Rebuttal to the attack on Dr. Don Easterbrook

Watts Up With That ^ | April 8, 2013 | David Deming

[Rocky]

I write in rebuttal to the March 31 letter by WWU geology faculty criticizing Dr. Don Easterbrook. I have a Ph.D in geophysics and have published research papers on climate change in the peer-reviewed scientific literature. In 2006 I testified before the US Senate on global warming. Additionally, I am the author of a three-volume history of science.

I have never met Don Easterbrook. I write not so much to defend him as to expose the ignorance exhibited in the letter authored by WWU geology faculty. Their attack on Dr. Easterbrook is the most egregious example of pompous buffoonery since the Pigeon League conspired against Galileo in the seventeenth century. Skepticism is essential to science. But the goal of the geology faculty at WWU seems to be to suppress critical inquiry and insist on dogmatic adherence to ideology.

-------------------------------------------------------

As Galileo explained, it is “certain that the number of those who reason well in difficult matters is much smaller than the number of those who reason badly….reasoning is like running and not like carrying, and one Arab steed will outrun a hundred jackasses.”

[Rocky]

Excellent letter. The newspaper which published a letter denouncing Dr. Easterbrook refused to publish Deming's letter. So he posted it on Watts Up With That. I'm glad he did, because more people will see it now.

[Da Coyote]

“Geology” faculty, eh?

Betcha they’d be confused by a simple CO2 absorption curve...and would think the word “extinction” refers only to flora and fauna that no longer are around.

Let us remember that climate “scientists” are those who really wanted to major in physics, but were stumped by Maxwell’s rumors.

[Portcall24]

Now this is how to write a clear, concise and coherent letter. Here’s another great quote:

“The WWU faculty never defined the term “global warming” but described it as “very real,” as if it were possible for something to be more real than real. They claimed that the evidence in support of this “very real” global warming was “overwhelming.” Yet they could not find space in their letter to cite a single specific fact that supports their thesis.”

[Excellence]

This is a keeper.

[fella]

Yet they could not find space in their letter to cite a single specific fact that supports their thesis.”

Without "Global Warming" there's no grant money to grease their palms. Remember to follow the money.