Dear Professor Dick Lindzen

Sharing an email I sent to the professor this evening:

Professor Dick Lindzen, 

Going through your 2012 interview with Alex Epstein at his Power Hour* and examining your various tricks and obfuscations, I'm amazed that real people of power have allowed you your long destructive career as a merchant of science fiction.

What I find difficult to grasp is when did it become OK to treat scientifically factual evidence with malicious contempt; and worse - with license to contort and misrepresent?  And when did it become OK to reject constructive honest learning in favor of clinging to faith based dogmas and short-sighted self-interest?

It seems like you've been on a way too long post retirement career dedicated to dumbing down our leaders and the public about the critically important topic of humanity's impact on our life supporting biosphere.  You must be feeling smug - you and your pals sure have succeeded.  

What do you care that the young ones get to deal with the mess that ignoring our Grand Geophysical Experiment for decades has created.

Though, guess I do understand why our leaders and society succumbed to your siren song - admitting the obvious would have required us to figure out how to be happy with a little less.  We couldn't do that, now could we?

Shame on you.


With deep sorrow,

Citizenschallenge
________________________________________________

* Dissecting Dr Lindzen's intrinsic obtuseness

part one - the "real" questions
part two - the conspiracy
part three - the government driving AGW
part four - nature in balance? 
part five -  spurious feedback mechanisms

________________________________________________

PS - This is what science looks like:
{followed by 176 myths addressed by SkepticalScience.com} 

Climate Change 2013: Working Group 1 - 

The Physical Science Basis

https://www.ipcc-wg1.unibe.ch/AR5/chapteroutline.html

Considering the silliness of Dr. L.W. at SoD #2

Here's my last post regarding the denial games over at SoD.  I actually started with this review, but then Florifulgurator's comment came along and since it was much more interesting I took that digression.  Now I feel I still owe RD a rational accounting of Dr.LW's many fallacies since RD puts so much store in his spoof.

___________________________________________

The Holocaust, Climate Science and Proof 

February 4, 2015 by ScienceofDoom

RD wrote on February 12, 2015 at 11:47am
The questions have appeared, as have two very thoughtful comments from L.W. Based on what he’s written, and your definition, and any additional concern you would have given because he’s Jewish, would you call him a climate change denier?
{...}
{CC: never did find any questions...}
RD wrote  February 12, 2015 at 3:54 pm
 ...    The questions have appeared, as have two very thoughtful comments from LW ...
This strikes me as a good question, because it’s precise. You’re responses have been very general. I’d like you to consider this very specific question. Thanks.

___________________________________

LW wrote: February 12, 2015 at 1:26 am

I started out conditionally accepting the AGW position because many experts claimed it was so. 

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

And I started out learning about our planet's geophysics and its atmosphere...

For the more complete response see:

Considering the silliness of Dr. L.W. (opening gambit) at SoD #1

_______________________________

LW wrote: However, I am a scientist, and looked in far more detail before I would accept it fully. 

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The discussion is supposed to be about discussing those details, not about self anointed authority.

_______________________________

LW wrote: I do not deny the basic science as stated by SoD and others. 

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 

Words are cheap.

_______________________________

LW wrote: With me, the issue is how much the human burning of fossil fuel affects the net result, and what is the supporting evidence of consequences.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

To understand any of that one must first understand our planet's CO2 cycle.  

As for supporting evidence, one must make the effort to become familiar with it, not hide from it.

http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

~ ~ ~

IPCC Working Group 1, the physical basis

http://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg1/

~ ~ ~

SkepticalScience.com explaining the science

http://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-lags-temperature.htm

http://www.skepticalscience.com/human-co2-smaller-than-natural-emissions.htm

~ ~ ~

The Carbon Cycle

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/CarbonCycle/

~ ~ ~

The Global Carbon Cycle

University of Michigan

http://www.globalchange.umich.edu/globalchange1/current/lectures/kling/carbon_cycle/carbon_cycle.html

Considering the silliness of Dr. L.W. at SoD #1

I'm home alone and have been musing so instead of finishing my review of L.W.'s much commended comments, a reread had me turning my response
 to his opening gambit into a full length editorial of sorts.

___________________________________________________________

The Holocaust, Climate Science and Proof

February 4, 2015 by scienceofdoom

__________________________________________ 

L.W. wrote February 12, 2015 at 1:26 am:I started out conditionally accepting the AGW position because many experts claimed it was so. 

~ ~ ~

Well there's the first mistake.  How about this:  

I started out learning about our Earth in high school (early 1970s) science classes, that led to the atmosphere, which inevitably led to learning about AGW.  The instructors with their text books (consensus) laid out the fundamentals of our atmosphere and how greenhouse gases behave.  That is, by allowing short-wave ultra-violet rays enter and warm Earth's surface and then catching the outflowing long-wave infrared rays.  Or more accurately slowing down their escape.

We also learned about the incredible amounts of fossil fuels our society (we) were burning.  This stuff was/is increasing our atmosphere's Heat Retention Ability.  That extra CO2, plain and simple was going to warm our planet.  Like putting on extra layers of clothing when you're already comfortable.  Simple down to Earth logic!

This atmospheric property doesn't turn on and off at will.  So when an incredibly complex  globally (actually, excluding polar regions) averaged surface temperature data set jogs up and down or stays down a little longer than most expected, I understood the place to look was within natural and manmade variability, and the measurements. not in pretending that the physics of greenhouse gases had gone on a vacation so that global warming could go on a "hiatus".  

Think about it, there is a big difference between the warming water in a kettle and our ability to measure the temp. profile of said steaming kettle. 

Concluding thoughts on: Lindzen, Deconstructs Global Warming Hysteria

Lindzen, Deconstructs Global Warming Hysteria - Anatomy of a Con Job 

That was quite the project, I wasn't sure I'd finish it... and I'm sure that it's going to need some doctoring, but right now I need to catch up on neglected chores, so I'm going to have to live with them the way they stand. {that's finally taken care of}

Thinking back on this adventure that started with the following challenge.

Lindzen, Deconstructs Global Warming Hysteria - 3/3 Anatomy of a Con Job

{edited June 13th afternoon - for typos } 

"Citizenschallenge, you are the one who chose to make personal attacks and dishonest ad hominems about James Taylor*, The Heartland Institute and the scientists in his article.  

You want videos from climate scientists? No problem,Richard S. Lindzen Ph.D. Professor of Atmospheric Science at MIT  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-sHg3ZztDAw 

How many more do you want? I know you have been brainwashed to not believe there are highly credentialed scientists who do not support your position on climate change but please don’t make it so obvious."

*He's referring to 

"James Taylor Caught Doctoring the '97-Percent Consensus' Claims"  http://whatsupwiththatwatts.blogspot.com/2013/05/james-taylor-caught-doctoring-97.html

With that invitation I took up the video, it turned into a big project that I split between three posts.  Here is the last installment. Lindzen's 2009 Competitive Enterprise Institute talk can be found at my  first installment.  Lindzens words are in courier font.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~  

Lindzen, Deconstructs Global Warming Hysteria 2of3 - Anatomy of a Con Job

{edited June 10th AM - for typos } 

"Citizenschallenge, you are the one who chose to make personal attacks and dishonest ad hominems about James Taylor*, The Heartland Institute and the scientists in his article.  

You want videos from climate scientists? No problem,Richard S. Lindzen Ph.D. Professor of Atmospheric Science at MIT  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-sHg3ZztDAw 

How many more do you want? I know you have been brainwashed to not believe there are highly credentialed scientists who do not support your position on climate change but please don’t make it so obvious."

*He's referring to "James Taylor Caught Doctoring the '97-Percent Consensus' Claims"  http://whatsupwiththatwatts.blogspot.com/2013/05/james-taylor-caught-doctoring-97.html

With that invitation I took up the video, it turned into a huge project that needs to get split between three posts.  Here is the second installment. Lindzen's 2009 Competitive Enterprise Institute is at my first installment. Lindzens words are in courier font.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~  

Lindzen, Deconstructs Global Warming Hysteria 1of3 - Anatomy of a Con Job

{edited June 10th AM - for typos } 

"Citizenschallenge, you are the one who chose to make personal attacks and dishonest ad hominems about James Taylor*, The Heartland Institute and the scientists in his article.  

You want videos from climate scientists? No problem,Richard S. Lindzen Ph.D. Professor of Atmospheric Science at MIT  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-sHg3ZztDAw 

How many more do you want? I know you have been brainwashed to not believe there are highly credentialed scientists who do not support your position on climate change but please don’t make it so obvious."

*He's referring to "James Taylor Caught Doctoring the '97-Percent Consensus' Claims"  http://whatsupwiththatwatts.blogspot.com/2013/05/james-taylor-caught-doctoring-97.html

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 

With that invitation I took up the video: