Heartland: Economics is not Science

See the program for their next caucus. (They call it a conference, but it isn’t that, is it?)

It’s got a pretty horrifying cast of characters. Lindzen, Delingpole, De Freitas, Monckton, D’Aleo, etc. etc. all in the same place. But there is an interesting implicit concession that “science” and “economics” are distinct.

Advertisements

10 thoughts on “Heartland: Economics is not Science

  1. And that public policy is distinct from either. It's hard to disagree with this.I'm not planning to attend but if I were I'd sure like to go to this session:Session 9: ScienceModerated by Kristine EsposoJames DelingpoleJoe D'AleoFred SingerI've looked up Delingpole on Wikipedia and he describes himself as a "conservative libertarian." Interestingly, from a philosophical point of view, that's how I'd describe myself. Delingpole and I have little in common, however.I'm unable to find anything in his biography that qualifies him to sit on a science panel. It seems like I'm more qualified, and I'm not qualified at all.

  2. Well, economics has been called the dismal science.Take that in the second sense, please.

  3. John Mashey says:

    yes, that's a nice lsit to add to my compendiums of such things.I notice Gerald Marsh has fully come out now. he had some interesting involvement with the APS FPS – Monckton fiasco in 2008.

  4. May seem odd to suggestTol, R.S.J. and A.F. de Vos (1998), ‘A Bayesian Statistical Analysis of the Enhanced Greenhouse Effect’, Climatic Change, 38, 87-112,but the second author is an econometician and the paper states "This approach is inspired by the developments in econometrics where the failure of large models has led to the return to simplicity."

  5. Well both economy and ecology derive from the same Greek word; oikos – the house. It seems to me that there has been little to no progress to go beyond our typical view (which drives many policies) that the world is our oyster, with a bounty of resources for the taking to a more sustainable give and take approach. It’s horrible when you hear of a pack like this getting together, who talk like hotel guests who find nothing wrong in swiping anything not nailed to the ground. King of the Road made a point about Delingpole being unqualified to discuss science; that certainly never stopped Monckton who is considered by many as their climate skeptic champion. Technically I have more qualifications than him regarding climate science and I know that I’m not qualified to be so loud on the subject.

  6. willard says:

    Do Steve have a PH.D?

  7. arajand says:

    Mr TobisIt is Delingpole, not Dellingpole.

  8. arajand, fixed, thanks.

  9. So, Willard's cryptic observation amounts to pointing out that McIntyre has been promoted to a doctorate in the Heartland Caucus Schedule of Events. Speaking of caucusing, I wonder if they ought to elect a denier-in-chief every year. That would add some drama to the event. Delegates could wear funny hats. There could be balloons.

  10. Andrew Adams says:

    King of the Road,Yes, that got my attention as well. If you want to read Delingpole's views on AGW (and other subjects) you can do so herehttp://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/author/jamesdelingpole/although I really would advise it (and I certainly would warn you against reading the comments). One thing is clear though – not only does he clearly not understand the science, he doesn't care about it – he 's just a professional contrarian who dismisses AGW because leftists and environmentalists believe in it.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s