Bishop Hill The VP candidate and Climategate
Aug 11, 2012 Climate: Parliament Mitt Romney's running mate for the 2012 presidential election is to be Representative Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, a youthful figure from the right of the Republican party. There is a profile of Ryan here.
Perhaps more interestingly he turns out to be very sceptical on the climate front and rather well informed on Climategate. As he said in an interview in 2009:
At issue ...are published e-mail exchanges from the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU). These e-mails from leading climatologists make clear efforts to use statistical tricks to distort their findings and intentionally mislead the public on the issue of climate change.
The CRU e-mail scandal reveals a perversion of the scientific method, where data were manipulated to support a predetermined conclusion. The e-mail scandal has not only forced the resignation of a number of discredited scientists, but it also marks a major step back on the need to preserve the integrity of the scientific community. While interests on both sides of the issue will debate the relevance of the manipulated or otherwise omitted data, these revelations undermine confidence in the scientific data driving the climate change debates.
While I think there was only one scientist who actually stood down, the rest is on the button. Of course, people like Chris Mooney are jumping up and down saying that Ryan has it wrong, but given that the CRU bods were found to have been misleading in their trick to hide the decline, this just makes him look disingenuous.
Reader Comments (18)
I would never vote Republican however IMHO anything Chris Mooney says seems to be wrong, at least in the conclusions he reaches - when he does.
A good sign that there is someone who knows to be skeptical, and why. One thing I liked about Pawlenty is that he was on board with CAGW and Cap and Trade, but after some education, changed his views.
Someone needs to make a laminated card with a list of 5-10 prominent, credentialed "deniers." That way, they will be prepared when some reporter asks them for even one scientist who doubts CAGW they will be ready. (Having been asked that by an arrogant Warmist at a public lecture, and replying quickly with 5 and their institutions, I can verify that it works wonderfully)
@ Tregonsee - care to list your chosen 5? I would like to prepare my own card!
Tregonsee: I think you suggest that the simplest arguments work the best in this debate. If so, I wholeheartedly agree, and with your general sentiment. On the highlighted issue, I think Mr Ryan aligns quite strongly with Richard Muller. I wish more UK politicians would (at least) do the same.
Dave Ward: Strangely enough, see here for a definitive list.
It's interesting that voters in both Australia and the US are going to have a clear sceptical option in the next few months.
That wasn't in the UN/Transnational Bureaucracy script was it?
No wonder the usual suspects are wailing and gnashing their teeth.
Ryan is a good choice for many reasons including climate realism, but Romney does not have a clear cut position, see for example: http://www.aei-ideas.org/2012/03/would-romney-go-green-if-elected-president/
Not commenting on any particular party/candidate, but I'm somewhat optimistic about politicians genuine thoughts. I think many simply don't want to get blind-sided and lose votes by misjudging the number of "green" votes that could be lost, not won.
To that end they tailor their statements to match the opponent on this issue, without having strong convictions. If polls I've heard reported are accurate, then the issue doesn't come near the top for many voters, and the politicians aren't going to try too hard to change that by outbidding each other on an issue they now have real doubts about.
Given the rhetorical level of the campaign, there will soon be an ad by some Democratic Party entity claiming that Romney and Ryan have caused a doubling in the level of manmade CO2 in the last decade. Most members of the Democratic Party will believe it.
If I remember right the "one scientist" in question merely "stood aside" and soon chassé-ed back into his position again.
yes, one scientist had an extended vacation (paid, perhaps, or not??) while the fake "inquiries" proceeded, and then returned once thick coats of whitewash had been applied
I think his position changed somewhat to "Director of Research" rather than "Director" of the whole unit, so that may have been some recognition of his administrative ineptitude, but there's been no hint that he suffered any adverse bureaucratic action so far as I have seen.....
Theo,
I believe you will find that most of our lefty friends will believe that Bush and Cheney...oh sorry, Romney and Ryan are responsible for Granny Smiths death from cancer in 1987 after her husband was made redundant from General Motors in 1923 and was thus left without health care coverage even though Granny Smiths employor at the time (ACORN) provided health care cover for her under their employees plan.
Mailman
I think Romney is on a par with Dan Quale, who once announced
When Romney announced Paul Ryan, he announced him as
I think it might have worked out better that way round.
For those who don't remember, we may have seen a paring like this in the past - Dole-Kemp. The wiki piece on Jack Kemp seems fair to this frustrated Republican (me).
It is too bad that there will not be a debate between Obama and Ryan.
Ryan is very smart; knows how much trouble the U.S. is really in; and has put forward a plan that "threads the needle" between Grecian-like financial collapse and another Great Recession. Now if only enough people will pay attention....
Romney has company in deciding to "promote" a VP candidate:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2187040/Barack-Obama--Both-President-Mitt-Romney-introduce-running-mates-president-U-S.html
'forced the resignation of a number of discredited scientists'. Well, the good thing about that is that Ryan's perception may become the reality. The list of discredited is gradually lengthening, the need for resignations is growing.
========
Romney, to his discredit as Governor of Massachusetts, was advised on global warming by no less than the current 'science czar' in President Obama's Administration, John Holdren.
My hope is that Paul Ryan will educate Romney on this problem and all its implications. Were you guys aware that back in 1998, John Holdren was involved in efforts with the White House to marginalize skeptic climate scientists?
Yes, Russ, but that was then and this is now. Romney, like any effective executive, is capable of learning. He'll also not be pushing RomneyCare on the nation as he was once persuaded to allow it in Massachusetts. I wouldn't be floored if he chose Sarah Palin as Secretary of Energy. But then, I thought he'd pick Jan Brewer, Governor of Arizona, for his Veep.
=============