Having a PhD is an indication that a person has studied a specific subject intently for 6-8 years. It is an accomplishment that deserves recognition, as many canot make the cut. There are some people in our community who did not make the cut and are disparaging the academic accomplishments in others who did.
This is in response to a Union Other Voice by George Rebane PhD.
One of the things that PhDs learn how to do is to read peer reviewed academic papers and draw conclusions from the studies that are the subject of these research papers. The base skill is reading research papers and understadning the content, which may include research outside of, but related to, their core study areas. For example, climate is driven by physical forces. A physics should not have a problem understanding a climatology paper and reporting on the results.
You have to be an climatologist to understand climate complexity, according to our local progressive blogger.
But George is making the same mistake: equating his Ph.D. in engineering with being a climate scientist. He is not.
George is a systems engineer with degrees from UCLA in physics (BS), control & estimation systems (MSE), and computer science and complex dynamic systems (PhD).
Scientist agree, climate is a complex dynamic system. It seems to me that a PhD in systems engineering should have a better understanding of this complexity than a Progressive who cannot even read or understand a climate research paper and list the critical facts in a blog post.
It is my position that one does not need to have a PhD to read and understand a climatology paper that is based on properly collected data. Anyone with a science or data analysis back ground can grok the details of a climatology study. However, a PhD maybe required to lift the hood on the paper and understand the complex math used to support the authors hypothesis and conclusions. This is where a PhD counts.
Our local Progressive’s view is that only a climatologist can report on the complexity of climate change. That is unadulterated hubris from a person that cannot even read and evaluate a climatology paper and report on the core details, supporting his postion that humans are responsible for climate change.
Read the comments of on our progress bloggers post: When holding a Ph.D. does not make you an expert. No facts, only attacks! These people just do not have the mental capacity to understand the complexity of climate change, so they cite the progressive AGW talking points and attack the people who are able read the detailed studies and understand the complexity of climate change.
The climate has been changing since the earth was created and will until it expires in a few billion years, and humans will have little to do with the changes. The California drought is not unusual, we are not having more forest fires, there is a ten year lull in hurricane land falls, the number of tornados is declining and there is still ice in the Arctic with Antarctic ice growing. And, humans had nothing to do with any of this. It is just part of the chaotic world we live in, enjoying the lulls between chaotic events.