Vahrenholt in Der Spiegel: "I Feel Duped on Climate Change" ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ A REVIEW

Examining Fritz Vahrenholt's 
answers in his Der Spiegel's interview


'I Feel Duped on Climate Change'
 

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 

The outgoing German electric utility executive Fritz Vahrenholt recently published a book "Die Kalte Sonne" (The Cold Sun) that put him at the top of the media circuit for a while.

I was given Vahrenholt’s interview with Der Spiegel {Germany’s premier news magazine} as a supposed eye opener.  Instead I found a man way too convinced of his own infallibility, who described the science with appalling deceitfulness.  Olaf Stampf and Gerald Traufetter do a nice job of interviewing and getting Vahrenholt to open up.  Still answer by answer he says things I know are blatantly false.  Then Vahrenholt’s constant disingenuous complaints about the IPCC went so over the top, they demand rebuttal. 

By the end of my reading I was angry enough to start all over again, to consider and research Vahrenholt’s answers.  
My intention was to document his nonsense answer by answer.
After many delays and other projects I’ve fairly finished it, 
though I have the feeling I'll be working it for a while yet. 
 

Review of Fritz Vahrenholt A Denialist In Action. 



I do warn you, it's a long one (23 questions), 
specifically intended for the student of the Art of Denial.




Der Speigel’s article, published February 8, 2012, includes a hefty six hundred word introduction to this “practiced provocateur” that makes for a good read: 
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,813814,00.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Examining  Fritz Vahrenholt's replies to Der Spiegel interviewers
{Stampf and Traufetter}: 

'I Feel Duped on Climate Change'

Yahoo Answers, a platform for attacking SkepticalScience.com ?

I'll admit I have seldom used Yahoo Answers but yesterday I stumbled on something upsetting and since they have decreed the "Answer (has been) Resolved" they won't let me reply to Billy's question.

But since Billy so perfectly reflects the increasingly shrill paranoid tone of folks who feel we should ignore what the science of climatology is teaching us, I’ll unburden myself here.  First Billy’s comment:

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Is skeptical science a propaganda site? 

I have been linked their many times by the community and it seems one sided, it does nothing but debunk all credible independent scientists work+ it completely toots the horn of the IPCC song sheet. John Cook is the creator and he is an advisor to rothschild australia who controls australias carbon market. Its hard for me to except considering my research has uncovered a huge rothschild connection and he is an advisor for their board which handles the cap+trade and carbon tax market in australia. You think im lying, go look up and see who is handling the carbon market in australia.       [signed Billy]

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Billy’s Rothschild charge is a red herring since by his own admission (in his first response) he don’t know what or if there is any connection.  ‘John belonged to a think tank that did some research, back when, that Rothschild used, etc., etc.‘ Yet in typical denialist fashion Billy morphs that vague few ‘degrees removed’ connection into “John is an advisor to Rothschild.” 

Then Billy cries “Credible Independent Research” gets ignored or debunked.  Well to begin with Billy's “Credible Independent Research” is sort of an oxymoron.  If the CIR can not stand up to the community of skilled scientists, it’s because they are laced with flaws.  CIRers are also constantly “disproving” Einstein’s theories, but they get ignored for a reason!

Independent Research done in the vacuum of Think Tanks dedicated to refuting the scientific understanding is like a fiction novel, where any fact can be adjusted to fit the plot of the story.  But, it’s fiction just the same and never stands up to real life.

SkepticalScience.com reports on the actual science.  It is a teaching tool.  It supports all of it’s assertions with links to the real scientific sources.  It has fascinating on-point discussions following all their posts, where CIRers constantly present their side of the story.  It can’t be helped that they are constantly shown to be filled with errors and flaws.  That’s how science works, that’s also how Mr. Cook’s SkS website works. 

SkS also goes to lengths to examine and discuss the works of the few legitimate climate scientists who continue to contest the general understanding. The fact that those few contrarian studies constantly flunk the acid test should tell you something.

Instead folks like Billy rather think it’s all part of a grand conspiracy, instead embracing the workings of a few agenda focused “think tanks” funded by a few very rich, extremist, dedicated to their own interests Über Alles.

In closing, Billy before attacking John Cook look around and come to grips with the scandalous behavior in your own backyard.

No Need to Panic About AGW ~ important LINKS

This latest tiff regarding Wall Street Journal’s shameful distortion of science centers around a lead letter printed January 27, 2012 and signed by a collection of sixteen engineers and scientists titled:   “No Need to Panic About Global Warming.”
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204301404577171531838421366.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop 
It repeats the “free-market think-tank” claims that there's no compelling scientific argument for drastic action to 'decarbonize' the world's economy.

In doing research on the signees I’ve come across an assortment of rebuttals to the various misleading and outright false claims made in the letter from a variety of sources. This post is a collection of those varied rebuttals.

Regarding the Wall Street Journal's letter "No Need to Panic About Global Warming"

This latest tiff regarding Wall Street Journal’s shameful distortion of science centers around a lead letter printed January 27, 2012 and signed by a collection of sixteen engineers and scientists titled:   “No Need to Panic About Global Warming.”

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204301404577171531838421366.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop 

It repeated the “free-market think-tank” claims that there's no compelling scientific argument for drastic action to 'decarbonize' the world's economy.

In doing research on the signees I’ve come across an assortment of rebuttals to the various misleading and outright false claims made in the letter from a variety of sources. This post is a collection of those varied rebuttals.

NCAR and UCAR's Staff Notes revealed

http://www2.ucar.edu/staffnotes/research-in-brief
"STAFF NOTES"
For and about the people of NCAR and UCAR
(A brief look at research throughout the organization)

For someone who spends as much of his free time searching the web as I do - I am consistently smacked in face by the wonderful resources that I’ve been missing. And when I find an exceptionally good site I want to shout it from the tree tops. Or at least share it with others who are passionate about learning.

If learning about Earth dynamics, and the sub-topic of global climate change, is your thing you owe it to yourself to take a look at this site. ±80 studies going back to 2008 are reviewed in brief. Perhaps you too will be amazing with the varied bona fide scientific information collected at this one location.