Time and again, deniers cry “censorship” whenever their stupidity is not tolerated. The latest instance is a story in Forbes about Professor Niv Shaviv and his (disproven) hypothesis that cosmic rays, not carbon pollution, are responsible for climate change.
Forbes pulled the story shortly after it was published, replacing it with a disclaimer that reads “after review, this post has been removed for failing to meet our editorial standards.” That’s...really saying something. Forbes has, at least in the past, been host to all kinds of denial nonsense, largely due to its uncontrolled “contributor” program, where most anyone could post most anything with zero editorial oversight. (James Taylor was one such contributor, for example, before they switched to a more controlled contributor situation in 2018.)
The author of the piece in question, Doron Levin, doesn’t appear to be a science reporter. Rather, his bio states he “covered the global auto industry for more than three decades.” His other posts are all about cars, so this turn to denial certainly raises questions, especially given Forbes’ history of being used by monied interests for covert PR efforts.
Although Forbes removed the story relatively quickly for being an editorial failure, the GWPF, ever ready to prop up laughable pseudo-science, reposted it in full, with the headline “Against censorship: the climate story Forbes doesn’t want you to read.”
So what did it say? Honestly, nothing particularly new or interesting.
The story simply posits a hypothetical on warming: wouldn’t it be neat if everyone were wrong on the causes of climate change, and this mild-mannered professor were a 21st century Galileo? (To the author’s credit, numerous mentions are made to the fact that Shaviv’s theory runs contrary to a wide body of evidence and a near-universal consensus.)
But because the issue’s come up again, it needs to be smacked down again. In fact, there was enough chatter about the piece to warrant a ClimateFeedback evaluation. ClimateFeedback pointed to some past comments on the topic, reinforcing the naivety, at best, of the write-up. The post references the study from Europe’s Large Hadron Collider that conclusively disproved Shaviv’s hypothesis, as well as other studies, one a decade old, that give cause to doubt the cosmic ray hypothesis.
And we’ve talked about Shaviv’s frequent co-author Svensmark, and how CERN experiments found their proposed mechanism for cosmic rays causing warming was way too tiny to work.
The Forbes piece ends with a potential “silver lining” of Shaviv’s status as a member of the contrarian fringe. “Just think of the acclaim that awaits if his research -- and scientific reconsideration of the current orthodoxy -- one day proves persuasive,” Levin writes dreamily.
We would all be very happy if climate change wasn’t caused by the burning of greenhouse-gas emitting fossil fuels. But at this point, the only thing about Shaviv’s theory that has been proven, is that it’s false.
Top Climate and Clean Energy Stories: