Bush Administration Has Pressured Half Of Gov’t Scientists To Downplay Global Warming
Bush Administration Has Pressured Half Of Gov’t Scientists To Downplay Global Warming
A new report presented to the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee by the Union of Concerned Scientists and the Government Accountability Project shows 435 instances in which the Bush administration interfered into the global warming work of government scientists over the past five years. Some other findings of the survey:
– 46 percent of government scientists “personally experienced pressure to eliminate the words ‘climate change,’ ‘global warming,’ or other similar terms from a variety of communications.”
– 46 percent “perceived or personally experienced new or unusual administrative requirements that impair climate-related work.”
– 38 percent “perceived or personally experienced the disappearance or unusual delay of websites, reports, or other science-based materials relating to climate.”
– 25 percent “perceived or personally experienced situations in which scientists have actively objected to, resigned from, or removed themselves from a project because of pressure to change scientific findings.”
James Hansen, the government’s top global warming researcher, has also revealed that the Bush administration tried to prevent him from speaking freely about global warming to the media. In 2004, the administration also had a requirement that “NASA press officers listened in whenever NASA scientists spoke with reporters, either on the telephone or in person.”
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
118 Responses to “Bush Administration Has Pressured Half Of Gov’t Scientists To Downplay Global Warming”
Register
RSSLogin
What would a bunch of rocket scientists know?
/sarcasm = off
January 30th, 2007 at 4:29 pmIt’s all about big business to BushCo. If the big oil companies feel threatened, the global climate change science will be threatened.
January 30th, 2007 at 4:30 pmWe need to find out if Mr Hansen deliberately downplayed the ‘Urban Heat Island’ myth. Call Jason Fact Mangler - we need an Ivy League perspective…
January 30th, 2007 at 4:35 pmHow is this any different from a Communist regime where a “Political Officer” is always present to make sure that party purity is maintained?
January 30th, 2007 at 4:37 pmIt’s shameful beyond belief that American Democracy has sunk to this level.
Call Jason Fact Mangler - we need an Ivy League perspective…
Comment by TerrytheTurtle — January 30, 2007 @ 4:35 pm
That is freakin’ hilarious!
January 30th, 2007 at 4:40 pmIn 2004, the administration also had a requirement that “NASA press officers listened in whenever NASA scientists spoke with reporters, either on the telephone or in person.â€
Und don’t forgessen. Vee vill be lissunink to you. But speeken freely mein freund….hahahaha
January 30th, 2007 at 4:41 pmGood for you, Hansen. The Bush adminstration has long pressured Hansen to not speak up and to keep his mouth shut. He hasn’t knuckled under to these morons for an instant and today still has his integrity. That’s more than can be said of piss-poor Bush and his obnoxious thugs.
January 30th, 2007 at 4:41 pmDeliberate disinformation of this sort, in a democracy, is tantamount to treason. It should be an impeachable offense.
2 + 2 = 5
January 30th, 2007 at 4:41 pmYou are led to believe this is a Democracy.
January 30th, 2007 at 4:42 pmBad news for Global Warming Alarmists!
http://www.dailytech.com/ Bad+News+for+Global+Warming+Alarmists/ article5914.htm
Interesting, it seems that global warming is a natural part of the earth’s weather patterns.. Let the shouting begin.
January 30th, 2007 at 4:43 pmthe other have are too scared to admit they were pressured.
January 30th, 2007 at 4:45 pmHmmm… let me see.
Supressing science, check. Supressing art and literature, check. Embracing a theology, check. Having Corporations make the decisions in concert with government, check. An overgeneralized sense of nationalism, check. Controlling the media, check. Taking away individual liberties, check.
Looks like Fascism to me, just sayin’
January 30th, 2007 at 4:48 pmShut up, Hansen or otherwise instead of a house you will own a “greenhouse”…..
January 30th, 2007 at 4:49 pmLet the shouting begin.
Comment by Douglas G. — January 30, 2007 @ 4:43 pm
I think you meant the ridicule… Your ’source’ offers the following options:
Home
Gadgets
Hardware
Internet
IT
Science
Software
Blogs
LOL!
January 30th, 2007 at 4:49 pmBad news for Global Warming Alarmists!
http://www.dailytech.com/ Bad+News+for+Global+Warming+Alarmists/ article5914.htm
Interesting, it seems that global warming is a natural part of the earth’s weather patterns.. Let the shouting begin.
Comment by Douglas G. —
Dougy,
If they don’t like what the scientists say, you’d think they would be able to find enough other scientists who would agree with you. Where are they?
January 30th, 2007 at 4:49 pmOk Douglas so it seems your smarter and cleverer than NASA’s Hansen….!
Hey brodda, this is not rocket science!!!
January 30th, 2007 at 4:50 pmRighto, here I am and here I go:
CO2 can’t possibly be the major cause of climate change. Look at the curve. The sharp increase in temperature change in the last 20 years is easily explained by any one of the following correlations which have also sharply increased in the last 20 years:
1 The Dow Jones Industrials Index - all that irrational exuberance is exacerbating the urban heat island effect
January 30th, 2007 at 4:50 pm2. The amount of money spent on Superbowl ads. Don’t believe me - look at the trends its obvious
3. David Beckham’s salary - from his paper round in South London to his LA Galaxy signing - stop paying Beckham and the ice caps will be back pronto.
4. The average size of the family TV - its a direct match…you’ll see.
Doug G., even though there is evidence of a natural cycle of climate change it would be irresponsible to conclude that becasue warming has occured in the past that current levels of greenhouse gas emmissions would not exacerbate that trend.
But hey, why tackle a problem that won’t effect your life directly? Let’s leave it to our great great grandchildren to figure out why we didn’t have enough foresight to try and live in an environmentally viable way.
January 30th, 2007 at 4:51 pmThe government is silencing the truth on an issue that, if left unchecked, could lead to the extermination of the human race.
The administration is taking every sleazy approach to silencing dissent and opposition. Heavy handed (oppressive) tactics cannot be far behind.
Bush is trying to steal congress’s power through a presidential directive (gee, this one’s not getting much press for some reason).
The country votes to end the Iraq war (that is what last November’s election was about, by the way) and Bush’s response has been to expand the conflict and even attempt to compound it with Iran and Syria.
I don’t know about you, but with all this talk about global warming why is it that a chill is running down my spine?
January 30th, 2007 at 4:51 pmMore proof that humans are a cancer on the earth. We will continue to blindly abuse and feed off of our host until it dies and becomes a lifeless rock lost in infinity. Heck of a job George.
January 30th, 2007 at 4:51 pmLet’s not forget that the world’s temperature has increased as the number of pirates has decreased.
January 30th, 2007 at 4:54 pmArgh!
And here I thought all the hot air from Bush was to blame for global warming and the global frigid conditions were because of Rice and Cheney.
January 30th, 2007 at 4:55 pmThe extreme winter precipitation is, of course, from Tony Snow.
Douggy baby - your talking point is out of date. The 4th IPCC report is due on Friday. Here’s the money shot:
“These changes took place at a time when non-anthropogenic factors (i.e. the sum of solar and volcano forcing) would be expected to have produced cooling, not warming”
Dagadagadagadaga - Douggy’s going down in flames, Biffo….
January 30th, 2007 at 4:59 pmWilco,
I’ll meet you next to the nearest beer volcano in the next life, fellow Pastafarian.
January 30th, 2007 at 4:59 pmAre we all that suprised? Bush is THE DECISION MAKER, and if he decides that global warming is interfering with his money, or his plan to dick-tate - then it doesn’t exsist.
Can we impeach him and his side kick already…….. IM WAITING
January 30th, 2007 at 4:59 pmScience is apparently too important to be trusted to scientists.
I suspect that there might be a little bit of blowback to this one. People who think Global Warming has reached a “tipping point” in terms of public awareness haven’t seen anything yet.
Reality has a well known liberal bias. Colbert
January 30th, 2007 at 5:01 pmThere better be some blowback for this one and not the kind of blow GW would enjoy!
January 30th, 2007 at 5:10 pmComment by Jason Fact Mangler
That was brilliant. Thanks for the laughs.
January 30th, 2007 at 5:13 pmThe average size of the family TV - its a direct match…you’ll see.
Comment by Jason Fact Mangler — January 30, 2007 @ 4:50 pm
Don’t forget the pirates! :D
January 30th, 2007 at 5:15 pmThe government is silencing the truth on an issue that, if left unchecked, could lead to the extermination of the human race.
Comment by Tuber — January 30, 2007 @ 4:51 pm
Except that Jeebus wouldn’t dare allow that, so they can’t even consider it… Yet another reminder of why separating church from state is necessary…
January 30th, 2007 at 5:18 pmRighto, I’m back and I’m bad:
Yes UB - the number of pirates matches very well with global mean temperature. During the Little Ice Age from 1500 to about 1750 the Spanish Main was crawling with Johnny Depp types.
Now we could fix the whole thing if we can get Johnny and Orlando to switch from a once a year sequel to a weekly show.
Jesus H Christ and his chariot - why hasn’t Nancy Pelosi come up with this solution yet?
January 30th, 2007 at 5:22 pmNow we could fix the whole thing if we can get Johnny and Orlando to switch from a once a year sequel to a weekly show.
Works for me! :D
Jesus H Christ and his chariot - why hasn’t Nancy Pelosi come up with this solution yet?
Comment by Jason Fact Mangler — January 30, 2007 @ 5:22 pm
Really… She has been in office for three weeks now! What’s the delay.
LOL
January 30th, 2007 at 5:26 pmDear trolls,
Don’t you realize that the fact that the Bush administration tries to control the message shows that they realize that global warming is real. If they were on the side of truth, they wouldn’t need to control anything. Try reading a science book for a change. The earth isn’t flat. The sun doesn’t revolve around the earth. Stupid trolls.
January 30th, 2007 at 5:33 pmBut it’s INCONCEIVABLE to believe the gov’t may have influenced the WTC “collapse” studies!
January 30th, 2007 at 5:35 pmNow the test for the “new” congress will be who they subpoena from the WH to testify about all this funny business.
January 30th, 2007 at 5:35 pmDr. Lawrence Britt
January 30th, 2007 at 5:36 pm14 Characteristics of Fascism
http://www.bushflash.com/14.html
I’m opening an inn, The Admiral Bushco, here at the head of Coyote Draw, a league west up the canyon from the Rio Grande, just north of Truth or Consequences.
January 30th, 2007 at 5:37 pmI figure in about 48 years or so, I’m gonna have a nice little deep water anchorage on the Colorado Sea.
All you pirates will be more than welcome.
Just look for the big blinking neon cactus on the cliff as you’re comin’ up the coast.
Douglas G,
DailyTech is one of the web sites I send my companies routers to have them reviewed. They are hardly scientific/climate experts.
That is like siting PC Magazine or CNet for information on Ocean Liners.
January 30th, 2007 at 5:43 pmCan we talk about Judy Miller’s testimony yet?
January 30th, 2007 at 5:51 pmRaven thats funny.
I know Bill Thrash who lives in Truth or Consequences. Have you heard of him, he makes guitars, flamenco.
January 30th, 2007 at 5:53 pmWhen is she supposed to appear, and how about Karl and Dick….. can’t wait……:)
January 30th, 2007 at 5:54 pmFor Truth…
January 30th, 2007 at 5:58 pmI’m just starting to find my way around down there, I’ve found the Fire Water Lodge hot mineral springs…… it’s a small enough place, all the artists and craftspeople know each other, I may yet…………
ForTruth - Firedoglake blogs Judy Miller’s testimony real-time.
On this thread Douggy has been ‘jolly rogered’ so far…
January 30th, 2007 at 5:59 pm#14, and that makes the information presented any less believable than the information posted here, how?
January 30th, 2007 at 6:00 pmJason Fact Mangler,
That was brilliant. Very funny.
David Beckham, the real culprit of global warming? Who would’ve thought!?
Maybe Victoria’s skimpy outfits had something to do with it too?
LOL
January 30th, 2007 at 6:06 pmCan we talk about Judy Miller’s testimony yet?
Comment by ForTruth — January 30, 2007 @ 5:51 pm
But I wanna talk about Johnny Depp and Orlando Bloom some more… :)
It’s over for Scooter… I just wonder how long Cheney will allow this to continue. I mean his puppet George has already usurped the Legislative Branch… Why not show the Judicial Branch who’s boss…
January 30th, 2007 at 6:07 pmYeah, well then the rest of the world will beat us in science again. It’s like Sputnik waiting to happen all over…
We will be SHOCKED that our future scientists will be bad at biology (what’s evolution?) and bad at geology (Noah’s flood explains it all!) and bad paleontology (look at all those 6,000 year old fossils!), etc.
January 30th, 2007 at 6:09 pmand that makes the information presented any less believable than the information posted here, how?
Comment by Douglas G. — January 30, 2007 @ 6:00 pm
Scary that I have to explain this….
TP doesn’t sell gadgets, and list news close to last on their list of ‘options’. They just post news. Which is their function.
Also, a computer repair company doesn’t trump reputable Climatologists when it comes to climate ( http://www.dictionary.com ).
January 30th, 2007 at 6:11 pmSuppose that the climate is damaged by humans; how is it that we are going to FIX the problem one way or another? If we are the reason how would you go about fixing it? Your car will run real smooth on your way to the slave labor camp provided it’s all downhill! I personally do not see how anything we do now can put the genie back. I’m sure some will list their ideas though I doubt you will park your car for long.
January 30th, 2007 at 6:18 pmand that makes the information presented any less believable than the information posted here, how?
Comment by Douglas G. — January 30, 2007 @ 6:00 pm
::sigh::
Here we go again. Your source is not a scientific publication, not peer-reviewed and so not a reliable source of information regarding global warming.
Let’s take a look at what actual scientists are saying. From the IPCC website:
There is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities. Detection and attribution studies consistently find evidence for an anthropogenic signal in the climate record of the last 35 to 50 years. These studies include uncertainties in forcing due to anthropogenic sulfate aerosols and natural factors (volcanoes and solar irradiance), but do not account for the effects of other types of anthropogenic aerosols and land-use changes.
Climate Change 2001: Synthesis Report
Here is a great resource on the web to get your facts on climate science.
January 30th, 2007 at 6:18 pmOh, and as someone else already pointed out:
The fact that the Bush administration has to put pressure on their own scientists to make them eliminate the words “global warming” means they realise the phenomenon is real, and human-induced.
January 30th, 2007 at 6:20 pmRead #38.
I know the guys at DailyTech. Not in that I read their stuff, I mean I talk to them on the phone from time to time when I pitch my wireless networking products for them to review.
January 30th, 2007 at 6:21 pmIt’s like Sputnik waiting to happen all over…
January 30th, 2007 at 6:22 pmComment by Publicus
Excellent remark. In fact, it was the Sputnik event what rushed into a frenzy all the research for a better understanding of space science and a better engineering craft in the US.
Douggy - it is the IPCC versus S. Fred Singer (one of your sources).
The same Fred Singer who was in the pay of the tobacco industry during the cancer legislation, now funded by Exxon and who lied about the funding.
Let’s see several hundred peer reviewed scientists v one industry shill…hmm. I’m going with the IPCC especially since they deal with Singer’s counterargument explicitly..
January 30th, 2007 at 6:24 pmHere is a great resource on the web to get your facts on climate science.
Comment by Gregor Samsa — January 30, 2007 @ 6:18 pm
Gregor,
Douglas doesn’t want all that complicated fact-based Science. He wants elementary school drama and make-believe boogeymen that disappear when you sleep with the hallway light on.
:D
January 30th, 2007 at 6:25 pmWelcome to Oceania
January 30th, 2007 at 6:27 pmBush can pressure them all he wants. The scientists need to not buckle under to that pressure and show the pipsqueak son of a rich man who’s in charge and who knows better. It’s on the scientists. Just say no to the pressure.
January 30th, 2007 at 6:40 pmOne more time:
Provided GLOBAL WARMING is caused by HUMANS how will we fix it? How will nearly 7 BILLION humans living in different climates, altitudes and the like support themselves w/ out OIL?
January 30th, 2007 at 6:45 pmUnbelievable,
That is what is so unsettling about global warming deniers. Their stance is basically anti-science, even when they claim to “believe” in science.
Maybe the idea that you can “believe” in science is what so confuses them to begin with… Hhhmmm…
January 30th, 2007 at 6:58 pmHandy Andy,
http://www.aninconvenienttruth.co.uk/
Then click on Take Action (right-hand column)
January 30th, 2007 at 7:12 pmYou might also want to see the movie and maybe Google “alternative fuel sources.”
Even better, write to your congressmen and women and demand they take action.
Provided GLOBAL WARMING is caused by HUMANS how will we fix it?
Comment by Handy Andy — January 30, 2007 @ 6:45 pm
There are already regional initiatives across the US to address the problem of global warming. Here is a link:
Pew Centre on Global Climate Change - Regional Initiatives
January 30th, 2007 at 7:15 pmbtw, I’m back. I kind of lost heart during the weeks before the election, thinking republicans would somehow find a way to “fix” it. And though I’ve felt encouraged since then, I just haven’t gotten back into posting. I have been keeping up and reading TP regularly though, and it’s always nice to see posts from “the regulars” and everyone else.
January 30th, 2007 at 7:18 pmOh yea, what was that Norwegian’s name? You remember; that undisputed authority on global warming?
#62 - Seixon
January 30th, 2007 at 7:33 pmUnbelievable,
That is what is so unsettling about global warming deniers. Their stance is basically anti-science, even when they claim to “believe†in science.
Maybe the idea that you can “believe†in science is what so confuses them to begin with… Hhhmmm…
Comment by Gregor Samsa
W/ out going into high detail here are some concepts that are all floating about.
Conservation will save us!
January 30th, 2007 at 7:47 pmThe average man needs at least 2000 calories each day so in using that as a base multiplied by global population (slightly over) of 7B we arrive at 14,000,000,000,000 calories per day. This does not include water for drinking or washing. Since we are working on ethanol as an alternative fuel farmable land has been cut in half here in the US. Mining Uranium requires more total calories then it returns when accounting for waste transport and storage.
Science will save us!
This would be nice given that science gave us items like the nuclear warhead and Twinkies. Science allows us to make growing amounts of pollution and better harvesters of the remaining fossil fuel. The laws of thermodynamics are stacked against us since returns will always diminish. Unless science can change the laws of thermodynamics we can kiss our asses’ goodbye.
God will save us!
According to the bible itself God will save 144,000 chosen servants while the rest will be crispy critters. Naturally this gives any of us poor odds of survival. It happens that theologists tend to believe that Mesopotamia is the location of the chosen ones and you can’t fool the creator by renaming it to Iraq.
#62 - Seixon
Comment by Zooey
No, Seixon, not him.
Actually, people were asking for him when the trolling was really bad. I guess you get what you ask for.
January 30th, 2007 at 7:51 pmAgain what makes the experts you like any more believable than then experts you don’t like. As long as they all have excellent credentials, and are willing to consider all relevant data, why should they be discounted. The blog you don’t like cites 2 excellent references, both of whom are legitimate scientists with excellent credentials. The fact that you don’t like where the article was posted, or the fact that it contradicts what you so desperately desire to be the truth does not in fact invalidate their research or conclusions.
BTW, the arguement that someone is a shill simply means they say something you don’t agree with. Everyone who disagrees with your point of view is a shill, and quite frankly that type of argument makes you appear childish.
January 30th, 2007 at 8:02 pmTruth,
Lily just asked his name. Believe me, I wasn’t summoning him. Oy.
January 30th, 2007 at 8:03 pmHandy Andy,
I think boiling the whole thing down to the laws of thermodynamics may be oversimplifying the matter. There are ways people can survive without oil. I don’t think people are willing to do what it would take.
You can use the Google and put in “Peak Oil”. There are ways to live without it.
January 30th, 2007 at 8:03 pmNo, Seixon, not him.
Actually, people were asking for him when the trolling was really bad. I guess you get what you ask for.
Comment by ForTruth
Actually Seixon would try to back up his statements and debate without the “you liberals” and other namecalling.
January 30th, 2007 at 8:05 pmThe trolls lately **cough**like moron micheal**cough** cant even provide one link when challenged on a statement, and just keep insulting and thinks that is debating.
Lily just asked his name. Believe me, I wasn’t summoning him. Oy.
– Zooey
Need a pentagram drawn on the floor first for that right ?
January 30th, 2007 at 8:07 pm=D
“Conservation will save us!
The average man needs at least 2000 calories each day so in using that as a base multiplied by global population (slightly over) of 7B we arrive at 14,000,000,000,000 calories per day. Comment by Handy Andy — January 30, 2007 @ 7:47 pm”
Son, you aren’t very smart are you? We flush food down the toilet because the ‘free market’ won’t buy it. The planet makes so much food, that fat asses like yourself wallow in your own swill.
“This does not include water for drinking or washing. Comment by Handy Andy — January 30, 2007 @ 7:47 pm”
The earth is 70% water, and many parts of the world suffer from water over abundance. We can ship around billions of gallons of Oil, but not water? Please. This is a political, not a resource issue.
“Since we are working on ethanol as an alternative fuel farmable land has been cut in half here in the US. Comment by Handy Andy — January 30, 2007 @ 7:47 pm”
What a completely stupid, I dare say retarded comment. Ethanol can be made from the waste products of agriculture now burned. Look it up ’son’, it’s called cellulosic ethanol. You can find it with ‘the-google’.
“Mining Uranium requires more total calories then it returns when accounting for waste transport and storage.Comment by Handy Andy — January 30, 2007 @ 7:47 pm”
Why, you plan on eating it? Calories indeed!
“Science will save us! Comment by Handy Andy — January 30, 2007 @ 7:47 pm”
And politicians, and unscientific fools like you will destroy us.
“This would be nice given that science gave us items like the nuclear warhead and Twinkies. Comment by Handy Andy — January 30, 2007 @ 7:47 pm”
Actually politicians, applied engineers and corporations gave us those things. Scientists gave us the understanding of how to be shits and build them. Science is a tool, in the hands of an idiot like you, it can destroy the world, just as easily as anti-science can.
“Science allows us to make growing amounts of pollution and better harvesters of the remaining fossil fuel. Comment by Handy Andy — January 30, 2007 @ 7:47 pm”
As I said, just with religion, science can be subverted by politicians and fools such as yourself that ignore the ’science’ (eg. consequences) of their actions.
“The laws of thermodynamics are stacked against us since returns will always diminish. Comment by Handy Andy — January 30, 2007 @ 7:47 pm”
And the laws of ‘idiots’ like you are stacked against us. The laws of thermodynamics only apply to a ‘closed’ system you blubbering idiot. Last time I checked, there was a giant nukular furnace spraying us with new energy every day. DuhhH!!!
“Unless science can change the laws of thermodynamics we can kiss our asses’ goodbye. Comment by Handy Andy — January 30, 2007 @ 7:47 pm”
Unless unscientific fools like you shut your dumbass mouths, we can kiss our asses goodbye. Where did you get this claptrap thermodynamics nonsense - an anti-evolution website? Son, you’re one giant dumbass.
“God will save us!
According to the bible itself God will save 144,000 chosen servants while the rest will be crispy critters. Naturally this gives any of us poor odds of survival. It happens that theologists tend to believe that Mesopotamia is the location of the chosen ones and you can’t fool the creator by renaming it to Iraq. Comment by Handy Andy — January 30, 2007 @ 7:47 pm”
Speaking of ‘dumbasses’, this sums it up nicely. You people are the stupidest morons on earth! You have access to the internet, libraries and the knowledge of the ages - and this is the best you can muster out of you stupid pie holes? I’m so sorry I dropped you on your head as a baby, because surely you’re mentally retarded son!
January 30th, 2007 at 8:11 pmPolitical Science…
The Union of Concerned Scientists and Think Progress team up to propagandize once again on the supposed massive interference of the Bush administration on science research….
January 30th, 2007 at 8:13 pmComment by Douglas G. — January 30, 2007 @ 8:02 pm
I would like to also add that everyone on the other side of my windshield is an idiot.
So Douglas. We have two excellent groups of experts who disagree. We decide who we like and agree with. Ok. Now we can get into the “well my side has a larger number of experts than yours.” Ok, all well and good.
I think err on the side of caution might be a good way to go. How about you?
January 30th, 2007 at 8:14 pmNeed a pentagram drawn on the floor first for that right ?
=D
Comment by Wayne
And the blood of one dozen Emperor Penguins.
January 30th, 2007 at 8:15 pmAnd Unbelievable,
I would rather talk about Tyra Banks,
And, someone’s second sex-video has just surfaced.
January 30th, 2007 at 8:16 pmWhy, I must say I am pleased to be mentioned. It’s nice to know you guys miss me…. *snicker* Anyways, since Think Progress apparently isn’t allowing me to trackback to this post from my blog, I thought I would drop in and let you all know that I have posted a rebuttal to this dishonest post. Hint: try reading the actual study for yourself and think critically about what it is trying to portray.
The Bush administration has goofed a couple times in relation to the federal science community (Mr. Deutsch and Mr. Cooney, for example), so Think Progress and UCS’s attempts to exaggerate and hype the scope and nature of the problem is, although quite true to character, deeply dishonest and unethical.
James Hansen was prevented from speaking freely? I see. So that’s why he was stumping for Kerry and all over the news whenever he feels like it. Gotcha.
Anyways, I’m not going to stick around, so please do commence with the obligatory Nazi and Fascist comments. Don’t be scared to drop by now!
G’night.
January 30th, 2007 at 8:21 pmWhy, I must say I am pleased to be mentioned. It’s nice to know you guys miss me…. *snicker* Anyways, since Think Progress apparently isn’t allowing me to trackback to this post from my blog, I thought I would drop in and let you all know that I have posted a rebuttal to this post. Hint: try reading the actual study for yourself and think critically about what it is trying to portray.
The Bush administration has goofed a couple times in relation to the federal science community (Mr. Deutsch and Mr. Cooney, for example), so Think Progress and UCS’s attempts to exaggerate and hype the scope and nature of the problem is, although quite true to character, deeply dishonest and unethical.
Don’t be scared to drop by now!
G’night.
January 30th, 2007 at 8:22 pmOh and Andy,
I’m watching NBC nightly news, they are all about climate change, and say the argument is over. The MSM has decided on the matter.
January 30th, 2007 at 8:22 pmWhy, I must say I am pleased to be mentioned. It’s nice to know you guys miss me…. *snicker* Anyways, since TP apparently isn’t allowing me to trackback to this post from my blog, I thought I would drop in and let you all know that I have posted a rebuttal to this dishonest post. Hint: try reading the actual study for yourself and think critically about what it is trying to portray.
The Bush administration has goofed a couple times in relation to the federal science community (Mr. Deutsch and Mr. Cooney, for example), so TP and UCS’s attempts to exaggerate and hype the scope and nature of the problem is, although quite true to character, deeply dishonest and unethical.
Don’t be scared to drop by now!
G’night.
January 30th, 2007 at 8:23 pmWhoops. Thought the TP filter had gotten me… you can all view the process in which I try to eliminate what would have offended the TP filter. Heh. Later.
January 30th, 2007 at 8:24 pmOy, I guess I didn’t need the penguin blood….
January 30th, 2007 at 8:27 pmQuote
All sorts of stuff that mom said
End Quote
The Earth and Sun are a closed system and since food is energy that requires the Sun’s radiation thermodynamics closes the door on 7,000,000,000 people.
Humans can only drink potable water. Desalinization equipment requires massive amounts of energy and raw materials so this accounts for a fraction of needed water. Many aquifers are polluted and still others contain radioactive waste.
I like your point by point breakdown of my post and the added color created by the whole SON vs MOM thing. All of the name calling diminishes your image though and you’re no sort of expert to banter in that way.
Everything comes down to survival and mom you’re too old and dried up. Enjoy the next life!
January 30th, 2007 at 8:35 pmAgain what makes the experts you like any more believable than then experts you don’t like.
Comment by Douglas G. — January 30, 2007 @ 8:02 pm
There is consensus in the scientific community that global warming is real, and man-induced.
Of course, you can always find the one who will disagree but when the majority points in one direction I’d say it is better to go with the majority.
For example: William Dembski is a proponent of Intelligent Design, even when the scientific ommunity by and large has already confirmed the Theory of Evolution is rock solid.
As long as they all have excellent credentials, and are willing to consider all relevant data, why should they be discounted.
Because 1) they don’t have credentials in the areas where they’re opining, 2) they are bucking years of research by hundreds of others, 3) they’re conclusions are not supported by the data, 4) they do not publish in peer-reviewed publications.
The blog you don’t like cites 2 excellent references, both of whom are legitimate scientists with excellent credentials.
Right. It’s still not a scientific publication. As for the “excellent references”, see above.
The fact that you don’t like where the article was posted, or the fact that it contradicts what you so desperately desire to be the truth does not in fact invalidate their research or conclusions.
“desperately desire to be the truth”!?
LOL -You are really funny. I don’t “do” beliefs, Douglas. I think you’re projecting here. After all, you are the one who wants to desperately “debunk” global warming.
I am going with the scientific consensus.
Oh, and where it is published matters when it comes to scientific credibility.
Everyone who disagrees with your point of view is a shill, and quite frankly that type of argument makes you appear childish.
What in the world are you talking about? Where did I mention the word “shill”?
January 30th, 2007 at 8:35 pmMaybe it’s time for a re-release of Waterworld?
January 30th, 2007 at 8:53 pmThe Earth and Sun are a closed system and since food is energy that requires the Sun’s radiation thermodynamics closes the door on 7,000,000,000 people — Handy Andy
I for one would like to see where you got that information. Back up your statement.
January 30th, 2007 at 9:06 pmLinks please.
That is unless you just pulled it out of your a$$.
Gregor at #82 - thank for that - that was my post Douggy baby was responding to. I used the word shill in reference to the checkered career of S. Fred Singer, whose history of being the token scientist for the tobacco industry is well documented and now his attempts to hide his subsidies from the oil industry. I used the word shill as a hat tip to said Mr Singer’s habit of taking money from the industries he is paid to cover for.
And Douggy, I read the summary of Singer’s and the other book you linked to. From that and Mr Singer’s biography I am quite at liberty to question his motives. You might find your argument appear with more gravitas if you spend less time looking for poorly qualified outlier opinion and focus on the far greater weight of the peer-reviewed scientific study.
The fact that you don’t like where the article was posted, or the fact that it contradicts what you so desperately desire to be the truth does not in fact invalidate their research or conclusions.
Where the article is posted is not really the point, the point is that it is not a peer-reviewed scientific opinion, it’s the equivalent of getting your news from the supermarket check out (apologies to MIB fans).
“Desperately desire” - do you think I am looking forward to drought, a possible collapse of society, social and political crises over resources the rest of my life? Don’t talk wet sonny - your strawmen are purile. And once again, science is not a matter of desire or faith. Keep your mumbo - jumbo to yourself.
January 30th, 2007 at 9:27 pmI’ll show them Waterworld will fly off the shelves once again! Revenge will be mine!
January 30th, 2007 at 9:28 pmThe Earth and Sun are a closed system - Handy Andy
I think you need to send that engineering degree you bought on the ‘net back, Andy.
January 30th, 2007 at 9:29 pmSeixon, you are critiquing the method of the survey on your site.
Sorry to disappoint, but your post on your site shows you really do not know how a survey is done. I have worked on many customer surveys for the company I work for.
We will send out thousands of surveys, but because of human nature, only a portion will reply. You then extract the percentages from the samples that were replied to. This is normal with every survey I have ever done.
Everything done on the survey was scientific and straight foreward, no dishonesty as you claimed.
January 30th, 2007 at 9:31 pmLooks like you need to reseach a bit further on how surveys are actually done.
The late Paleozoic deglaciation is the vegetated Earth’s only recorded icehouse-to-greenhouse transition, yet the climate dynamics remain enigmatic. By using the stable isotopic compositions of soil-formed minerals, fossil-plant matter, and shallow-water brachiopods, we estimated atmospheric partial pressure of carbon dioxide (pCO2) and tropical marine surface temperatures during this climate transition. Comparison to southern Gondwanan glacial records documents covariance between inferred shifts in pCO2, temperature, and ice volume consistent with greenhouse gas forcing of climate. Major restructuring of paleotropical flora in western Euramerica occurred in step with climate and pCO2 shifts, illustrating the biotic impact associated with past CO2-forced turnover to a permanent ice-free world
This is the abstract of the article referred to in the first part of Asher’s article. Asher implies that this article is supportive of the idea that gloabl warming is an alarmist position. Let’s look at this idea.
The late Paleozoic deglaciation is the vegetated Earth’s only recorded icehouse-to-greenhouse transition, yet the climate dynamics remain enigmatic.
This statement says two things (1) We have a record of a greenhouse transition and (2) we don’t know exactly what happened at that time
Comparison to southern Gondwanan glacial records documents covariance between inferred shifts in pCO2, temperature, and ice volume consistent with greenhouse gas forcing of climate.
This statement says only that statistical indicators based on comparison to another set of data indicate forced climate change due to greenhouse effects. (BTW, the mathematician Fourier coined the term “greenhouse effect” while studyingf heat phenomena in the mid 1800’s, for this who think this is “new science”.
Major restructuring of paleotropical flora in western Euramerica occurred in step with climate and pCO2 shifts, illustrating the biotic impact associated with past CO2-forced turnover to a permanent ice-free
This statement says that climate change due to greenhouse gas forcing made major changes to plant life.
Where in here is the idea that this makes current day global warming less of a problem?
In 1948 CO2 records began being kept on Mauna Loa, Hawaii. Those records show that CO2 concentrations in the earths atmosphers have increased dramatically, tracvking the use of fossil fuels, primarily oil, for transportation and energy production.
All I can infer from this inforamtion is that increased CO2 concentration forces greenhose effect, and that we are voluntarily increasing the levels of CO2 in our atmosphere without really understanding what that means. I have a word for that : stupid.
January 30th, 2007 at 9:44 pmSo I spent some time on Seixon’s site. The top article is a critique of the survey TP used. Seixon has some good points to make - TP looks to be stretching the weight of the survey a bit. There are a few foaming comments about lying and such, but he keeps it workmanlike. We all know TP overreaches every now and again - they did here, I think.
Next up is a commentary on Larry Johnson - looks like Seixon has himself a troll of his own. Not a very nice one, either. Whether or not it is Mr Johnson I can’t say.
Then we have the news that Norway is passing out Al Gore’s film to high schools. Seixon takes issue with that.
1. Al Gore is not a scientist
2. The showing of the film is ‘indoctrination’
3. The new IPCC report makes the sea level rise less than Al’s - therefore Al is wrong
There is this foamer:
If anything, the manner in which these people fronting the “climate crisis” tell half-truths, lie, exaggerate, and try to silence/smear any dissenter on their grand plans makes me more skeptical of their claims than anything else. The truth tells itself, it doesn’t need a cadre of environmentalist journalists slanting articles and movie-peddling campaigns. Yet for some reason, the “climate crisis” does.
Well its his blog, he can put strawmen wherever he wants right?
OK so what did I think of that?
1. If we can’t watch Inconvenient Truth because Al Gore is talking, then all that “Walking with Dinosaurs” stuff needs to be thrown out, because Kenneth Brannagh narrated it - he’s no scientist. Neither is Leonard Nimoy, Alec Baldwin or any other professional speaker who shows up to present someone elses scientific theories on Discovery Channel or wherever. Sorry Seixon, your anti-Gore emotions are stopping you from retaining your objectivity - focus on the message not the messenger.
2. Speaking of objectivity, Seixon has no respect for Norwegian high school students and their ability to objectively decide for themselves on the science presented in the film. At least there is something to examine, unlike Intelligent Design which gives students nothing to debate. Since there is no real impression of the format of the presentation, Seixon might be usefully employed offering his own rebuttal film to the schools too - hopefully you are a qualified climate scientist yourself so you can keep costs low and narrate it yourself, matey - you know to avoid the obvious contradiction above in #1
3. Hmm Seixon attacks Al for presenting older information than the upcoming IPCC report includes on the sea level rise. Then goes on to quote Al on the continent/plate theory anecdote where Al makes a bit of fun of the teacher who ridiclued the idea that Brazil and Africa were ever connected - only slightly hypocritical Seixon.
Seixon just doesn’t like Al. That’s what I learned tonight on my cyber jaunt to happy Norway. Interesting place Norway. A country with a great but finite blesisng in the North Sea which has been assiduously saving it’s bounty for the time when the resource runs out and energy becomes expensive. Socialism like that of Joseph in Egypt from Biblical times. Norway has the reputation in the E&P industry as being the forefront of adoption of the most advanced technologies to make their resources last the longest for the good of their nation. Well anyway that’s it on that.
January 30th, 2007 at 10:09 pmNot to be alarmist or anything, but the guy down the street is building one big a$$ed boat….
January 30th, 2007 at 10:15 pmThanks a lot for that TP - can’t stand the criticism can you?
January 30th, 2007 at 10:18 pmSeixon might be nocturnal.
TP is flashing my post on Seixon’s comments in and out - do they not like the criticism, or perhaps the discussion of someone elses blog?
January 30th, 2007 at 10:31 pmTP is flashing my post on Seixon’s comments in and out - do they not like the criticism, or perhaps the discussion of someone elses blog?
Comment by TerrytheTurtle — January 30, 2007 @ 10:31 pm
Except that he once posted that he just came in from the movies with a friend…at what would have been 4:30 a.m. in Norway. He stopped posting soon after that was pointed out….only to show up today shortly after his name was mentioned…at what would be after 3 am. for him.
As for disappearing/reappearing posts…that’s one of the reasons why BnF isn’t around anymore…good posts get deleted while troll’s posts stay.
January 30th, 2007 at 10:43 pmAs for disappearing/reappearing posts…that’s one of the reasons why BnF isn’t around anymore…good posts get deleted while troll’s posts stay.
Yup, I’m borderline myself. I’m blocked from my main IP. See how strangely your “90- Seixon posts..” post is behaving - lookng at the time: you haven’t posted it yet…
Comment by psst… — January 31, 2007 @ 3:26 am
Where’s Michael J Fox - he understands this stuff?
January 30th, 2007 at 10:52 pmpsst…
You’re commenting from the future…heh.
January 30th, 2007 at 10:59 pmGregor at #82 - thank for that - that was my post Douggy baby was responding to.
Comment by TerrytheTurtle — January 30, 2007 @ 9:27 pm
Ah, now it all makes sense…
Yes, I agree with you on Singer’s possible motives for trying to “debunk” global warming. However, I do think we are on more solid ground when we point out the consensus in the scientific community.
Being accused of “desperately” wanting to believe was really funny. It doesn’t get any richer than that…
January 30th, 2007 at 11:26 pmFrom http://www.physicalgeography.net/
Dick Cheney made the following statement in late 1999:
Later he commissioned a report w/ this passage:
http://dieoff.org/Olduvai.gif
January 30th, 2007 at 11:42 pmHow is it that the time stamp on this post:
is off by some 3+ hours???
ThinkProgress is losing ALL CREDIBILITY HERE!!!!!
January 31st, 2007 at 12:14 am“Let’s not forget that the world’s temperature has increased as the number of pirates has decreased. Argh!” –Wilco
That’s hilarious, Wilco. LMAO.
You should have seen the GLEAM in the eyes of the scientists who testified before Waxman’s committee today — wow, they were so HAPPY to be teling the truth.
The industry hack wasn’t so happy. Watching CHAIRMAN Waxman rhetorically gaveling him down was a joy to all involved.
Science, in service to the truth? Or throwing virgins into the volcano?
ARGH!
January 31st, 2007 at 1:24 am(psst, it’s not 1:30 in Los Angeles — it’s 10:30. Guess which server is dating the posts?)
January 31st, 2007 at 1:27 am(I responded to psst’s post, and now my post is listed above his, renumbered. So you can see that HaloScan is busy making some strange ‘decisions’).
Don’t trust the HAL.
January 31st, 2007 at 1:29 amSo many fine people murdered by Bush in Iraq.
So many virgins tossed into fire for the superstitions and hatreds of the evil.
January 31st, 2007 at 1:31 amLooks like the server had a hiccup…
I wonder if my post will be displayed above psst’s too.
January 31st, 2007 at 1:32 amgogreen,
“The late Paleozoic deglaciation is the vegetated Earth’s only recorded icehouse-to-greenhouse transition, yet the climate dynamics remain enigmatic.”
This is a badly-written sentence and/or a lie.
The ‘vegetated Earth’ has had many glaciation cycles.
What is ‘only,’ is the recorded evidence — our only direct evidence (as a result of ice core studies on the existing icepack).
So his sentence really makes no sense, which is not a good characteristic of PUBLISHED scientific thought.
Given the rhetoric, the man is either sloppy, a liar, or a fool. And all three are also possible.
January 31st, 2007 at 1:41 amBtw, this is HUGE:
http://physorg.com/news89292896.html
January 31st, 2007 at 3:16 amHansen is so concerned with censorship but censors himself by refusing to testify to the Government Reform Committee because he didn’t want to be there with John Christy.
No one has ever prevented Hansen from talking to Congress, or the media for that matter. He has only done it to himself.
Of course, he expected NASA to pay his way to Iowa so he could announce his support for John Kerry. Maybe he felt he was being muzzled since NASA wouldn’t fund his politcal agenda.
BTW, the Union of Concerned Scientists were part of an advocacy campaign to sell climate change using the word “harbringer” to describe weather events. That term was picked up by other leftist advocacy groups, and numerous government agencies including NOAA and the Fish and Wildlife Service. The UCS has been schooled by Dr George Lakoff. The UCS has an agenda of promoting climate doomsday (Lakoff says facts don’t sell climate change, but scary words will) is hardly presenting an unbiased survey here.
This superficial survey that Waxan touted is just another attempt on their part to “pick the best, and leave the rest”, clouding the policy debate on climate change.
January 31st, 2007 at 3:22 am90 - Seixon posts at impossible times for a Norwegian.
Funny…an earlier post pointing out that Seixon was posting at 3:30 a.m. disappeared. hmmmm.
January 31st, 2007 at 3:26 amHey guys, I’m really sorry I brought up his name. It’s just that he was always good for a laugh when commenting on global warming.
January 31st, 2007 at 4:15 amhttp://www.climatesciencewatch.org/index.php/P45/
Climate Science Watch is a nonprofit public interest education and advocacy project dedicated to holding public officials accountable for the integrity and effectiveness with which they use climate science and related research in government policymaking, toward the goal of enabling society to respond effectively to the challenges posed by global warming and climate change.
See Details: http://www.climatesciencewatch.org/ index.php/ csw/ details/ about-climate-science-watch/
January 31st, 2007 at 7:04 amAgain what makes the experts you like any more believable than then experts you don’t like.
Comment by Douglas G. — January 30, 2007 @ 8:02 pm
There is consensus in the scientific community that global warming is real, and man-induced.
Comment by Gregor Samsa — January 30, 2007 @ 8:35 pm
Men like you just need to stop passing so much gas when they talk. Like your doing now. That would solve the emission problem and tangentially the global warming theory.
So, in a nutshell gents, and unladylike ladies as well, purchase an item in the health and beauty aids section of any grocery store a product called Beano. That`s B E A N O it will reduce your methane gas output dramatically. There already is a cure for global warming available and it is as close as your nearest grocery store.
B E A N O
January 31st, 2007 at 8:04 amThis shows that there are still people who are not patriots but lovers of Humanity of any kind.
Hats Off.
http://www.tekno-world.blogspot.com
January 31st, 2007 at 8:48 amI am teaching English in South Korea right now and my Korean students tell me that they are watching Inconvenient Truth in the Korean schools, because it’s important, as they probably are in many countries around the world. And there are schools in the US that are forbidding teachers to show it? My youngest students know more about global warming than many adults in America. Unbelievable.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see one day where the third-world (and maybe other) countries of the world launch a class-action suit against the US, the greatest polluter, for billions if not trillions of dollars. It would mostly be fair.
January 31st, 2007 at 12:01 pm#72 I never said global warming is not real. I simply question how much of an affect humans have really had. The last volcanic eruption put more soot and gasses into the atmosphere than humans have in YEARS of industry. Knowing that, and the number of volcanic eruptions over the years, how great an affect has that had in correlation to what humans have done?
January 31st, 2007 at 12:04 pmI wish AlG and his scientific support team would explain the causes of previous Ice Ages and Global Warming trends…..Was Fred Flintstones’ flint-mobile an early polluter? How much methane did the dino-cranes produce?
January 31st, 2007 at 1:27 pmNaturally occurring water vapor makes up 95% of greenhouse gases. The proportion of CO2 (the next biggest contributor) that is anthropogenic is very small (around 2-3% of total atmospheric CO2).
To attribute climate change to anthropogenic CO2 is silly given the overwhelming primacy of water vapor and the vast majority share of naturally occurring CO2 in the CO2 equation. Don’t you see this? How can you not see this?
Next time you read a Global Warming study, see how they handle water vapor. Most likely it will be ignored That should be your first clue that something ain’t right.
January 31st, 2007 at 1:44 pm“This superficial survey that Waxan touted is just another attempt on their part to “pick the best, and leave the restâ€, clouding the policy debate on climate change.” — hippie with a pistol
This, Pete above, and several other CORPORATE-PAID SHILLS want to muddy the water for the DO NOTHING BUT PROFIT corps they work for.
“Naturally occurring water vapor makes up 95% of greenhouse gases. The proportion of CO2 (the next biggest contributor) that is anthropogenic is very small (around 2-3% of total atmospheric CO2).”
Which is enough to tilt the balance. Greenhouse gases is not the whole picture — it’s SOOT as you very well know. Global dimming, from soot, in fact, is reducing the impact of global climate change by a factor of 10. If we cleaned the air, we would see a far larger result of the soot we have put into the air.
However, you are right, it’s not just greenhouse gasses. It’s also deforestation, big time.
Count on the corporations to get right on that.
January 31st, 2007 at 3:56 pm