I don’t recommend blogs or blog posts often; that’s for lazy bloggers. But here is an exception. William M. Briggs, Statistician is a man who beats his own path through the underbrush of uncertainty. His article, “Don’t be too sure” is worth reading. His polygenous blog is worth adding to your feed.

“I think the lesson for conservationists today is that, yes, the world is full of surprises. There’s a lot of uncharted territory.” I wonder if she’ll still feel the same way during the next round of fund raising.

…

This week’s Science magazine has an article (subscription required) on how Purdue is castigating Taleyarkhan. They suspected he fudged his data, but couldn’t prove it, so like the feds with Al Capone, they got him on a technicality

…

Doubt, therefore, is the proper emotion.

Now check out this letter from an APS member, Roger W. Cohen, in support of Lord Monckton’s paper published in the July APS newsletter:

I retired four years ago, and at the time of my retirement I was well convinced, as were most technically trained people, that the IPCC’s case for Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) is very tight. However, upon taking the time to get into the details of the science, I was appalled at how flimsy the case really is.

Why has his view changed only AFTER retirement? In the opening statement he states:

I have been involved in climate change for nearly 30 years.

Is it plausible that he took the time to “get into the details of the science” only after retirement, after being “involved in climate change for 30 years”. Pull the other one. Whatever the value of the letter, which is not too bad, Roger should come clean about his real motivations for certainty/uncertainty.