The Inconvenient Scientist

Mike Beam writes a column today in the Boston Globe on scientist Richard Lindzen, an MIT professor of meteorology who has dared to challenge the Al Gore model of global warming. Dr. Lindzen wrote a piece for the Wall Street Journal which pretty much demolished the prevailing theories that are so near and dear to the environwackos.

Beam's column first discusses the desire for global warming alarmists to muzzle any opposition (even going as far as to claim there is "no science" opposing their pet global warming theories), and then explains why Lindzen is a thorn in their side:

Here's the kind of information the ``scientific consensus" types don't want you to read. MIT's Alfred P. Sloan professor of meteorology Richard Lindzen recently complained about the ``shrill alarmism" of Gore's movie ``An Inconvenient Truth." Lindzen acknowledges that global warming is real, and he acknowledges that increased carbon emissions might be causing the warming -- but they also might not.

``We do not understand the natural internal variability of climate change" is one of Lindzen's many heresies, along with such zingers as ``the Arctic was as warm or warmer in 1940," ``the evidence so far suggests that the Greenland ice sheet is actually growing on average," and ``Alpine glaciers have been retreating since the early 19th century, and were advancing for several centuries before that. Since about 1970, many of the glaciers have stopped retreating and some are now advancing again. And, frankly, we don't know why."

When Lindzen published similar views in The Wall Street Journal this spring, environmentalist Laurie David, the wife of comedian Larry David, immediately branded him a ``shill." She resurrected a shopworn slur first directed against Lindzen by former Globe writer Ross Gelbspan, who called Lindzen a ``hood ornament" for the fossil fuels industry in a 1995 article in Harper's Magazine.

I decided to check out Lindzen for myself. He wasn't hard to find on the 16th floor of MIT's I.M. Pei-designed Building 54, and he answered as many questions as I had time to ask. He's no big fan of Gore's, having suffered through what he calls a ``Star Chamber" Congressional inquisition by the then senator . He said he accepted $10,000 in expenses and expert witness fees from fossil- fuel types in the 1990s, and has taken none of their money since.

He's smart. He's an effective debater. No wonder the Steve Schneiders and Al Gores of the world don't want you to hear from him. It's easier to call someone a shill and accuse him of corruption than to debate him on the merits.

He's not the only one standing up to the global warming crowd. Powerline points to another scientist, Dr. Russell Seitz, who has his own blog and posted this:

As summer sizzles on, pundits are warming to Al Gore’s popcorn film debut. One of the things that make An Inconvenient Truth a scary movie is that in its certitude it ignores our past, present and future dependence on the greatest of native American fuel sources. Al may dream of fields of switch grass as biofuel frenzy spreads, but coal remains the mainstay of America’s power supply.

I've written previously about the attempts to muzzle global warming opponents. Let's hope there more guys like these two scientists who are willing to publicly challenge the politically correct fantasies regarding climate change.