Monday, January 16, 2017 by Daniel Barker
The climate change narrative has led to the resignation of a noted academic who dared to question the legitimacy of the anthropogenic (man-made) global warming theory.
Dr. Judith Curry, a respected climatologist and tenured professor at Georgia Tech University, has decided to leave her “dream job” in academia after years of battling with those pushing the climate change agenda – a group of narrow-minded zealots who accept nothing less than complete agreement with their theoretical biases. (RELATED: Stay up to date on real climate change news at ClimateScienceNews.com)
In other words, a powerful coalition of scientists, politicians and other interested parties have decided that empirical scientific method is no longer valid when it comes to evaluating the state of the planet’s climate and its future permutations – they have all the answers, it seems, and no further critical investigation is allowed.
Of course, this is bogus science – all valid scientific theory is dependent on critical evaluation and when scientific research becomes politicized, it no longer can be trusted. (Coming soon: FakeScience.news, which will catalog all the fake science being pushed by bureaucrats and globalists.)
Judith Curry recognized this, and although her decision to leave Georgia Tech was partly based on other motivations, including expanding her climate analytics firm, there were other “deeper reasons” behind her early exit from the ivory tower.
In a blog post, Curry wrote:
“I’m ‘cashing out’ with 186 published journal articles and two books. The superficial reason is that I want to do other things, and no longer need my university salary. This opens up an opportunity for Georgia Tech to make a new hire.
“The deeper reasons have to do with my growing disenchantment with universities, the academic field of climate science and scientists.”
Curry’s position on climate change seems reasonable enough – she believes that mankind’s activities certainly have an effect on the climate, but that current climate models are inadequate in terms of supporting the claims of the global warming faithful.
When she publicly questioned the findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) , she was labeled a “climate heretic” in a Scientific American article.
Her criticism of climate change alarmists and insistence on adhering to sound scientific principles led to her becoming treated as a pariah within the academic world.
Curry told Fox News:
“I’ve been vilified by some of my colleagues who are activists and don’t like anybody challenging their big story.”
“I walk around with knives sticking out of my back. In the university environment I felt like I was just beating my head against the wall.”
Curry wrote in her blog that she no longer knew what to tell students “regarding how to navigate the CRAZINESS in the field of climate science.”
An excellent op-ed piece written by Jerry Shenk for The Mercury points out that what Curry and others have encountered is precisely what President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned against in his famous speech regarding the creation of a military-industrial complex in the United States.
Along with the danger posed by the private arms industry working hand in hand with the federal government, Ike also cautioned against the “prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money.”
In the post-truth era, “fake science” is competing with empirical science and threatening to destroy one of the foundations modern society was built upon, just as “fake news” (i.e. mainstream media) poses a very real threat to legitimate journalism and our nation’s underlying democratic principles.
The issue isn’t whether climate change is real or not, but whether we can continue to allow agenda-driven scientific dogma to direct academic research and public policy.
Shenk quotes Thomas Huxley’s words: “…[S]kepticism is the highest of duties; blind faith the one unpardonable sin.”
In the midst of today’s political climate, however, performing one’s duty as a skeptic is rewarded by a cold shoulder – at least within the academic world. (Stay informed about other media hoaxes at Hoax.news)