Bizarre Science notes an Op-Ed piece by Sallie Baliunas and others, criticising the Kyoto protocol on a number of grounds and claiming that global warming is a natural phenomenon. As BS points out, Googling Baliunas (try Baliunas + Institute) reveals that she is a Harvard-based astrophysicist, and also that she is affiliated with a wide range of anti-Kyoto thinktanks including the Competitive Enterprise Institute, the George Marshall Institute, the Fraser Institute and so on.

So Baliunas is both an astrophysicist and a political activist. Although this is not a particularly common combination, there’s nothing wrong with it. Most of the time, one would expect astrophysics would not have political implications, nor that discoveries in astrophysics would be particularly likely to suit the political proclivities of those making them.

When such a coincidence does occur, as in the case of Baliunas’ theory that fluctuations in solar irradiance are the main cause of global warming, a conflict of interest arises. Such conflicts are part of life, and there are straightforward ways of dealing with them. In most cases, all that is required is a frank declaration of one’s position.

Provided Baliunas declares her affiliation with anti-Kyoto thinktanks, there is no problem with her putting forward her theories regarding the causes of global warming. Sadly, scrolling to the bottom of her Op-Ed page, we find ‘Dr. Sallie Baliunas is deputy director at Mount Wilson Observatory and an astrophysicist at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics.’ Her other affiliations are not mentioned, although, in a piece that is not primarily about astrophysics, they are at least as relevant and arguably more so.

This is a straightforward test of Baliunas’ good faith, and she flunks it. As BS observes “We obviously cannot trust anything she writes, can we?”
Update(Sigh) For irony-challenged readers, I should note that Aaron Oakley of BS really thinks we should trust Baliunas and is speaking ironically, and that I am doing the same in taking his words literally. Ken Parish is perhaps even more subtly ironical in his response, where he suggests I am trying to deceive unwary readers into thinking that BS is a pro-Kyoto site.
On the general point of ad hominem attacks, I’d be happy at any time to drop this kind of argument and accept the verdict of the great majority of scientists who’ve studied this topic, as represented by the IPCC, the US National Academy of Sciences, CSIRO etc. Kyoto sceptics routinely claim that the great majority of atmospheric scientists are lying in order to boost their research grants. Having raised the issue of potentially dishonest motives for scientists as a group, they complain when the same test is applied to the handful of individual scientists on whom they rely.

I’m creeping back towards regular blogging, which includes resuming my weekly features. This is the opportunity to comment on any topic that takes your fancy (civilised discussion and no coarse language, please). To kick things off, is anyone willing to defend the anti-terrorist laws recently introduced by state governments in Victoria and NSW?

The government has deferred any further sale of Telstra. In view of the many times it has been correctly stated that Telstra can’t stay ‘half-pregnant’, it’s now time to consider renationalisation.

I’ve also published a piece on elites at On Line Opinion. Opening paras:

Of course there is an Australian elite. In fact, there is more than one. Business wealth commands one sort of power, central position in political machines commands another, and senior office in the public service yet another.

The recent discussion of elites in Australia has focused on the ‘opinion elite’. Many of the assertions that have been made about the opinion elite in recent months, particularly by supporters of the Howard government, have been self-serving nonsense. Nevertheless, there is no denying the fact that some Australians have more influence than others in determining the ideas that are taken seriously in formulating public policy, and that, on many occasions the views of this influential group are not representative of the population as a whole.

Ray Cassin gives a great analysis of the current state of the republican debate. Ever the optimist, I disagree with him about one thing. I think that once it becomes clear that we are not going to remain a monarchy, a significant number of old-style monarchists (those who actually like the monarch as a person rather than as a cog in the wheels of the Westminster system) will switch to support for direct election.

I recently reviewed Thomas Frank’s One Market Under God, and William Baumol’s The Free-Market Innovation Machine: Analyzing the Growth Miracle of Capitalism,for The Drawing Board, an Internet journal published out of the University of Sydeny. My concluding para

The Free-Market Innovation Machine is a disappointing book from an author who has made substantial and creative contributions in many fields of economics in the past. By contrast, One Market Under God deserves to be recognised as the best dissection of the bubble culture of the 1990s that has yet been written.

It may be a little while before my latest contribution to the Fin goes up on my new website at UQ, and of course the Fin is almost the only paper in the world with a website that’s “all pay, all the time”. In my most recent column, published on Thursday, I argue that Labor needs to push for higher taxes and conclude

For the moment, it is probably too optimistic to suppose that any political party in Australia would advocate an increase in standard rates of income tax to finance improvements in health, education and the environment. But ultimately, those who will the end must will the means.

Reading the comments that have accumulated in my absence, I see that some of my American readers were a bit miffed about my gentle raillery on the subject of coffee. To even the score, I’ll just mention that while the espresso machine was the second-last item to be packed and the second to be unpacked, my beloved PowerBook G4 Titanium was last on and first off. Nothing I have ever owned has made a bigger difference to my quality of life (except perhaps my first 128K Mac). I dips me lid to American style and ingenuity for this marvelous device.

In a virtual sense, anyway. In geographical terms, I’ve arrived on a beautiful day in Brisbane. The flame trees and poincianas are in bloom, and there was even a kookaburra on the back fence to welcome us. More from me after I’ve unpacked the Krups!

Well, this is my definite last post from Canberra. The Krups is in the car, and the Powerbook is the last thing left in the house that’s plugged in. Thanks to all the Queensland bloggers who’ve already offered welcomes.

Since I’ve got a little bit of time on my hands, I’ll just observe that the Indonesian police have done a great job. In view of their success in catching the main suspects, I’m prepared to put the ‘laughing bomber’ episode down to cultural differences – it seems to have played OK in Indonesia and that’s what matters. The blame has been pinned firmly on radical Islamism and this will hopefully help to stop this malign import from taking root in Indonesia.

Now if we could only get Howard to do something positive, like a full-scale denunciation of Fred Nile’s absurd comments on chadors. Given that Howard has the guts to take a stand on things he believes in, like gun laws, his pussyfooting with Nile and earlier with Hanson leads me to the conclusion that he shares their sentiments to a large degree.