An insightful account of a major global challenge from one of the leading scientists at the center of the storm. A must read.I saw this as a chance to give one of Mann's enablers a piece of my mind, so I fired off this fire breathing comment in the form of a letter:
Mark Jacobson is a crackpot! He's famous for larding the carbon footprint of nuclear power with soot from future nuclear wars. His original Scientific American study proposes hydrogen for transportation. He's now touting cryogenic airplanes. He's clueless about how impractical actually using hydrogen is. He also appears to be cherrypicking capacity numbers over generation ones. And Amory Lovins is being very disingenuous touting Germany's renewable generation. Bjorn Lomborg sucinctly [sic] demolishes their wind and solar claims:
Well, I called Jacobson a crackpot and accused Amory lovins of being disingenuous. Is this ample justification for canning my comment? I think I provided plenty of examples to back up my claims. There are seven comments that all pretty much fawn over Jacobson. Here's a ridiculous quote by commenter Freddy D:
Mark Jacobsen shows, beyond a reasonable doubt, that all the worlds primary energy needs can be met with wind, water, and solar.
I included Cwon14's quote because of how well it expresses the outrage a lot of people feel about the field. It is really unfortunate that this debate no longer appears to be available on the web. It exposes Trenberth as an example of science politization at its worst. I'm absolutely unsurprised that he signed the RICO letter. It looks like the chickens may be coming home to roost on that one.BBD:"The politics comes in when right wingers make politically-motivated attacks on the science because they don’t like the policy implications. "
[Update: 8 hours later I see my previous 2 comments are canned. More in a later postThere's some truth in that, but there is also some truth in a sort of correlary [sic]that left wingers defend "The Science" because they like the policy implications. In fact they might even make politically-motivated attacks on science that refutes some of "The Science", such as papers by "McIntyre and McKitrick" or "lewis and Curry" or blog posts that show how incompetent and ethically challenged Stefan Lewandowsky and John Cook are.
