More Evidence Climate Scientists Can’t Measure Anything Correctly

Note this from Davos via Tom Nelson:

Friedman adds that Exxon Mobil has “done a number” on the debate with PR. Brilliant says that their role is to get information to people, as much information as they can. Page says that success is the best message — that is, if they had three-cent power, everyone would come.

Gore, from the audience, takes issue with Brilliant, saying that getting information out is no longer sufficient. “That’s the way the world used to work. The world doesn’t work that way anymore. The reason that the tobacco industry was able to continue killing people for 40 years ater the surger General’s report…. they understood the power of strategic persuasion. They went about it in a very careful, organized, and well-funded way.” He says we are “vulnerable to strategic persuasion campaigns if the other side assumes that we should just get the information out there.” He says Exxon Mobil has funded 40 front groups to “in their own words position global warming as theory rather than fact.” He concludes: “We need to take them on, Goddamnit.”

Using what rational metric could anyone argue that ExxonMobil and the oil/power industry is winning or dominating the PR war on global warming?  Gore and company are leading this race 1000:1.  Every media story is sympathetic to their side.  Every public school course teaches it their way.   The entire scientific grant process is tilted to make sure only global warming believers get fundingExxon has been outspent thousands to one in funding research.  Only a few lone bloggers and scientists even keep the skeptic’s issues alive.   If climate scientists really have such a warped perspective on measurement, can we really trust them to be measuring temperature correctly?

Gore’s frustration is that, despite this 1000:1 PR advantage, his side is still losing the hearts and minds of average Americans, who are far less likely to think in lockstep with their country’s "elites" than are Europeans.  His definition of Exxon controlling the debate is having Exxon be able to excercise its free speech rights at all.  And since he "takes them on" at every turn, my guess is what he means by this exhortation is to actually use the coercive power of the government to shut Exxon and other skeptics up completely.

  • bill-tb

    I liked this comment

    “You can’t succeed just out of conservation because then you won’t have economic development,” Brilliant explains. “Find a way to make electricity — not to cut back on it but to have more of it than you ever dreamed of.”

    probably forced Al Gore to blow a gasket. You know the goals of the alarmists are to contain people in a limited energy bubble, google seems to have other ideas, as do most rational people.

    It is only the irrational alarmists who continue to dance while the obvious solution to solving the energy problem while at the same time reducing CO2 is shunned — Nuclear power. In particular the newer PBMRs are showing great promise. If the predictions are true about the quite sun, we should get cracking now to solve the problem, we will need the energy to keep warm. I also agree that transmission and switching of power needs a major upgrade to improve reliability and flexibility.

  • morganovich

    “Nobody is interested in solutions if they don’t think there’s a problem. Given that starting point, I believe it is appropriate to have an over-representation of facts on how dangerous (global warming) is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are, and how hopeful it is that we are going to solve this crisis.” -al gore

    there it is. straight from the horse’s mouth.

    So it’s fine to overstate a problem to make sure everyone gets on board to solve it? He has just told us he plans to lie to us and feels justified in so doing. (and apparently the IPCC agrees with him) And still he is considered credible? This beggars belief. it’s egocentrism is breathtaking. To hear him accuse “deniers” of “propaganda” reeks of nearly as much hypocrisy as the $30,000/year electrical bill for his home. His cries against the deniers echo martin luther calling for the head of Copernicus.

  • Chris, Baildon UK

    “who are far less likely to think in lockstep with their country’s “elites” than are Europeans”

    Please don’t write off all Europeans as follows to our great leaders (alleged) wisdom……

  • Mike

    Bill:
    What is a PBMR?
    Thanks

  • TCO

    It’s called the law of diminishing returns, Houston office shitferbrains.

  • Pops

    The retiring Dr. Joanne Simpson tells it like it is (from Pielke Sr.’s web site): “Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receive any funding, I can speak quite frankly.” It isn’t ExxonMobil that’s distorting the process.

  • Scientist

    average Americans, who are far less likely to think in lockstep with their country’s “elites” than are Europeans – what a thoroughly, thoroughly stupid thing to say.

  • I wouldn’t worry too much about the sun. The attribution relies on the same spurious feedbacks and lags as GHGs. My guess is that both effects are much smaller than we think.

  • MCF

    @Mike – The power of Google…

    PBMR = pebble bed molecular reactor a/k/a PBR

    See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pebble_bed_reactor and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PBMR

  • litesong

    Poor Exxon can’t pay to distribute their overwhelming data that pollution doesn’t effect the earth in any way, shape or form. They are outspent 1000 to one. You mean they are so poor that they can only give their retiring heads $400 million? Such poorness stabs me to my heart’s core!

    Oh, save me from evil scientists who sell their souls & make up research papers to gain their massive $30,000 research grants. Yes, its so easy to buy off scientists who have poured their life long efforts into truth seeking. Just $30,000 & scientists are in your hands. Hey, maybe you don’t even have to pay them $30,000!

    Woe is me! Exxon is such a pauper! Let’s start a poor box for Exxon.