## Friday, February 22, 2019 ... //

### Über-IPCC chairman Will Happer may need good bodyguards

Young Sheldon: Last night, he realized that the bread tasted different. The change was traced to a cheaper and faster production process. He organized a petition and appeared on Texas' Channel 7 news, demanding the central communist control over bread. Oops. ;-) He was ostracized. These days, Sheldon would become the Democratic Party's national hero.
In the most recent Will Happer blog post, prominent Princeton retired physicist Will Happer was referred to as a Trump "new tech adviser". Trump has ignored the Paris treaty and similar things but I have felt uneasy because he left the underlying cause of such irrational campaigns, the politicization of science, untouched.

Some good news may change it. As The New York Times wrote,
White House Climate Panel to Include a Climate Denialist.
The main task for Happer's new panel should be to recheck the Pentagon statements that "climate change represents a national security threat" for the U.S. I guess that like your humble correspondent, Happer has already made some research into this particular mind-boggling statement and he may already believe in certain conclusions.

The New York Times article above used the word "denialist" – something that has become so common among the left-wing activists (a category that includes most of the "MSM" journalists) that most of us no longer express any irritation about it. But The Washington Times still ran a story about the "backlash" by people like Roy Spencer who didn't like the denialist slur.

At any rate, you may imagine that the New York Times isn't the only entity that tries to attack Happer. Nasty comments also came from the former New York mayor Michael Bloomberg and top Senator Chuck Schumer.

I have a problem when scientifically incompetent politicians such as Bloomberg and Schumer – who were trained as an electrical engineer and lawyer, respectively – attack the natural science done by an actual achieved natural scientist (and the impartial scientist as a person) from one of the world's two most prestigious universities.

Can't they see that Happer clearly knows more about these matters – especially the absorption of electromagnetic radiation (the greenhouse effect is an example) and the relative CO2 famine in the present – than they and their Senate clubs and aides combined? Bullying of a scientist by a politician is the right word here.

Now, Trump is a politician and his pick of the scientist who will lead the audit of the "climate national security claims" was certainly affected by the kind of political beliefs that are characteristic of the current U.S. president. But the exact same thing applies to all the previous U.S. presidents and politicians across the world.

And in total, they have
• done much more to politically distort this scientific field
• hired thousands of people who have devoured tens of billions of dollars just for research that has led to almost no genuine and trustworthy new findings
• preferred scholars from not really prestigious fields, such as "applications of climate change to squirrels etc.", from "not really the most prestigious" places such as Penn State University
Donald Trump's pick is much more ethically justifiable because
• Will Happer has clearly done politically neutral kind of science throughout his impressive career
• he's been a professor of the most prestigious and fundamental natural science, namely physics
• he's been a professor at Princeton and not some lower-class college where it's a matter of common sense to assume that the people aren't very good and are manipulated more easily
I think it could be sensible to build such a panel out of people from sufficiently related fields who have worked at the Ivy League schools plus IAS, MIT, and Caltech, to make the prestigious character of the required science self-evident.

Lots of unimpressive people from less credible places are attacking Happer and I do hope that the Princeton folks – and their P.R. department – will be supportive of his scholarship when he was picked for this pretty important job; and I believe that the White House should also give some pretty good bodyguards to Happer because the climate change has evolved to a cult whose advocates think and act in a way that is comparable to the warriors of the Islamic State.

The most popular quote that is used by the leftists to "summarize" Happer's views is the following (from CNBC):
The demonization of carbon dioxide is just like the demonization of the poor Jews under Hitler. Carbon dioxide is actually a benefit to the world, and so were the Jews.
Exactly. The Jews – in Germany and elsewhere – were crucial for the development of the modern financial industry and many other fields of the human activity. The benefits of CO2 are even more obvious. The hostile movement against both is irrational and uses many unacceptable methods.

By pure numbers, Will Happer is almost certain to feel like a minority in the communities that "care" about the climate issue. I sincerely hope he is ready because the discussion about the CO2 was recently hijacked by the irrational climate fearmongers and their structures – much like the discussion about the Jews in Germany of the 1930s was hijacked by the anti-Semites.

One typical class of Happer's foes are the mediocre "scientists-activists" such as Andrew Dessler. He complains against a testimony that Happer gave (as an antagonist of Dessler's) in a Minnesota court. The only problem is that Happer's statements were spot on, they basically coincide with what I present as the most important facts relevant for this scientific discipline in my talks on the subject (despite the fact that we have reached those conclusions rather independently), and Dessler doesn't present an epsilon of evidence that there's something inaccurate about Happer's testimony.

In this 2015 video, Prof Happer was verbally attacked. Unfortunately, we can't see the face of the accuser at the beginning. Who was the man? Thankfully, Prof Happer has used his great resolution and did the categorization work for us. The stalker was a son of a bitch. That conclusion is compatible with the video's being posted on the YouTube channel of the Greenpeace USA eco-terrorist group.

You know, people like Dessler have gotten used to the backing by activists and politicians-bullies so they are adjusted to the rules of the game in which the evidence or arguments are completely unnecessary. It's enough to sling mud at an inconvenient scholar and to scream "denialists" and everything is settled, isn't it, Mr Dessler? Maybe it won't be enough now.

At any rate, I wish a lot of good luck to Will Happer and I kindly ask the physicists at Princeton (that town is highly overrepresented among the TRF readers – it's the 4th U.S. location after New York, Edison_NJ, and Mountain View [Google proxy]; sometimes Chicago, L.A., Cambridge_MA, or Bedford_IN may jump higher) and other places to be somewhat supportive because Happer has been assigned a difficult job to deal with something that has grown into a hostile monster. That monster is full of people who just haven't behaved morally in the recent years or decades and it was the right time to hire an adult in the room like Prof Happer who may give some proper spanking to all the naughty kids and activists in the climate debate and research and who may restore some Princeton-level standards in that scientific discipline and in the political discussions that depend on the discipline.

#### snail feedback (0) :

(function(i,s,o,g,r,a,m){i['GoogleAnalyticsObject']=r;i[r]=i[r]||function(){ (i[r].q=i[r].q||[]).push(arguments)},i[r].l=1*new Date();a=s.createElement(o), m=s.getElementsByTagName(o)[0];a.async=1;a.src=g;m.parentNode.insertBefore(a,m) })(window,document,'script','//www.google-analytics.com/analytics.js','ga'); ga('create', 'UA-1828728-1', 'auto'); ga('send', 'pageview');