Prof Matt Strassler who blogs at ProfMattStrassler.com made an excursion into our favorite topic which is an inferior scientific discipline at the same moment, namely to the climate change science:
He’s been instantly conjectured by Twistor 59 to be Dr Luboš Motl because he blogs both about physics and the climate. As you will see, this conjecture may be intriguing but it is incorrect; the difference is that Dr Luboš Motl doesn’t write nonsense about climate change. What do I mean?
Try the minimalistic template.
Prof Matt Strassler (yes, I will repeat the titles as often as Prof Matt Strassler does so that even the people who like titles will soon be driven up the wall by this pretentious way to talk about the people) discusses the recent bold claims by Prof Richard Muller of Berkeley.
Prof Matt Strassler describes Prof Richard Muller in this way:
But he’s one of the most famous, now, because he was also a loud skeptic not long in the past.
Except that a rudimentary knowledge of the facts is enough to realize that the proposition above is false. Prof Richard Muller himself has described his past attitudes to the climate change in an interview for The Huffington Post:
It is ironic if some people treat me as a traitor, since I was never a skeptic – only a scientific skeptic. [...] But I never felt that pointing out mistakes [in Gore's movie] qualified me to be called a climate skeptic.
So the claims that Prof Richard Muller has been a climate skeptic are indefensible; they are malicious lies, a part of an orchestrated propaganda campaign. Let me admit that because of Prof Matt Strassler’s references to blog articles that have irritated him, I find it hard to believe that Prof Matt Strassler hasn’t encountered the information that Prof Richard Muller hasn’t been a climate skeptic yet. It seems clear to me that he is spreading this misinformation deliberately while he is aware of its invalidity.
The most obvious difference between Matt Strassler and Luboš Motl is that Matt has the self-awareness, honesty and integrity to realise that he’s not qualified to pontificate on the subject, whereas Luboš does not.
The phrase “Luboš Motl doesn’t write nonsense about climate change” is exceptionally silly.
Perhaps you’d care to debate that with Luboš at The Reference Frame, he’s eminently approachable.
I’ve commented there several times and each one all been removed without comment. I’m not interested in a debate with someone who simply deletes any reference to facts that contradict his (often deeply unpleasant) opinions.
True, he doesn’t have much patience with patently stupid comments like “He’s right and you’re wrong, nyah!” but he does engage if you have a valid point.