work, I will attack all others vociferously”
“The climate scientists got this one bit over here on the periphery wrong”

So a person can admit humans are causing warming, and we should change our ways and still be a denier?

Yes. Pielke actually attacks every serious or large-scale suggestion about how we should change our ways, instead championing adaptation, which is unscientific as fuck.

I’m not sure what’s challenging about the concept of a soft denier vs. a hard denier. A hard denier just denies that it’s happening or that it’s humans’ causing it. A soft denier denies other parts of the science around it, while admitting that it’s happening and that it’s at least partially human-caused. That’s the distinction.

The soft deniers are still denying scientific reality.

89 makeitstop  Sun, Mar 30, 2014 5:54:00am

re: #34 FemNaziBitch

My Old Man Dog

I am now going to bed, finally.

Hugs, GGT. So sorry for the loss of your friend.


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
A Closer Look at the Eastman State Bar DecisionTaking a few minutes away from work things to read through the Eastman decision. As I'm sure many of you know, Eastman was my law school con law professor. I knew him pretty well because I was also running in ...
KGxvi
1 hour ago
Views: 65 • Comments: 1 • Rating: 1