Climate Change Scientist Forced out for being a Heretic

[Glacier]

A climate change scientist who challenged the status quo on extreme weather claims he faced such backlash from the left that he lost a writing job and wound up on the White House website.

Roger Pielke Jr, an environmental studies professor at the University Of Colorado, called himself a 'climate change heretic' in an opinion piece for the Wall Street Journal Wednesday. Pielke Jr believes climate change is real but his research has concluded that there is little evidence that extreme weather events, such as hurricanes, flood and droughts, have increased in the United States or across the world.

That position, which he admits might be wrong, prompted 'an intense media campaign' to have him fired from his position as a writer for Nate Silver's FiveThirtyEight, Pielke Jr wrote. He said he was demoted from staff writer to freelancer and quit when it became 'obvious' that the website wouldn't publish his work anymore.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... earch.html

[StraitTalk]

Is there truth to this? I have such a hard time taking the dailymail seriously - the claim that the scientific community spat on the principles of science so universally is a bit tall.

[rustled]

More here:
http://www.wsj.com/articles/my-unhappy- ... 1480723518
Food for thought about how effective we've become at silencing dissenting voices.

Most of us recognize the danger of silencing dissent. Most of us recognize that good science actually depends on skepticism, while only bad science (which isn't really science at all) depends on silencing dissent.

Einstein welcomed dissent.

It's informative (and disappointing) to see how Mann, Cook et al respond to dissenting voices.

[The Green Barbarian]

- the claim that the scientific community spat on the principles of science so universally is a bit tall.

They do it every day with the man-made climate change myth, why are you surprised by this?

[The Green Barbarian]

More here:
http://www.wsj.com/articles/my-unhappy- ... 1480723518
Food for thought about how effective we've become at silencing dissenting voices.

Most of us recognize the danger of silencing dissent. Most of us recognize that good science actually depends on skepticism, while only bad science (which isn't really science at all) depends on silencing dissent.

Einstein welcomed dissent.

It's informative (and disappointing) to see how Mann, Cook et al respond to dissenting voices.

I thought that it was Harper muzzling scientists. Now we see who really gets muzzled, anyone who disagrees with the fake "consensus" regarding the man-made climate change hoax.