Dr. Willie Soon, an Aerospace engineer and prominent Climate expert, has been attacked by the left because of the possibility some of his research may have been funded by “fossil fuel” and corporate interests.

What sparked this latest attack was due to the fact that Dr. Soon and three other scientists had a paper recently published that showed computer models used in predicting climate were running hot.  This paper demonstrates, once again, evidence contrary to the dogma of the Climate Change Religion.

The paper’s proof was apparently damning enough that one of the authors of the paper had his website hacked.  Interestingly, the paper itself was published without any funding whatsoever.  And yet, despite this revelation, these respected members of the science community are being subjected to a silencing campaign from the left.

Now it seems, scientists who may have agreed with this paper by speaking out, are now being targeted by representatives in Congress.   In fact, Dr. Judith Curry, Atmospheric Scientist from Georgia Tech, and Dr. Roger Pielke, Jr, Professor of Environmental Studies at the University of Colorado,  were the targets of  Rep. Raul Grijalva, (D-AZ) now asking about there research funding (here and here), because they may have been supportive of Dr. Soon.

I will say this about Dr. Pielke and Dr. Curry.  Both of these scientists have stated that they believe that man is influencing the climate.  At one time, they both leaned more towards dogma.  In the last few years, they have moved more towards the center, perhaps “lukewarm” as stated in some circles.  They both, however, are skeptical of substantial policy changes due to the uncertainties in the data and would like to see many glaring issues resolved before hyping the need for change that could drastically affect millions of people economically.

It is important to note, that while my policy stance is to do nothing because of the uncertainties within many aspects of Climate research, my software engineering background screams that computers are not fully capable of modeling the climate yet, or even reliable weather predictions.  While neither Climate modeling, nor weather models are the same, both systems have errors that accumulate over time.  Weather modeling is improving, but its not where it needs to be.  Climate modeling is way off the mark.

The fact that climate models have performed poorly at predicting many of the climate events over the last 150 years should give anyone pause to suggest they are necessary to make drastic policy decisions.  That’s not to say they aren’t worthy tools.  That’s all they are at this point in the evolution.  The problem has been scientific work using these tools as a means to influence policy, and has translated into advocacy where it shouldn’t.

However, when you are part of a religion, that doesn’t matter. The only thing you believe in is the Consensus Bible, even when the facts presented to you show you’re views are wrong, doesn’t matter.  What is concerning is the involvement now, of Congressmen who are also wanting the same information that the leftist attackers want.  People need to stand up now and ask why that is.

Update:  Washington Post story showing even more inquiries.  Also, a correction to Dr. Soon’s academic field.

What makes this interesting?  The hypocrisy that corporations influence policy.  Can you say Tom Steyer?