“There’s a range of credible perspectives that I try to consider. It’s a very complex problem, and we don’t have the answers yet.”

“And now we have way too much confidence in some very dubious climate models and inadequate data sets. And we’re not really framing the problem broadly enough to … make credible projections about the range of things that we could possibly see in the 21st century.”

– Judith Curry, below

“One plus the truth equals a majority,” the saying goes. This certainly applies to Judith Curry, a distinguished academic and professional climate scientist now retired from Georgia Tech. (For previous posts at MasterResource on Dr. Curry, see here.)

The latest from this rare straight shooter comes from a taped interview with Christopher Balkaran at his Strong and Free Podcast, where, in his words, “my goal is to showcase multiple perspectives on the topics and ideas of our time, regardless of your politics and views.”…

“Whispered discreetly at conferences or in meeting rooms, these claims [against mainstream climate science] might be accepted as part of the frequently contentious process of a still evolving area of science. Stated publicly on some of the same Web sites that broke the so-called Climategate e-mails last fall, they are considered by many to be a betrayal, earning Curry epithets from her colleagues ranging from ‘naive’ to ‘bizarre’ to ‘nasty’ to worse.”

– “Climate heretic: Judith Curry Turns on her Colleagues,” Scientific American (reprinted in Nature), 2010.

The Climategate saga in 2009 (see here and here) opened the door to uncertainty and dissent regarding the ‘settled science’ view of carbon dioxide (CO2) and climate alarmism. The next year, Scientific American (October 25, 2010) published a piece by Michael Lemonick, then senior science writer at Climate Central, on respected scientist Judith Curry on the agenda-driven turn of climate science.…

It began early. In a candidate questionnaire in March 2016, Trump answered two key questions presented by the free-market American Energy Alliance:

“8). Do you support a carbon tax? Do you support the Obama administration’s use of the social cost of carbon in rulemakings?

A. No and No.

 9). Do you think federal agencies have abused the cost-benefit process to suit their political agenda? Would your administration end the process of underestimating costs and inflating benefits of agency regulations?

A. Yes and Yes.”

And in his first energy speech in May 2016, Trump stated:

“And if Crooked Hillary can shut down the mines, she can shut down your business too.”

“These actions have denied millions of Americans access to the energy wealth sitting under our feet. This is your treasure, and you – the American People – are entitled to share in the riches.”

“Climate change, for many conservatives, is associated with fringe environmentalism and a political nemesis, [Al] Gore.”

“Climategate showed us what was behind the curtain,” said Robert Bradley…. There’s a whole lot of alarmism and a whole lot of scientific intolerance toward other views.”

– Eric Berger, Houston Chronicle, January 24, 2010.

Think back ten years ago, when a federal cap-and-trade bill passed the House and was before the Senate. And Climategate was just a few months old.

Today? Cap-and-trade remains dead as federal policy, and proposals for a carbon tax are not being pushed by Biden/Harris (Harris/Biden?) in the current debate. Climagate? Its ten-year anniversary last year brought forth numerous retrospectives, apologetic, critical, and harshly critical.

——————–

All this brings me to a January 2010 piece by Eric Berger of the Houston Chronicle, Climate Change Activists Work to Regain Momentum.…