Jim Hansen supports civil disobedience

Some have said in the past that Jim Hansen of NASA GISS is no longer a scientist, but an advocate. Today, by his own hand, I believe that description rings true.

Click for video

Here is what Greenpeace is using Dr. Hansen for:

It’s time to take a stand on global warming. Dr. James Hansen, an internationally-recognized climate scientist, calls for Americans to take part in the Capitol Climate Action on March 2 at the Capitol power plant in Washington DC — expected to be the largest display of civil disobedience against global warming in US history. Dr. Hansen warns that unless we stop burning coal, the country’s largest source of global warming pollution, young people will inherit a dramatically different world than the one we know. For more info visit capitolclimateaction.org.

Let us hope that nobody is injured or killed at this demonstration. Hansen may run afoul of the Hatch Act, see below.

For those of you that wish to write letters, here is the info:

Jim Hansen’s email: jhansen@giss.nasa.gov

His supervisor is Robert Strain at Goddard Space Flight Center: rstrain@gsfc.nasa.gov (which apparently does not wor)

So try: public-inquiries@gsfc.nasa.gov

Here is what the US Office of Special Counsel says about the Hatch Act as it applies to Federal Employees, of which I believe Dr. Hansen is one. You can file complaints online here with the office of Special Counsel

Federal employees should also be aware that certain political activities may also be criminal offenses under title 18 of the U.S. Code. See 18 U.S.C. §§ 210, 211, 594, 595, 600, 601, 602, 603, 604, 605, 606, 607, 610.


Permitted/Prohibited Activities for Employees Who May Participate in Partisan Political Activity

These federal and D.C. employees may

  • be candidates for public office in nonpartisan elections
  • register and vote as they choose
  • assist in voter registration drives
  • express opinions about candidates and issues
  • contribute money to political organizations
  • attend political fundraising functions
  • attend and be active at political rallies and meetings
  • join and be an active member of a political party or club
  • sign nominating petitions
  • campaign for or against referendum questions, constitutional amendments, municipal ordinances
  • campaign for or against candidates in partisan elections
  • make campaign speeches for candidates in partisan elections
  • distribute campaign literature in partisan elections
  • hold office in political clubs or parties

These federal and D.C. employees may not

  • use official authority or influence to interfere with an election
  • solicit or discourage political activity of anyone with business before their agency
  • solicit or receive political contributions (may be done in certain limited situations by federal labor or other employee organizations)
  • be candidates for public office in partisan elections
  • engage in political activity while:
    • on duty
    • in a government office
    • wearing an official uniform
    • using a government vehicle
  • wear partisan political buttons on duty
0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

316 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
James S
February 22, 2009 8:22 pm

Can somebody please sack the loony?

John Philip
February 22, 2009 8:23 pm

Some have said in the past that Jim Hansen of NASA GISS is no longer a scientist, but an advocate
He’s both.

David C. Ball
Reply to  John Philip
February 22, 2009 8:50 pm

Cannot have it both ways, sorry

P Folkens
Reply to  David C. Ball
February 23, 2009 12:08 am

On rare occasions it can. The Society for Marine Mammalogy is careful about such things. It took quite an effort and thought for the Society to publish an official Society Letter that advocated conservation of the Baiji and Vaquita. The advocacy was backed by strong science and analysis. However, with that said, when it came to taking a position on global warming, the Society broke its own rules regarding membership discussion about an official letter advocating a position on climate change. It seems that when it comes to climate change, conventional rules of scientific debate go out the window in the wholesale rush to get on board.

MarkW
Reply to  John Philip
February 23, 2009 4:47 am

I don’t see any evidence that Hansen has done anything that I would consider “science”, in decades.

Slioch
Reply to  MarkW
February 23, 2009 5:15 am

The see (for example, there is much more):
http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/2008/TargetCO2_20080407.pdf

Slioch
Reply to  MarkW
February 23, 2009 5:16 am

Then see (for example, there is much more):
http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/2008/TargetCO2_20080407.pdf

MarkW
Reply to  MarkW
February 23, 2009 8:09 am

Slioch,
No science there.

Just want truth...
Reply to  MarkW
February 23, 2009 2:54 pm

Slioch
If James Hansen can’t correctly handle the simple task of temperature data can anyone trust the far, far more complicated task to him of determining how much co2 is appropriate to have in the atmosphere?

pottenstein
Reply to  MarkW
February 23, 2009 3:23 pm

“Decreasing CO2 was the main cause of a cooling trend that began 50
million years ago”??? – says Hansen
Not a climate scientist, but my take on the “CO2 has historically been a strong climate driver” was all but abandoned given ice core data, etc. True or false?

robert brucker
Reply to  John Philip
February 23, 2009 5:56 am

john philip,
I see your debunking responses on more than one site. What is your occupation and at what agency are you employed? You are quite obviously in the AGW camp.
Just curious.

Spathirin
Reply to  robert brucker
February 24, 2009 12:39 am

I’d guess he’s someone interested in this issue. I know I am, which is why I attend several sites. While my own MO is lurking, that doesn’t mean someone shouldn’t comment when they don’t agree with something.

John Philip
Reply to  robert brucker
February 24, 2009 9:17 am

Robert
I am a self-employed software developer, British, a father, with an undergraduate degree in Physics but no no qualifications in climate science. I am flattered by the implication that my posts are good enough to attract renumeration but sadly George Soros has so far somehow overlooked my contributions to the cause ….

Hank
Reply to  John Philip
February 23, 2009 9:46 am

Fair point, Hansen *is* both an advocate and scientist. Does that make him better as both or the opposite? I submit that as an advocate he overuses arguments to authority and as a scientist he’s turned supercilious. Read his essay on the usufruct and the gorilla to get a real sense of how the guy thinks. In it he drags up an obscure and minor principal of law to distract from the fact that he wasn’t on top of his data. It seems to me that being an advocate is a wonderful place for a scientist to be. You get to paper over your sloppy mistakes with arguments about the importance of your advocacy. What I find most disingenuous about Hansen is when he says (as he often does) that the science is clear. He is absolutely correct when he says this of course because the science of “greenhouse gas” is a well established principal of physical chemistry. What he glosses over when he takes this tack is that there are still large questions about what the degree of the crisis is. Judging from what I hear from the unskeptical side of the debate there is still a huge amount of uncertainty as to what the degree of warming might involve – from hell on earth to – it would take a long time to melt all of antartica to – we may be canceling the next ice age. Now there is a frightening prospect. No more ice ages. Think of it.

Reply to  Hank
February 24, 2009 7:41 am

Re: The term “Greenhouse gas”. See Dr. Robert Wood’s work with two lab “solar collectors” one with a NaCl window, and one with glass,
circa 1911.
There IS NO SUCH THING AS AN IR “VALVE” INDUCED HEATING IN
A GREEN HOUSE.
It is SIMPLY the translation of incoming visible radiation to lower grade “heat” (i.e., heating the objects in the green house) which then exchange via convection. The GLASS is an insulating boundary, the losses via IR (10,000 nanometer) to the sky, space..etc. are an insignificant part of the balances.

Reply to  John Philip
February 24, 2009 8:07 am

Perhaps,
But one should not be both an advocate and the keeper of the data. This represents a confilct of interest. If the data does not support your position, then the temptation is there to “correct” it. At the very least the level of trust in the data by the general public is degraded.

Robert Rust
February 22, 2009 8:32 pm

Watched the video – the video doesn’t give instructions to do anything other than protest.
Interesting tatic – to say that “it’s difficult to understand that the climate is an emergency.” So, if you disagree, you’re just a dumb dumb dummy. Also says that the science is clear, which is strange since they never seem to have an exchange of ideas with “deniers.”
It would be interesting to have a counter protest – but we need a simple sound byte that the media can digest in just a few words. Any constructive ideas on what that could be???

Kum Dollison
Reply to  Robert Rust
February 22, 2009 10:42 pm

If it Cools, they’re Fools?

JimB
Reply to  Kum Dollison
February 23, 2009 3:21 am

RealPower

Reply to  Kum Dollison
February 23, 2009 4:57 am

It will cool…but after they achieve their goal of issuing several bills to fight “GW”. It is too late now.

Michael J. Bentley
Reply to  Kum Dollison
February 23, 2009 7:21 am

No Kum
It’s just “weather”.
Mike

Reply to  Robert Rust
February 23, 2009 12:51 am

It would be interesting to see how many people would actually bother turning up to a “the climate always has, and always will change so stop taxing our breath” demo.
How about this for a slogan:
Taxing breath = death!
Even if a million turned up, I would be surprised if the mainstream media covered it. They lied about the necessity of war in Iraq and they lied about climate change so often that I do not believe that the mainstream media are honest advocates of truth. They are more the mouthpieces of global corporations.

papertiger
Reply to  Ken Hall
February 23, 2009 3:09 am

How about “Who turned the lights out?” – sung to the tune of “Who let the dawgs out?”

Reply to  Robert Rust
February 23, 2009 7:19 am

[snip – let’s not make labels please]

James
Reply to  Robert Rust
February 23, 2009 4:53 pm

The climate credibilty crunch

Syl
Reply to  Robert Rust
February 24, 2009 12:01 am

POP goes the AGW Fear Bubble!

SaveTheSharks
February 22, 2009 8:32 pm

f I were president the first thing I would do would be to FIRE JAMES HANSEN no doubt.
He has no business, as a GOVERNMENT employee funded by the taxpayers, spouting off his political views about coal and AGW.
His allusions to coal trains as “death trains” is insulting to the memories of the real holocaust that occurred in Germany.
His getting on YouTube and encouraging a mass civil disobedience to protest AGW in DC March 2nd is a HIGHLY inappropriate action for the director of the Goddard Space Center.
Maybe if he stuck to his field of astronomy, and directed his energy and influence to assist the solar scientists to try to decipher what is going on with the sun….we would be a little further along in understanding what is going on with the No Show of Solar Cycle 24…and be better prepared for the consequences.
The man has lost it….completely lost it. I wouldn’t be surprised if there comes a day he blames earthbound CO2 on the lack of sunspots….and THAT is the day he needs to be shipped to the insane asylum…if not sooner!

P Folkens
Reply to  SaveTheSharks
February 23, 2009 12:11 am

But you are not the president.
And, as recent history has recorded, one of the first things this president did was give Hansen and his ilk an extra $160million to continue the pseudo-scientific behavior.

eo
Reply to  SaveTheSharks
February 23, 2009 1:44 am

Hansen is sensing AGW is a losing cause. He is simply looking for martyrdom. Even a simple letter reminding him of his legal obligations as a public servant will be blown out of proportion that he is being censored, eased out, or simply martyred. Let history judge him if he has a sense of history. There is no way he could evade the judgement of history. The truth will come out no matter sooner or later. Even if the power plants are closed just like book buring, future technology will still judge him.
Just ignore him. Dont make him a matyr.

papertiger
Reply to  eo
February 23, 2009 3:18 am

Just ignore him. Dont make him a matyr.
No no no. I beleive Hansen would be much less effective as an agent provacator behind bars. That’s just a guess But I am willing to wager if the Hatch Act is enforced (as much as $20).
In fact the whole martyr concept is over rated. The only time that worked well was for JC and or if the principle is in the right. Hansen is dead wrong and sense GISS is supposed to be doing science -formulaic science – a breath of fresh air at the head of that post shouldn’t make a wit of difference.
Hansen is the most expendable political/science figure on the planet.

DaveE
Reply to  SaveTheSharks
February 23, 2009 12:56 pm

I’m not even sure that technically he is a government employee.
He’s perhaps on secondment from Columbia?
Dave

SaveTheSharks
February 22, 2009 8:33 pm

If I were president the first thing I would do would be to FIRE JAMES HANSEN no doubt.
He has no business, as a GOVERNMENT employee funded by the taxpayers, spouting off his political views about coal and AGW.
His allusions to coal trains as “death trains” is insulting to the memories of the real holocaust that occurred in Germany.
His getting on YouTube and encouraging a mass civil disobedience to protest AGW in DC March 2nd is a HIGHLY inappropriate action for the director of the Goddard Space Center.
Maybe if he stuck to his field of astronomy, and directed his energy and influence to assist the solar scientists to try to decipher what is going on with the sun….we would be a little further along in understanding what is going on with the No Show of Solar Cycle 24…and be better prepared for the consequences.
The man has lost it….completely lost it. I wouldn’t be surprised if there comes a day he blames earthbound CO2 on the lack of sunspots….and THAT is the day he needs to be shipped to the insane asylum…if not sooner!

David C. Ball
February 22, 2009 8:36 pm

His body language tells me he is being deceptive. Clearly advocacy. He left the scientific arena a long time ago. Sad.

Robert Bateman
Reply to  David C. Ball
February 22, 2009 8:52 pm

[snip]

Just want truth...
Reply to  David C. Ball
February 22, 2009 10:34 pm

“His body language tells me he is being deceptive”
I got that impression too. But can I decipher his motives, his reasons? Nope.
Who will be the whistle blower from his side? What’s happening on the James Hansen side has got to be eating at someone over there. You can come out, and come over to this side. You will find friends here, and a cleared conscience for yourself.
Maybe it’s wrong for me to use the word “side”. Is it?

Slioch
Reply to  David C. Ball
February 23, 2009 5:42 am

“He left the scientific arena a long time ago”
Nonsense.
Here is one of Hansen’s recent scientific papers that addresses the questions of what level of atmospheric CO2 humanity should aim for.
http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/2008/TargetCO2_20080407.pdf
Whether or not to burn coal is very germane to that debate.

Slioch
Reply to  Slioch
February 23, 2009 6:04 am

“He left the scientific arena a long time ago”
Still nonsense.
Also see;
J. Hansen et al., Atmos. Chem. Phys. 7, 2287 (2007).
J. Hansen, M. Sato, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 101, 16109 (2004).
J. Hansen et al., Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. A 365, 1925 (2007).
J. Hansen et al., Science 308, 1431 (2005).
J. Hansen et al., J. Geophys. Res. 110, D18104 (2005).
J. Hansen et al., Am. Geophys. Union Geophys. Mono. Ser. 29, 130 (1984).

David Ball
Reply to  Slioch
February 23, 2009 7:23 am

It’s not science unless it is falsified. He isn’t releasing his methodology, so how much you publish is irrelevant.

Reply to  Slioch
February 23, 2009 2:00 pm

David Ball:
“It’s not science unless it is falsified. He isn’t releasing his methodology, so how much you publish is irrelevant.”
I think you mean it’s not science unless it’s falsifiable.

Gary England
February 22, 2009 8:46 pm

Hey, give us his email address and the email address of his so called superior.
They will soon find out they are not in the majority.
They’re in a rush because they fear the elections in less than two years will change it all for them. And it will.
REPLY: Gary, welcome. Here is Jim Hansen’s email: jhansen@giss.nasa.gov
His supervisor is Robert Strain at Goddard Space Flight Center: rstrain@gsfc.nasa.gov

Pierre Gosselin
Reply to  Gary England
February 23, 2009 5:26 am

Seriously doubt that old dog would listen to anyone with a different opinion.

Robert Rust
Reply to  Gary England
February 23, 2009 7:58 am

I send an e-mail to the hansen address and the “rstrain@gsfc.nasa.gov” address. The rstrain address bounced saying it could not be delivered. It was “rejected by the recipient domain.”

Doc_Navy
Reply to  Gary England
February 23, 2009 10:15 am

Also, his direct supervisor would be the Director of Earth Sciences Division (Code 600) at Goddard Space Center.
Director, Franco Einaudi
franco.einaudi@nasa.gov
Next up the list would be Dr. Nicholas White, Director Of Sciences and Exploration Directorate (Can’t find his Email Addy)
THEN would be Rob Strain Director of Goddard Flight Center.
Doc

AnonyMoose
February 22, 2009 8:49 pm

It’s fine with me if they replace the Capitol Power Plant’s coal system with the Capitol Nuclear Power Plant.

Reply to  AnonyMoose
February 22, 2009 10:48 pm

Use clean, green nuclear power to replace natural 100% organic coal ? Naw.
Just shut the coal plant down and let them suffer a Browner-out. The less power DC gets the better.

Rob
Reply to  AnonyMoose
February 23, 2009 10:10 am

They should just close the plant down for a week or so, that should concentrate minds.

Robert Bateman
February 22, 2009 8:49 pm

So, how much of the US grid are we talking about taking down here?
From this site: http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epm/table1_1.html
Last year, 3,771,908 Thousand Megawatthours of electricity were produced.
1,824,137 Thousand Megawatthours were from Coal Fired Plants.
That’s 48.3%.
Hansen wants the US to cut it’s electricity consumption by almost 1/2.
And substitute with what? Imported oil? Or just plain do without.
I won’t go into the need to stay warm, take baths, refrigerate your food, cook dinner, keep abreast of the news, etc.
But I do know that Redding, CA, has outlawed firewood, and will evict you from your home if you fail to maintain electric power.
Jim Hansen, master puppeteer, what a piece of work!

Manfred
February 22, 2009 8:58 pm

“A scientist refers to individuals who use the scientific method. Scientific method refers to bodies of techniques for investigating phenomena, acquiring new knowledge, or correcting and integrating previous knowledge.”
Mr. Hansen doesn’t fall into this category. In the Guadian we wrote, that in his opinion “climate science only cristallised in recent years.”. However, he started his aggressive activist carrer already in 1988, pushing media and politicians – without foundation – if his own view point is correct.
His predictions since then have long been disquialified, even if he uses his own strange temperature records. These GISS temperatures reveal his disinterest in correcting errors, disinterest in acquiring new knowledge about real current and historic temperatures and in applying new techniques.

Mike from Canmore
February 22, 2009 8:58 pm

It should read below, “About 50% of the power required to produce this supplied by coal”.
I hope Al Gore joins in. Sure to snow on March 2nd then.

microw
February 22, 2009 9:03 pm

In Australia we have had enough and have formed the World’s first political party that opposes all ETS and carbon taxes. Called the ” Climate Sceptics” we chose this name because we know that is what the warmaholics call us. Australians are known for their ironic sense of humor.
Australia like the US has become captive of the environmental loony fringe. Our James Hansen equivalent is Tim Flannery.
Australia being Australia we have the chance to have a significant role to play in Australian politics even if we can get just one member elected into the Senate.
Last week one Senator held the Australian Govt to ransom over their economic stimulus package and won, gaining hundreds of millions of dollars for the Murray/ Darling River system which is suffering at the moment from drought (always happens, will again), over alocation of irrigation licences and plain stupid Govt policy.
If you would like to see what we are about visit http://www.climatesceptics.com.au .
Maybe in the US and other like minded communities you could use the same idea to unite those opposed to bad science and form your own party. We will be a useful experiment for you to watch.
If you are Australian and are sick of the nonsense come join us. We need 500 members to get our name on the ballot paper for elections. Time to put the weights on all political parties for ignoring the debate that has to happen.

Philip_B
Reply to  microw
February 22, 2009 9:11 pm

I’m on my way to sign up.

tallbloke
Reply to  microw
February 23, 2009 12:07 am

Good on you. Get your webhosters ready for the onslaught, I hope they know all about resisting DOS attacks. I see they are running linux so should be ok. Best of luck with the campaign.

Reply to  microw
February 23, 2009 5:50 am

I don’t know about Australia, but in the USA single-issue political parties are generally regarded as kooks (I think the Prohibition Party still runs a candidate for President). Political action is what’s needed, though, and applause is deserved.
I recommend the term Realist rather than ‘Skeptic’, because while skepticism is the proper attitude for science, in the context of the AGW debate the term has become almost equivalent to ‘heretic’, i.e. a denier of Received Wisdom, and has acquired a negative connotation in the mind of the public.
I’d like to see a Realist party here in the USA, devoted not only to Climate Realism (instead of Alarmism) but to Economic Realism (prosperity is based on Growth, and that means Energy, of which we have plenty—if the Alarmists don’t stop us from using it).
BTW, Realists have at least one stalwart ally in the Congress: Sen. James Inhofe, of Oklahoma. I suggest contacting his office to see what he can possibly do to put the brakes on Hansen and on the EPA’s plan to ‘regulate’ CO2. With any luck, he’ll be able to enlist the help of Senators and Congressmen from coal- and oil-producing states as well.
/Mr Lynn

pkatt
Reply to  Mr Lynn
February 23, 2009 3:35 pm

We definately need a strong third party here in the US .. Im so tired of the swing back and forth between the Rep and Dems. A third party would break up the majority rules garbage and force all the sides to work together. Trouble is, most of the ‘third’ parties are more wacko then the main two.
Remember when Ross P. ran for a while.. ya know all it would take right now is for one person like that to take power away from both parties, and a reasonable middle road third party that doesnt focus on OLD ISSUES and would act reasonably, would win big time. I cant be the only one in the world who thinks all the petty fighting between Rep and Dem parties has hit a serious rut. Hard to move forward when youre stuck in a rut.

Michael J. Bentley
Reply to  microw
February 23, 2009 7:28 am

Just a personal note:
You Aussies are a tough bunch – so I’ll be watching. Got to know some of you in Viet Nam. Good people all, but don’t cross them…
You can give the namby-pamby US a lesson in government – Please, we need it.
Mike

Larry Kirk
February 22, 2009 9:06 pm

I hope I wouldn’t look that sinister if I made an advertisement for Greenpeace.

February 22, 2009 9:17 pm

Before commenting here, I went to whitehouse.gov and posted the following query:
———-
I have just viewed a video on-line where a government official was urging people to join in an “action,” a protest to let the Congress and the President know where Americans stand on global warming.
The video is posted at

and the official is Dr. James Hansen of NASA.
What is the administration’s policy on government officials and “actions” that border on civil disobedience?
——————–
I doubt if I will get a response, but I at least wanted to get something in the new White House system on this.

theduke
February 22, 2009 9:17 pm

If there are such things as a crimes against science, Dr. Hansen should be indicted.

Antonio San
February 22, 2009 9:24 pm

This is a very disturbing interview. These people are dangerous and totalitarian. The future our children will inherit will be different if ever these people are free to run the world today.

XQ
February 22, 2009 9:27 pm

If I am not mistaken, there is a federal law on the books that prohibits anyone who receives federal money (i.e. research grants, etc.; not sure about a govt salary) from lobbying the government.

Reply to  XQ
February 23, 2009 7:27 am

XQ – It’s called the Hatch Act – and is mentioned elsewhere in this post/thread.

rickM
February 22, 2009 9:29 pm

Oh my…..in reality, the man should resign from his position and join one of the organizations that espouses his ideal of a world minus electricity. He adovocates coal’s end, now, as a source of energy. We have no viable alternative to take the immediate action he wants.
I can’t separate the man from his work, his position as GISS nor the advocacy he so clearly states. This is why he must go. But …the government has many protections for it’s employees, and this one seems protected, even as outrageouss he has become, by the reaction of the legions out there, that he is being silenced.

Katlab
Reply to  rickM
February 23, 2009 8:42 am

He can’t leave his position, then others could get a look at his methods and he would be exposed. He is like an embezzler who cannot afford to have anyone else look at the books.

Barry
Reply to  rickM
February 23, 2009 10:08 pm

If he left his position then he could not use it to make his voice bigger than it is.

Ron de Haan
February 22, 2009 9:30 pm

Think what Ike would have done!
1. He would have been fired.
2. He would have been arrested.
3. He would have been trialed for treason.
Coal is an essential part of the US energy system.
Any conspiracy with the object to disrupt or endangers the continuity of the US energy infra structure is considered an act of treason.
Today he is part of the scientific conspiracy which is protected by the US President so they can rip off the American people based on a hoax.
This country is led by con artists.

SaveTheSharks
February 22, 2009 9:34 pm

The interesting thing is…some of the Greenpeace agenda is rational and plausible (hence my screen name).
The WORST thing is…that the truth is lost in the noise…from both sides.
Neither Democrats nor Republicans nor ANY party in our “two-party” system (LOL) have shown a REAL concern for the advancement of pure Science.
From the failed Bush Administration to the Obama’s appointment of the ultimate politician, John Holdren, as his “Science Advisor”…we have shown continually and time and time again….that we are not the leader of the free world whose primary concern is the pursuit of the truth.
Perhaps the microw from Australia is correct. A new party needs to be formed in the U.S. The Science Party it shall be called….and its main “agenda” is advancing science and the pursuit of truth.
Anything to prevent Ellsworth Toohey Hansen from ever using his ill-gotten sphere of influence to wreak havoc on the public trust and the scientific method…again.

Philip_B
Reply to  SaveTheSharks
February 23, 2009 2:51 am

It’s unfortunate but many organizations like Greenpeace that start out with admirable aims get hijacked by generally leftwing extremists.
It happens that I have flown over and driven through the truly vast palm oil plantations that are destroying SE Asia’s tropical rainforests at a terrifying rate. This is easily the worst ecological disaster of my lifetime, all in the name of ‘green’ biofuels demanded by the AGW hysteria.

H.R.
Reply to  SaveTheSharks
February 23, 2009 5:05 pm

SaveTheSharks (21:34:08) :
[…] “Neither Democrats nor Republicans nor ANY party in our “two-party” system (LOL) have shown a REAL concern for the advancement of pure Science. […]”
There really isn’t a two party system in the U.S. any more. There are the Demlicans and the Republicrats; the political parties are pretty near interchangable.
There is the political class and then there are the rest of us supporting the political class. They used to have jobs and came to legislate from time to time. Now it’s a career or in many cases, the family business.
C02? Hey, if that’s what works, then that’s what they are going to run with. It doesn’t matter what the science is. “Get elected. Stay elected.”

F Rasmin
February 22, 2009 9:37 pm

I cannot wait to read all about these times in fifty years time. What a hoot that will be.

timbrom
Reply to  F Rasmin
February 23, 2009 12:46 am

F Rasmin.
Those clay tablets are going to be a bitch to carry mind you.

Reply to  F Rasmin
February 23, 2009 1:01 am

Only if sense wins out, if not, then you may not be alive in fifty years. Civilisation will disintegrate very quickly without the coal and oil that sustains it currently.
I am not against new technologies that do not produce CO2 and we should be finding those technologies. IF the conspiracy theorists are right and oil companies and Auto mobile companies are sitting these technologies, NOW would be the time to exploit them. UNTIL those technologies become available, (and Government should be doing a LOT more than it is to research into them) then we still NEED the coal and the oil.
Dr Hansen is a very dangerous man indeed.

pkatt
Reply to  F Rasmin
February 23, 2009 3:38 pm

Naw, it will just disappear in time like the 70’s 🙂 ha

Justin Sane
February 22, 2009 9:40 pm

[OT] Anyone know what happened to Climate Audit? Did the Luddites kill the site?
REPLY: see the story on the righthand recent post links

John F. Hultquist
February 22, 2009 9:43 pm

Over the past week or so I’ve developed a theory about Dr. Hansen.
The null hypothesis: Dr. Hansen is a great human being and will be remembered in the league with Copernicus, Newton, Bohr, and Einstein.
The alternative hypothesis: Dr. Hansen is going to be remembered with the likes of . . .
Hmm, who were those blokes? Now where is my copy of:
“Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science” by Martin Gardner
I do wonder if he or some close family member was slighted by the coal and/or power industry. Or, perhaps, the family lived by railroad tracks used by coal trains and he was sleep-deprived and remains a bit off kilter. I suppose only his shadow knows.

Tim Jenvey
February 22, 2009 9:47 pm

I heard a saying that sums it all up for me:
“The lunatics have taken over the asylum”.
God help us………..

evanjones
Editor
Reply to  Tim Jenvey
February 22, 2009 10:41 pm

It happens very now and then.
Being unsustainable, it never lasts.

E.M.Smith
Editor
Reply to  evanjones
February 22, 2009 11:32 pm

Unfortunately a large number of folks (and stuff) can get hurt in the process of abuse of the asylum followed by it’s retaking…

Justin Sane
February 22, 2009 9:47 pm

I only hope that some of the idiocy is present over the next two years so that the next US election can toss these Luddites from office before it’s too late for us.

1 2 3 6