So David Rose, Tamsin Edwards, and Tony Watts Walk Into Nick Lewis’ Bar

is the start of a hilarious joke, yet Eli lacks a punch line.  Sophie Yeo writes of a dinner thrown by Nick Lewis
Twelve scientists and sceptics have met privately to discuss how to suck the venom out of the climate change debate.

It was one of science’s strangest social events to date.
Eli enjoys British arch expressions well put, but hilarity ensues
 Some of the best known names in the climate debate – including Mail on Sunday journalist David Rose, blogger Anthony Watts, and Met Office scientist Richard Betts – shared salmon and civilities at a dinner party last month.
Sou writes daily of Willard Tony's lack of self awareness and Eli's suspicion is that Tamsin Edwards must be a distant descendent of Emile Coue, still, in the face of world class competition David Whitehouse brings the house down in a quote fed to Yeo
“Both sides are really fed up with the outrageous alarmists who are not representing science properly. Both don’t like those who shout about it and call people names and take a polarised point of view,” says David Whitehouse from the sceptic thinktank The Global Warming Policy Foundation.
Eli, Eli is simply not up to dealing with this, so the Bunny outsources to Paul Krugman writing about Nick Lewis' ilk
When the going gets tough, the people losing the argument start whining about civility. I often find myself attacked as someone who believes that anyone with a different opinion is a fool or a knave; as I’ve tried to explain, however, that’s mainly selection bias. I don’t spend much time on areas where reasonable people can disagree, because there are so many important issues where one side really is completely unreasonable.
for example, whether the rise in the airborne fraction of CO2 has been caused by humans.  Still, Krugman is right and he is right when he continues
 Relatedly, obviously someone can disagree with my side and still be a good person. On the other hand, there are a lot of bad people engaged in economic debate — and I don’t mean that they’re wrong, I mean that they argue in bad faith.
Perhaps in this context a word change or two but given the cottage industry in trying to beat back the numerous bad faith arguments made in denial of our changing our only planet and its climate not for the better, the Rabett might point out, why yes, bad faith arguments are everywhere

Illustration looking glassed from Stephen Kade Illustration blog

  • By EliRabett
  • Posted in science
  • Tagged climate, debate, people, Sophie Yeo
  • Translator

  • Recent Articles

    • Weekly Nikon news flash #283
    • PopKey Arrives On iOS
    • Man Accused Of Shooting Neighbor’s Drone
    • Top Android deals from Flipkart Big Billion Day sale
    • Angry Birds Movie To Feature Plenty Of Comedic Talent
    • Star Citizen Funding Surpasses $55 Million Mark
    • Peter Hurley on Jawline and Positioning for Headshots
    • T-Mobile’s CEO Weighs In On Apple’s “Bendgate” Controversy
    • Bill Gates Offers Praise For Apple Pay
    • Moto X (2014) Makes Its Way Onto US Cellular
    • Making of an Arduino
    • HTC Desire Eye Rumored To Feature 13MP Front-facing Camera
    • Payments Feature Found Hidden In Facebook Messenger
    • Yahoo Rumored To Be Looking To Acquire MessageMe
    • HP Rumored To Be Splitting Into Two Separate Companies
    • Bose’s Deal With The NFL Sees Beats Headphones Banned On Camera
    • Panasonic Nocticron 42.5mm f/1.2 and Vario 35-200mm f/2.8 Lenses $100 Off
    • Moto G Found To Have Hidden Camera Settings
    • HTC Desire 612 Spotted On Verizon’s Website
    • Microsoft’s RoomAlive Concept Hints At The Future Of Interactive Gaming