Thursday, October 25, 2007

A Level Climate Science

Melanie Phillips once claimed that she had, in the old Irving Kristol formulation, been “mugged by reality”. I think she sustained a head injury during the attack. She doesn’t, in any case, seem to be able to face her attacker. I wouldn’t normally write about her bizarre, frothing persona: surely most people, even Daily Mail readers, would view her as a slightly crude parody, as Steven Poole insists she is. But now her Spectator incarnation refuses to publish my comments, and I can’t let even a satiric invention get away with that.

It begins with her enthusiasm for David Bellamy. A while ago he jumped, beard first, into the global warming debate, and immediately made an idiot of himself. In 2004 he wrote a Daily Mail article with the standard discredited points – that carbon dioxide is not a pollutant but a fertilizer, that the real greenhouse gas is water vapour, etc. He even touted the absurd “Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine” petition, “signed by over 18,000 scientists”, including, as George Monbiot pointed out, “Ginger Spice and the cast of MASH”. In an exchange with Monbiot, Bellamy's complete lack of knowledge of global warming science became evident. For instance, to make his case on glaciers he had apparently relied on non-existent papers in prestigious journals, existent papers in LaRouchite journals, and, ultimately, his inability to operate a computer keyboard. He then wisely wrote to the Sunday Times announcing that he would “draw back” from this subject of which he knew nothing.

Sadly it didn’t last, and this week he was back with another self-pitying, “heretical” article informing Times readers that “the self-proclaimed consensus among scientists has detached itself from the questioning rigours of hard science”. Truth-tellers like Bellamy are victims of “McCarthyism, witch-hunts and all”. He has switched to a slightly different selection of debating points, but they are familiar enough. Ah, but the climate is cyclical anyway. And didn’t the Romans grow grapes in England? Oh, and Greenland used to be green (cue etymologically dubious assertion). On the strength of these claims we can obviously discard those “complex and often unreliable computer models” with their physics and their matching hindcasting. His points have all been dealt with, even in language a soil-fondling botanist should understand, but Bellamy has simply ignored these responses.

Naturally such a performance did not escape Mel P, forever casting around for abject stupidity to endorse. The Bellamy effusion is “glorious”. “Thank goodness” for him. He “rips into the global warming scam with unrivalled brio”. “Over and over again,” she reports, “he brings forward elementary facts which directly contradict or fatally undermine the misleading claims and sometimes totally bent predictions of man-made global warming catastrophe which masquerade as ‘research’.” So there. Even if a scientific consensus existed “it would prove nothing except the unlimited capacity of people to fall into line when their livelihoods are at stake”:

The ‘scientific consensus’ has been proved wrong over and over again; it was not long ago that it was proclaiming with the same certainty that the planet was about to freeze to extinction.

It is perhaps interesting to ponder Melanie Phillips’s understanding of the scientific method. Because the scientific consensus has been wrong in the past, no scientific consensus can “prove” anything except scientists’ self-interest. It is of course true science cannot absolutely prove anything. But if her statement has any informational content beyond this, it apparently suggests that all scientific consensus – indeed science itself – is meaningless. So what if the scientific consensus promotes certain views about gravity? The consensus has been wrong many times. And scientists do get grants for studying gravity: they’re just promoting their own interests. Who can trust these “complex” models of general relativity when all this talk of curved space-time is obvious nonsense to the ordinary decent folk in the street? (This attitude is held, of course, by the arch defender of truth from filthy pinko relativism.)

There is another scientific issue on which Mel P has historically believed herself to be almost uniquely correct, and it’s instructive because at no point did she ever acknowledge that her brave challenge to the consensus was wrong. It is of course the MMR vaccine. Her last article on the subject was titled “MMR: the façade cracks” – and yet since February 2006, and in spite of Andrew Wakefield coming before the GMC on a disciplinary hearing, she has found nothing at all to say. She no longer cares, it seems, about those poor children developing autism. She no longer cares about Wakefield having his reputation “systematically trashed” as part of a “witch-hunt”. No other conclusion is possible unless, of course, she changed her view on the risks of the vaccine. But surely if she’d changed her view this defender of objective truth would at least have admitted she was wrong? She had, after all, helped encourage dangerously low levels of resistance to serious diseases. But no – we heard nothing. Perhaps the final sign that evidence for anthropogenic global warming is irrefutable, even by the willfully ignorant, will be complete silence from Mel P, after a final tantrum where she insists she was right all along.

Anyhow, I originally started this because I wanted to talk about Mel’s attitude towards education (it’s hard to focus on any one part of her continent-straddling lunacy). Some of what she says has some kind of internal logic. One could, for instance, believe her pronouncements on Israel/Palestine if unable to access the empirical facts. But I cannot fathom how she manages to so blithely, and so loudly, hold logically contradictory positions simultaneously. On the one hand, regarding climate change, she believes that “[w]hat matters is not that very grand people with lots of letters after their names all agree to a proposition, but whether that proposition is actually true”. She holds that, without any relevant qualifications, she is in a position to pronounce on global warming by employing "the judgment of ordinary people". And yet yesterday she moaned that the “gold standard” A Level will be abolished, the “education system [has] imploded”, etc.

Equipped with only an English degree, Melanie Phillips has out-thought thousands of highly qualified scientists and doctors, many with those magnificent A Levels of yore. Some of them, I hear, even have degrees. The Melanie Phillips example surely proves we should at the least scrap science and maths A Levels, even if we have to ramp up numbers of English students to replace them. But as far as I can tell it is also an argument against any qualifications at all. Melanie Phillips should welcome the destruction of A Levels, for it will lead to the replacement of study and training with “the judgment of ordinary people”. And how else will we defeat the worldwide global warming conspiracy?

16 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Did Mad Mel's views not accelerate to the right after becoming friends with the notorious Chris Woodhead, another "anti-establishment" figure, whose wife, Ruth Miskin, was on Channel Four last week denouncing the state that education had go into, apparently in ignorance that this was partly under the supervision of her husband.

5:14 pm  
Blogger Renegade Eye said...

I wonder what he meant by McCarthyite smears? Think about what real leftists go through.

Very good blog.

5:08 am  
Blogger StuartA said...

anonymous:

I wasn't aware of a connection with Chris Woodhead. I suppose the timing matches up: her move to the Daily Mail occurred during the period when Woodhead was making a flap about traditional teaching methods, and just after she wrote All Must Have Prizes. It's intriguing to wonder exactly when she turned insane, so if you have any links on this I'd be interested to see.

renegade:

Thanks!

I assumed Bellamy was referring to the drubbing from Monbiot, and his being forced to resign from various environment groups. But yes, in spite of this terrible conspiracy, there he is being offered a guest column in The Times — not something you'd expect to see for a topic where dissident views weren't as useful to large corporate interests.

12:10 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's not hard to find a lot of platforms that they have appeared on together, so it wouldn't be any surprise, as they have so much in common.

I think I got it first from Daniel Davies: http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/jackie_ashley/2006/06/has_london_become_londistan.html

4:24 pm  
Blogger StuartA said...

Thanks for that — interesting stuff.

It's kind of strange how Mad Mel's split with the left originally occurred over social/educational policy, and yet her loudest hysterics these days are over Israel and the Islamist Menace. Somehow it turned out that everything her one-time opponents espoused was not only true, in toto, but it was so obviously true that anybody disagreeing is by definition a foul appeaser of totalitarianism. I suppose it's because these vile individuals, who infest every corner of public life, are distorting truth itself. It must take a while to see through that one.

On a separate note, I would like to know why an Oxford English graduate writes such lousy prose.

2:58 pm  
Blogger StuartA said...

In fact that makes no sense. If the Mel P view of the world is obvious then she should have seen it all along. So it can't be obvious, and Mel P must in fact be a rare genius. Fortunately she is here to educate us.

3:03 pm  
Blogger Bretwalda Edwin-Higham said...

Melanie has really come in from some stick from the left recently.

9:08 am  
Blogger StuartA said...

You find this surprising?

12:19 am  
Anonymous longsword said...

Hi

I just discovered your blog while digging up some background on Alan Johnson. I hope you haven't stopped posting. It's well-written, and your observations quite insightful. I'ld like to link to your page if it's still active.

10:34 pm  
Blogger StuartA said...

Thanks.

I have been busy with other things over the past few months. But a more important reason for the lack of activity here is simply that I find it hard to post about the usual targets without becoming as repetitive as them. I also don't want to just reiterate what's being said elsewhere.

I expect something will come along. But really, what is there left to say about Melanie Phillips? To continue to point out her lunacy seems kind of insulting towards readers. For example, I think of her relentless drive for a police state, and I see Stephen Pollard calling her "a true defender of liberty", and comment seems superfluous.

12:03 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Like longsword, I hope that this page isn't inactive. There has been some good stuff on it: it's insightful and well-written.

Your last point in your last comment points to something important. There are a lot of people around who talk about liberty but seem to be in favour of things that one associates with a police state. And people like this get quite a lot of room in the media without much criticism of this contradiction in their position.

I was reminded of this by an article by David Selbourne in the Spectator (reprinted on Comment is Free)(Selbourne is a Conservative Party advisor on human rights).
He tried to associate the Left with Stalinism but also tried to claim that society was breaking down because of the lack of rules and this was the fault of the Left as well. Possibly his readers in the Spectator could work out this contradiction, and possibly they have a tacit understanding of which rules are useful and which are just Stalinism, but they're not necessarily shared by society as a whole and are often left unstated. This will come up again and again and needs more thought.

10:19 am  
Blogger faceless said...

excellent stuff - well impressed

11:45 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I read lots of posts before and yours is the best one,I appreciate your attitude more information.
Now it will be very cold in winter, in order to keep warm yourself, moncler company has provide jackets for you, so it is better to own moncler jackets yourselif as soon as possible. Eeveryone love fashion clothing, polo ralph lauren is very popular all over world, that is my dream to get one.We know Ray Ban by America soldier, all of them wear ray ban sunglasses when they walk on the road, it is fashionable for you. Most of people like to wear jeans, it is very modern when wearing true religion jeans in the street.

2:39 pm  
Blogger Cheapsocceruniforms said...

There are many brand from France, also including herve leger, and most of womens stars love wearing herve leger dress when they join in some important party. Now polo ralph lauren is very popular with youthful people, everyone want to get ralph lauren polo shirts, there are lots of online shop which are ralph lauren polo outlet, true religion jeans outlet, it will be convenient for us.

9:43 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

脚やせエステ高崎
脚やせエステ錦糸町
脚やせエステ名駅
脚やせエステ徳島
脱毛 栃木
脱毛 神奈川
脱毛 福井
脱毛 天王寺
脱毛 博多
フェイシャルエステ所沢
フェイシャルエステ恵比寿
フェイシャルエステ福井
フェイシャルエステ天王寺
フェイシャルエステ福岡
エステ体験 大宮
エステ体験 新宿
エステ体験 石川
エステ体験 心斎橋
エステ体験 天神
郡山 エステ
春日部 エステ
練馬 エステ
横浜関内 エステ
長野 エステ
京都駅 エステ
奈良県 エステ
久留米 エステ
メンズエステ 群馬
メンズエステ 静岡
メンズエステ 長崎

8:01 am  
Blogger Lo Lo said...

Jordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan UniversityJordan University
http://www.ju.edu.jo/home.aspx
Jordan University
[url]http://www.ju.edu.jo[/url]

7:42 am  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home