Dr. S. Fred Singer: denier for hire

authordefault
on
Here’s the latest from Dr. S. Fred Singer, the go-to “scientist” for industries that are trying to dodge regulation.
In this piece in the New York Sun, Singer poses three questions:
(1) Is there evidence for or against an appreciable human contribution to current climate warming?

(2) Would a warmer climate be better or worse than the present one?

(3) Realistically speaking, is it possible to influence the climate by policy actions in an effective way?

The answers are:
1. Yes, there is overwhelming evidence
2. A warmer climate might be just peachy if you’re a selfish simpleton obsessed with the three most uncomfortable winter weeks in Chicago, but if you live in the Florida Quays, in Bangladesh, or in any of a number of low-lying South Sea islands, you might want to took to the New Orleans neighbourhoods that are already below sea level. Bad things can happen quickly. And that’s not counting other climate catastrophes: floods, droughts or really horrific scenarios like the death of all coral and, potentially, plankton. The world’s best scientists wouldn’t be waving warning flags if we were not facing grave dangers.
3. Realistically speaking? When did Fred Singer start caring about what was real? Woefully, though, the answer to whether we can develop policy that will influence climate change is, so far: no. Too many vested interests are blocking us from success.
It needn’t be so, especially not in the most innovative country on earth (as the U.S. has been for more than a century).
But here’s one last question: why do we have to argue these points with Fred Singer? The man has demonstrated again and again that he is willing to offer up his Ph.D. in the service of industries that find potential government regulation an inconvenience. He has little regard for science and, apparently, even less regard for the truth.
At least deniers like Dick Lindzen and Bill Gray bring some related scientific expertise and a little sincerity to their argument. Against such as these – and against the incredibly impressive scientists assembled in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Fred Singer should not even be allowed in the room.

Related Posts

on

The deal would place 40 percent of California’s idle wells in the hands of one operator. Campaigners warn this poses an "immense" risk to the state — which new rules could help to mitigate, depending on how regulators act.

The deal would place 40 percent of California’s idle wells in the hands of one operator. Campaigners warn this poses an "immense" risk to the state — which new rules could help to mitigate, depending on how regulators act.
Opinion
on

Corporations are using sport to sell the high-carbon products that are killing our winters, and now we can put a figure on the damage their money does.

Corporations are using sport to sell the high-carbon products that are killing our winters, and now we can put a figure on the damage their money does.
on

Inside the conspiracy to take down wind and solar power.

Inside the conspiracy to take down wind and solar power.
on

A new report estimates the public cost of underwriting U.S. plastics industry growth and the environmental violations that followed.

A new report estimates the public cost of underwriting U.S. plastics industry growth and the environmental violations that followed.