Prominent climate change denier now admits he was wrong

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by futurecurrents, Jan 27, 2013.

  1. Richard Muller, who directed a Koch-funded climate change project, has undergone a 'total turnaround' on his stance on global warming, which he now admits is caused by human activity.

    By Neela Banerjee, Tribune Washington Bureau (MCT) / July 30, 2012

    The verdict is in: Global warming is real and greenhouse-gas emissions from human activity are the main cause.

    This, according to Richard A. Muller, professor of physics at the University of California, Berkely, a MacArthur fellow and co-founder of the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project.

    The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and hundreds of other climatologists around the world came to such conclusions years ago, but the difference now is the source: Muller is a long-standing, colorful critic of prevailing climate science, and the Berkeley project was heavily funded by the Charles Koch Charitable Foundation, which, along with its libertarian petrochemical billionaire founder Charles G. Koch, has a considerable history of backing groups that deny climate change.

    In an opinion piece in Saturday’s New York Times titled “The Conversion of a Climate-Change Skeptic,” Muller writes:

    “Three years ago I identified problems in previous climate studies that, in my mind, threw doubt on the very existence of global warming. Last year, following an intensive research effort involving a dozen scientists, I concluded that global warming was real and that the prior estimates of the rate of warming were correct. I’m now going a step further: Humans are almost entirely the cause.”

    Michael E. Mann, director of the Earth System Science Center at Pennsylvania State University, said Muller’s conversion might help shape the thinking of the “reasonable middle” of the population “who are genuinely confused and have been honestly taken in” by attacks on climate science.

    On his Facebook page, Mann wrote: “There is a certain ironic satisfaction in seeing a study funded by the Koch Brothers — the greatest funders of climate change denial and disinformation on the planet — demonstrate what scientists have known with some degree of confidence for nearly two decades: that the globe is indeed warming, and that this warming can only be explained by human-caused increases in greenhouse gas concentrations. I applaud Muller and his colleagues for acting as any good scientists would, following where their analyses led them, without regard for the possible political repercussions.”
  2. Lucrum


    So he thinks he was wrong before. How do we know he's not wrong now?
  3. gwb-trading


    So his opinion on climate change is strictly driven by who is paying him money.

    So much for objective research and science.
  4. You don't seem to understand. The Koch bros helped fund the study. I'm sure they were hoping he would find the opposite conclusion from what he did. If anything this helps proves the objectivity and professional ethics of climate scientists.
  5. If he is, so is virtually all the world's climate scientists and science organizations.
  6. gwb-trading


    A different group is funding him now.... so his conclusions have changed. Magically his data is also 'updated'. No integrity whatsoever.

    In other news.... Global warming stopped 16 years ago, reveals Met Office report quietly released... and here is the chart to prove it
  7. gwb-trading


    If you want to get a proper perspective on "global warming" then you should watch Burt Rutan's presentation on it. I would urge you to watch the six videos by Burt. He is one of the top and most well-respected engineers in the U.S.; he may not be the most polished public presenter but he does have the facts.

    <iframe width="560" height="315" src="" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
  8. How much did he get paid by Big Environment?
  9. Oh brother. Try reading about what he and his team did rather than making stupid assumptions. Of course I don't expect you will either read it or understand it if you do.

    No, a sixteen year time period is not relevant. That article is the typical tabloid pseudo science that deniers love. It has been debunked up down and sideways by the met office itself among others and I talked about it here multiple times already.
  10. No he doesn't. He's a aeronautical engineer and ideologically motivated hack. Nothing more. We can't even include him in the 3% of climate scientists that deny AGW because he not a climate scientist.
    #10     Jan 28, 2013