In a rehash of last year’s laughable list of 400 ‘prominent scientists’ dispute climate change, Senator Inhofe has produced an updated list that now includes 650 scientists who dispute climate. As I explained last year; expertise matters, not everyone’s opinion is equally valid, and Inhofe’s list is short on people who’s expertise is actually relevant.
I wasn’t going to write anything about this year’s list, but Tim Lambert over at the Deltoid blog came to the realization that Inhofe’s list, is actually less honest than another famous anti-scientist list of ‘dissenting scientists’:
Inhofe’s list of 650 scientists that supposedly dispute the consensus on AGW reminded me of another list: The Discovery Institute’s list of scientists who dissent from Darwinism, so I thought I’d compare the two lists.
First, numbers. The Discovery Institute’s list has 751 names, while Inhofe’s has only 604. (Not “More Than 650″ as he claims — there are many names appearing more than once.) [SD: Not all people listed on Inhofe/Morano's list dissent to the consensus on climate change, yet the title is a count off erveryone listed in the list, thus the discrepancy between Tim Lambert's count and Morano's.]
Second, how do you get on the list? Well, you have to sign up to get on the Discovery Institute’s list, but Inhofe will add you to his list if he thinks you’re disputing the global warming consensus and he won’t take you off, even if you tell him to do so. Yes, there is someone less honest than the Discovery Institute.
Those that remember my brush with Marc Morano (Inhofe’s spin doctor) know that the lists of ‘dissenting research’ he posted here weren’t actually dissenting. Some of them even explicitly acknowledge climate change and say we are already feeling it’s impacts. So it should come as no surprise that Inhofe’s new list is full of people that don’t actually deny climate change.
Attached to the list was a a study that presumably (according to Inhofe) claimed that the sun is responsible for climate change. [SD: The study wasn't actually attached to the list, I was confused because it was sent in the same email as the list] If true this would be in direct opposition to two recent studies, that conclusively show that the sun is not responsible for the current warming trend. When the lead author was asked if her study claimed that human-caused emissions were not the major factor driving the temperature record in the past century? She replied:
We did a strong differentiation between preindustrial (1250-1850) time and the last 150 years. In the preindustrial time we found a strong correlation between the solar activity proxy and our temperature, suggesting solar forcing as a main force for temperature change in this time. However, the correlation between the solar activity proxy and Altai temperature is NOT significant anymore for the last 150 years. In this time the increase in the CO2 concentrations is significantly correlated with our temperature.
Surely we can expect a correction to Inhofe’s obvious error any day now… right?
You know you’re scraping the bottom of the barrel looking for dissent when the creationist cranks at the Discovery Institute are behaving with more integrity than you.