Skeptics attacked, once again, without specifics

Remember Anna-Maria Arabia? The one calling for deniers to stop casting a stain on science. Once again, she continues to advocate the position that any doubt over global warming is part of an anti-science campaign. At least she puts Greenpeace in their place.

“On the right, Christopher Monckton continues to misquote, misrepresent and misuse science in his anti climate science parade across Australia. And climate scientists have had to endure death threats for getting on with the job and furnishing the public with much needed information.”

Notice how she doesn’t provide any specifics of any misquoting, misrepresentation or misuse of science. I doubt if she has even heard anything he has said. Notice also, that she is still under the impression that death threats to climate scientists are actually death threats. By information, does she mean telling us of the lack of warming for the past decade, correcting the public misperceptions of the Vostok ice cores or just more outrageous alarmism?

She goes around labelling skeptics as “denialists” seemingly completely unware that she is having a go at scientists whom she intends to defend. I wonder if she thinks Roy Spencer, Richard Lindzen and Ian Plimer are also part of this anti-science agenda.

“At the same time climate denialists claim that government funded research has an inherent bias. Should we similarly ban all research funded by the public sector?”

She misses the point, any money poured into one side of a theory will produce bias and huge amounts of funding, conditional on one outcome will manufacture a consensus.

“In an ideal world…the planet wouldn’t be warming…”

What makes pre-industrial temperatures optimal? Why is any warming considered bad?