'A Form Of Violence'?
Some climate scientists still struggle to cope with people who disagree
So a few days back, Cliff Mass - a Professor of Atmospheric Sciences at the University of Washington as well as a radio weatherman - decided to write something about the wildfires in California, and in particular, the question of whether climate change had played a role. At the end of a long analysis of climatological trends in the area, he drew his conclusions:
Was Global Warming A Significant Factor in California's Camp Fire? The Answer is Clearly No. https://t.co/FjphH8N5tj pic.twitter.com/MhbjsEjSnN
— Cliff Mass (@CliffMass) November 20, 2018
Unexceptionable, you might think. Agree or disagree: show us your data and talk about it.Well, not in the Alice in Wonderland world of climate science. Take a look at some of the replies, particularly those from a moderately prominent climate scientist called Sarah Myhre.
This. Is. Propaganda. https://t.co/8loAkr0Ey4
— Dr. Sarah E. Myhre (@SarahEMyhre) November 20, 2018
There were many other responses in similar vein. One more moderate-minded reader tried to bring a little sanity to the exchange, but was told in no uncertain terms to be quiet:
Sorry Charles. That's white male identity politics to a T.
— Dr. Sarah E. Myhre (@SarahEMyhre) November 20, 2018
This exchange was followed by the almost inevitable attempt to contact Mass's employer
Yo @knkxfm
This is what you prop up when you give Cliff a public platform. This is a form a violence. Stop. Please stop.— Dr. Sarah E. Myhre (@SarahEMyhre) November 20, 2018
"A form of violence"? Whatever next? How can climate science ever hope to advance when the level of discourse is on this level?