4 ms·
Author's entry at the Climate Denialists Database: https://www.desmog.com/ronald-bailey/ https://www.desmog.com/ronald-bailey/ This guy is what you call a pie
by vanusa 5y ago
Author's entry at the Climate Denialists Database:
https://www.desmog.com/ronald-bailey/ https://www.desmog.com/ronald-bailey/
This guy is what you call a piece of work. Here's one of his more interesting quotes:
“And on the climate change issue, just a little anecdote, when I first heard about this was when I was working at Forbes Magazine, and somebody was saying, well, they’re claiming that we’re going to warm up the climate, and it’s going to get up to about nine degrees warmer. And I turned to the person and I said, you mean that we’ll be able to have palm trees growing down Fifth Avenue in New York now? And I didn’t see this was a particular problem.”
But you could already tell this was a bogus article, just from the glaringly misleading bar chart up at the very top.
- version_five 5y agoI posted the article and I certainly haven't first hand validated it's content as objective fact, and I know that Reason has a bias (although I think they are at least usually pretty consistent). By the same token, the "climate denialist" website you linked to is not exactly an unbiased source either, and even if it was, it's still more of a personal criticism of the guy than a counterargument to his article. I suspect this article has cherry picked some data to support a narrative, but I expect the same from articles that talk about the rise of extreme weather. What did you find misleading about the bar chart?
- vanusa 5y agoWhat did you find misleading about the bar chart? Do you really think there was a 5x increase in climate disasters between 1st and 4th decades as indicated in that chart? And doesn't this suggest to you that there might be something just a bit... "funny" about the data as a measure of events happening in the real world? It's still more of a personal criticism of the guy It's based on the content of his writings. Nothing personal about it at all.
- version_five 5y agoThe article mentioned that it was due to increased reporting. I agree that whole graph could be written off, but the same applies to instances when people point to some dramatic increase in recent disasters.
- vanusa 5y agoAll I can tell you is: The article stands or fails on the basis of its content. That's how you should evaluate it. It doesn't matter what any other article in the world says about any other topic.