Benny Peiser: Climate libel chill
network.nationalpost.com
network.nationalpost.com
"Piltdown man" was considered the greatest scientific hoax of all time
See PBS May 30, 2006 program
Link http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/hoax/
"For decades, a fossil skull discovered in Piltdown, England, was hailed as the missing link between apes and humans. Entire careers were built on its authenticity. Then in 1953, the awful truth came out: "Piltdown Man" was a fake! But who done it? In "The Boldest Hoax," NOVA gets to the bottom of the greatest scientific hoodwinking of all time."
I was raised as an academic (have a science PhD) and, without following this issue in detail, have continued to assume that climate change is "real". However, reading that column made me deeply ashamed about the way people - scientists - have behaved.
On the other hand, I can understand how being attacked by financially powerful interests that have a vested interest in discrediting valid, difficult, scientific work, generates that a "siege mentality".
So perhaps one thing that needs to come from this is institutional support (moral guidance and counseling, for example) for people doing research that is going to be opposed by powerful people in the "real world"...
Let's not forget the group-think and career-killing around AGW.
And the money - grant money is going to folks "proving" AGW.
Of course there's always peer pressure, but it's also true that science does progress because someone questions the current doctrine (and when you're a young, smart scientist, that's what you hope to do...). And some get the money because they are brilliant, in spite of disagreeing with everyone else.
Science does, generally, work. It's not perfect, but nor is it the kind of monster that people paint it to be.
I have worked as a researcher and the kind of defensive mentality described in that article is not normal. The most obvious explanation I can think of is that they were consistently attacked by vested interests. Money talks. Always has, always will.
You make it sound like the attacks were unprovoked and somehow unfair. Considering that they proposed massive social changes, said that "heretics" should be jailed, and so on, that's simply wrong. They acted as crusaders.