FOR REASONS ONLY A P-R FIRM MIGHT FATHOM, STEVE KOONIN HAS ELECTED TO PUBLISH HIS STATEMANLIKE RESPONSE TO GAVIN SCHMIDT'S REALCLIMATE CRITIQUE OF HIS PURDUE SPEECH IN A VENUE INTERMEDIATE IN CREDIBLITY BETWEEN BREITBART AND THE NATIONAL ENQUIRER -- WATTS UP WITH THAT
Here's the link to Gavin
Koonin’s case for yet another review of climate science
We watch long YouTube videos so you don’t have to.
In the seemingly endless deliberations on whether there should be a ‘red team’ exercise to review various climate science reports, Scott Waldman reported last week that the original architect of the idea, Steve Koonin, had given a talk on touching on the topic at Purdue University in Indiana last month. Since the talk is online, I thought it might be worth a viewing.
[Spoiler alert. It wasn’t].
The red team issue came up a few times. Notably Koonin says at one point in the Q and A:
The reports are right. But obviously I would not be pushing a red team exercise unless I thought there were misleading crucial aspects of the reports.55:55
But in over an hour of talking, he doesn’t ever really say what they are. Instead, there are more than a few fallacious arguments, some outright errors, some secondhand misdirection, a scattering of dubious assumptions and a couple of very odd contradictions. I cannot find a single instance of him disagreeing with an actual statement in the reports.
First, the fallacies...
And here is Steve's response
[ UPDATE: KOONIN FIRST SUBMITTED IT TO REALCLIMATE, BUT PUNTED IT TO WATTS BECAUSE GAVIN DIDN'T CHECK HIS MAILBOX THAT DAY.]
