Calling Bob Inglis – If Climatologists Were Doctors They’d Be Quacks

Defeated Republican has blasted GOP right-wing pundits for denying global warming science.  Rep. Bob Inglis (S.C.) threw sour grapes at his fellow party members and elevated junk climate scientists to the status of qualified medical doctors. In the wake of his election failure Inglis whined:


“They slept at a Holiday Inn Express last night, and they’re experts on climate change.”


Irrepressible Inglis had served six terms in the House but lost to a more conservative republican opponent and blames defeat on his belief in climate science and picking the wrong side in this latest battle. Indeed, global warming skeptics now fill most Republican seats in Congress.


 No Consensus on Climate

The bitter ex-Representative is now reduced to pitching the lame ‘most doctors’ analogy suggesting voters must be dumb for voting for climate skeptics. Inglis argues if climatologists were 100 doctors and 98 said the ‘patient’ was sick then it was foolish to listen to the two whose advice was to do nothing (clearly, inferring that 98% of climate experts have diagnosed a ‘sick’ climate).

Sadly, Inglis hasn’t checked the numbers lately. But voters have. They’ve learned that the ‘98% meme is pure myth and doomsaying scientists have been fiddling the figures. The so-called scientific ‘consensus’  is exposed as boiling down to the opinions of only 75 climatologists from over 19,000 of such experts worldwide. While the “evidence” that proves that the sun wasn’t responsible late 20th century warming came from just one expert.


Doctor Analogy is Quackers


Inglis has since repeated his lame ‘doctor’ analogy to become the unexpected darling of climate alarmists.  ThinkProgress first ran  the story.  But even a cursory analysis proves the Inglis analogy doesn’t hold water. Here’s why:


Medical professionals are required to undertake many years of training while most climatologists aren’t even qualified. Indeed, no climate scientist ever passed a basic degree in climatology.


Too many third raters weak in physics and higher math hide themselves in this infant, generalist-filled science; proof of this came from the official Climategate inquiries.


Lord Oxburgh, who chaired the 2010 independent British report into the Climategate scandal found that innumerate, cherry-picking climate scientists hyped up their global warming theory with unsubstantiated "subjective" claims. He officially recommended that skilled statisticians be brought in to hold their hand.


So when we switch the analogy to that of ‘statistician’ rather than ‘doctor’ we see how poorly Inglis has thought this through. Who in their right mind would want one of those charlatans calculating their tax accounts?


But it’s not just the climate doomsayers at CRU who can’t count; alarmists at the Royal Academy were exposed as innumerate, too. They somehow managed to miscalculate the duration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere by several orders of magnitude! And so embarrassed was the New Zealand government by the number-crunching calamities of its climate scientists its now abandoned all pretense to possessing a valid climate temperature record. This is so important because the Australian/New Zealand data constitutes the foundation of one quarter of the planet’s climate record.

But let’s get to the real reason why the ‘doctor’ analogy fails: the ‘patient’ isn’t ‘sick’ – not even showing a rising temperature. Professor Phil Jones, head of the world’s pre-eminent climate data handling establishment the UK’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) admits there’s been no statistically significant rise in global temperatures since 1995.


But worse, solar scientists (not to be confused with climate scientists) say soon we may be entering a new ice age. So if Mr. Inglis insists on proffering a medical analogy, the facts suggest he’d be better advised to refer to those discredited climatologists as quacks and the U.N’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) as snake oil peddlers.

The embittered former Representative hasn’t kept up with the science. Otherwise he’d know that
the laws of physics ably defeat the global warming theory. What Mr. Inglis ought to do is use all that extra free time the voters gave him and take a good hard look again at the science. Then he’ll learn: “it’s the sun stupid!”









Filed under Uncategorized

3 responses to “Calling Bob Inglis – If Climatologists Were Doctors They’d Be Quacks

  1. Anonymous

    Bob Inglis and junk science
    Mr. O’Sullivan, thank you for finally saying it: Bob is a devotee of quacks and a practitioner of that old political “art” of the ad hominem.
    Here’s a funny exchange that occured during the campaign:
    Bob: “Why would you vote for Christina Jeffrey? She’s a loser.”
    Constituent: “You’re going to be a loser in June, Bob.”
    The constituent was a better prognosticator than Bob. The climate was chilly for what he was selling, to wit, global warming, soft spot for Obamacare, amnesty for illegals and cap and tax (forget trade).

  2. Существует ли ответ, что происходит с экосистемой планеты?
    Происходит глобальное потепление или похолодание? Какие факторы могут влиять на этот процесс и как изменить климат в положительную для Человека сторону?
    Что происходит с пустынями,засухами,снегопадами, сильными дождями в отдельных регионах, ледниками, атмосферой,течениями? Как повлиять на происходящие процессы?
    От каких факторов зависит погода и как управлять погодой?
    Почему официальная наука не может дать однозначный ответ о прошлом и даже ближайшем будущем?
    Is there an answer, what happens to the ecosystem of the planet?
    Going global warming or cooling? What factors can influence this process and how to change the climate in a positive direction for Man?
    What happens to the deserts, drought, snow, heavy rains in some regions, glaciers, atmosphere, currents? How to influence the processes?
    What factors depends on the weather and how to control the weather?
    Why is the official science can not give a definite answer about the past and even the near future?

  3. Перспективная экономика, энергосберегающие управленческие системы, новые технологии управления,решение проблемы глобального потепления, как регулировать климат,экология,история,философия,право,аналитика,наука.
    Аналитика “полного цикла” с коррекцией объекта управления;
    стратегическая и тактическая системная аналитика и прогноз;
    управление проектами;
    консультационное обеспечение создания производства и сопровождение его деятельности;
    консультации по созданию бизнеса в финансовом секторе экономики и сопровождение его деятельности;
    правовая экспертиза документов и коммерческих схем;
    корпоративное право и антикризисное управление,банковское право, консультации по залогу и ипотеке, взаимоотношениям Клиента и Банка при возникновении проблемных вопросов, исполнительному производству.
    Perspective economics, energy management systems, new technology management, solutions to global warming (decision of problem of global rise in temperature), how to regulate the climate, ecology, history, philosophy, law, analytics, science, economy,economic perspectives.
    Interested in business contacts, get acquainted with their colleagues on their interests.
    -Optimization of the organizations, enterprises, commercial structures and institutions;
    -analysis charts of activity, recommendation;
    -analytics to order;
    -multilevel marketing;
    -how to make the correct decisions – the theory and methodology;
    -legal consultations.
    Service in Ukraine.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s