Folks, here’s a polite something to illustrate what climate science in Germany has decomposed to.
Here’s an interview with a seemingly true believer Michael Brzoska, scientific director of the Institute for Peace Research and Security Policy at the University of Hamburg and a principal investigator at the Integrated Climate System Analysis and Prediction’s (CliSAP) research group “Climate Change and Security”.
The CliSAP is a cluster funded with 32 million euros over five years and was started in October 2007.
As you read the interview you’ll quickly get the impression that Brzoska is convinced that since about 1900 all the world’s conflicts have increasingly been due to man-made climate change and will increasingly be so in the future. The way to stop war is to cut CO2 emissions.
Obviously he lacks historical literacy. History shows that cold periods led to food shortages, and thus uncontrollable social strife. But during warm periods, societies prospered. I’ll submit to Brzoska that war and conflict result much more from political and diplomatic failure by leaders, and much less from imagined man-made weather.
So indeed – isn’t climate change wonderful? Thanks to people like Brzoska, world leaders today have carte blanche to shirk all their responsibilities, completely and without any apprehension, and to blame everything (like war) on man-made climate change, i.e. their own citizens. But hey, maybe these thinkers are accomplishing something valuable with those €32 million they have been generously given.
Q: What do you see as CliSAPs largest achievements so far?
A: I have too little knowledge on most of the research topics and disciplines in CliSAP to answer this question with any confidence. My impression is that CliSAP has advanced quite a bit in its attempt to study climate change issues comprehensively. In social sciences, where I have a better judgment, main gaps remain, but CliSAP has clearly raised the interest of colleagues to get involved.”
Recall that the Cluster was started in October, 2007. So after 4 years he has “too little knowledge to answer this question with any confidence”? Could someone please tell me what we are paying them for? To raise interest of colleagues?
And now here’s Brzoska’s advice for young scientists:
Q: What constitutes “good” science?
A: Max Weber once wrote that it is the purpose of scientists to strive to disprove their own research results. Thus good science is critical science, including of what seems established even by oneself.”
Here I could not decide whether to laugh or to spill my dinner all over my keyboard.
Hint to Brzoska: That advice does not only apply to young scientists, but it also especially applies for the older ones too. Has Brzoska ever considered, for just a fleeting moment, that the true warmist believers could be, ahem, wrong? Seems he hasn’t.
And has he ever considered the horrific human consequences of massively and obstinately planning for the wrong scenario? Bear in mind we are not far from proving willful intent by scientists in producing wrong scenarios. There exists a massive amount of data that indicate things may very well turn out completely different than what they insist. Yet they refuse to acknowledge it.
His advice is of course correct. Science is about being open minded. Unfortunately too many climate scientists have been far too obstinate, elitist, overly pampered, corrupted and cemented deeply in dogmatism, and so the advice falls on many deaf ears. Indeed the greatest risk that global security faces today is not warming, but governments heeding the senseless advice that many scientists demand we accept without question.
Question for Prof Brzoska:
What should society do with highly influential scientists who absolutely refuse to consider they may be wrong, obstinately insist no matter what that they are right, and actually spend an entire career propping up falsehoods? Should society resist? Well, resisting has led to things like the WBGU advocating a watering down of democracy.
Sorry Mr Brzoska, but your perspective of the world, and on the causes of war, really do frighten me. I expect they frighten many others too. And they ought to be frightened. After all, nothing is more dangerous than a science that becomes decoupled from reality and truth.
Welcome to modern climate science in Germany.
2 responses to “Devout Warmist’s Advice Of The Week: “Strive To Disprove Your Own Research Results””
“What do you see as CliSAPs largest achievements so far? –
I have too little knowledge on most of the research topics and disciplines in CliSAP to answer this question with any confidence. My impression is that CliSAP has advanced quite a bit […]”
Oh nice, you give these guys 32million Euro and they advance quite a bit, great, that’s a third of the current market value of Al Gore, so if we give you another 70 mill Euro you’ll probably produce your first Powerpoint, Mr. Brzoska? What a joker.
The Institute for Peace Research and Security Policy could also be considered a social workshop as it is called here. If there are one hundred people employed, 32 million is perhaps not that much. They get a sense of usefulness and satisfaction in return and Michael looks quite satisfied on the photograph.