I wasn't going to write about the allegations of sexual harassment against Rajendra Pachauri, and I won't. However I will pick up on something that I admit to finding very difficult to believe. After all, Judith Curry is a professor. A supposedly educated woman.
You thought so too? Think again.
The Ugly Denier
Judith Curry writes, quoting Rajendra Pachauri:
Donna LaFramboise highlights what I regard as the most serious issue for the IPCC’s reputation.From Pachauri’s resignation letter:
For me the protection of Planet Earth, the survival of all species and sustainability of our ecosystems is more than a mission. It is my religion and my dharma.
Then she writes:
The bottom line is this. It is very difficult to ‘enforce’ or even defend the IPCC consensus when the leader of IPCC for more than a decade is alleged to have partaken in sleazy and illegal behavior, regards climate change as his religion, has massive conflicts of interest, and has used his position as a platform for personal advocacy. All of this reinforces criticisms that the IPCC is about politics, money and dogma, rather than science.
Leaving aside her quoting a nutter like Donna Laframboise, her complete nonsense about judging the IPCC by the alleged actions of one man (irrelevant to his role as Chair of the IPCC), or the ridiculousness of "conflicts of interest", or making the ludicrous claim that the IPCC is about politics and money and dogma, rather than science - what astounds me is her complete and utter ignorance of Hinduism, which is the religion of almost one billion people throughout the world. (Wiki lists Hinduism as the religion having the third largest number of adherents after Christianity and Islam.)
How Hindu Dharma views the world of nature
A central focus of Hinduism is the concept of being one with nature, of the central importance of the natural world. As Dr. Pachauri said, it is more than a mission, it is his "religion and Dharma".
Now I understand and appreciate that right wing ideologues like Judith Curry couldn't conceive of a "religion" that didn't worship money or individualism. The thought of being part of something bigger than them as an individual would be as foreign a concept as worshiping God is to an atheist.
But surely she is not so ignorant that she is unaware that many religions do not consider humans as being separate from the rest of the natural world - indeed, rather than regarding the world as theirs to be raped and plundered, many religions regard it as immoral for humans to wilfully destroy the environment. More than that, many religions regard nature as holy. Something that the Judith Curry's and Donna Laframboise's of the world would no doubt see as crazy, given their money mad, human-centric world view.
Here are excerpts from an article about Hinduism:
The Hindu approach to ecology requires that we first understand how Hindu Dharma views the world of nature, which is very different than that of the predominant western religions.
Western religious thought based upon Biblical traditions regards nature as something created by God. If nature is sacred, it is so as God’s creation. This is the basis of the approach to ecology in western religious traditions. They ask us to protect nature as God’s creation, but do not afford nature any sanctity of its own. However, they are generally suspicious of nature Gods and regard worshipping the Earth itself as a form of idolatry. That is why they have historically rejected nature based or pagan religions as unholy, including Hinduism.
The Hindu view of nature is based upon the Vedas, Upanishads and Vedanta and their philosophical views, as well as Hindu devotional and ritualistic practices. According to Hindu thought, there is no separation between the Divine and the world of nature. They are the two aspects of the same reality. The cosmic reality is one like the ocean. Nature or the manifest world is like the waves on the surface of the sea. Brahman or the unmanifest Absolute is like the depths of the sea. But it is all water, all the same single ocean.
...This Vedic vision of unity is the basis for an ecological approach in which we can honor the entire universe as part of our own higher Self. It takes us beyond the duality of God and the creation. God does not create the world out of nothing. The world, God and the soul are inherent aspects of the same Eternal Being. We need not protect nature as we would an inferior creature. We can honor nature as our own greater life and expression.
I only write this because I can see it being spread far and wide that "global warming is a religion" - which is not at all what Dr Pachauri wrote. It is nature that is integral to his religion - and he would regard it as integral to his being. Which is about the best way I can describe it. He has a moral obligation - as we all do, to nurture and protect the natural world as we would ourselves.
Something that deniers like Judith Curry can't conceive of.
Can you imagine any science denier admitting that they regard as any sort of priority: "the protection of Planet Earth, the survival of all species and sustainability of our ecosystems"?
Heck, most of them can't wait to see the earth destroyed.
As you know, I didn't think much of Judith Curry before. If it's possible, I think way less of her now. This article of hers shows you'd be hard-pressed to meet a sleazier individual or a more ignorant academic.