Guardian Headline – “Leading climate scientist: ‘democratic process isn’t working'”

Even the very liberal UK Guardian picked up on this. What next Jim, the Constitution? NASA, please fire this man. (h/t to Barbara)

Prof James Hansen

Photograph: Gareth Fuller/PA

From the UK Guardian:

Protest and direct action could be the only way to tackle soaring carbon emissions, a leading climate scientist has said.

James Hansen, a climate modeller with Nasa, told the Guardian today that corporate lobbying has undermined democratic attempts to curb carbon pollution. “The democratic process doesn’t quite seem to be working,” he said.

Speaking on the eve of joining a protest against the headquarters of power firm E.ON in Coventry, Hansen said: “The first action that people should take is to use the democratic process. What is frustrating people, me included, is that democratic action affects elections but what we get then from political leaders is greenwash.

“The democratic process is supposed to be one person one vote, but it turns out that money is talking louder than the votes. So, I’m not surprised that people are getting frustrated. I think that peaceful demonstration is not out of order, because we’re running out of time.”

Hansen said he was taking part in the Coventry demonstration tomorrow because he wants a worldwide moratorium on new coal power stations. E.ON wants to build such a station at Kingsnorth in Kent, an application that energy and the climate change minister Ed Miliband recently delayed. “I think that peaceful actions that attempt to draw society’s attention to the issue are not inappropriate,” Hansen said.

He added that a scientific meeting in Copenhagen last week had made clear the “urgency of the science and the inaction taken by governments”.

Read the entire story in the UK Guardian

About these ads
This entry was posted in Climate_change, Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

395 Responses to Guardian Headline – “Leading climate scientist: ‘democratic process isn’t working'”

  1. William says:

    When they make a movie about this man, I can only see Tim Conway as the lead.

  2. He is right: “democratic process isn´t working¨…Only an extreme democracy could allow such a guy to be free.

  3. AKD says:

    “The democratic process is supposed to be one person one vote, but it turns out that money is talking louder than the votes. So, I’m not surprised that people are getting frustrated. I think that peaceful demonstration is not out of order, because we’re running out of time.”

    Oh, and also future votes are talking louder than past votes, but yeah, “corporate greed,” “big oil,” blah, blah, blah…

  4. Pearland Aggie says:

    [snip]

  5. Nat McQueen says:

    Its becoming quite clear that Hansen WANTS to be fired to solidify his position among the AGW crowd as a victim and martyr for his cause.

  6. Dorf on Global Warming. I can see it!

  7. Robert Wood says:

    Jim Hansen clearly isn’t working. Isn’t he supposed to sweating over hot global climate models, not galivanting around the world trying to stir up insurrection?

  8. TerryBixler says:

    He should have been fired long ago, but now has full support from the carbon taxers. Anthony has done the QA that NASA should have been doing. NASA has and will continue to ignore their responsibility of properly siting and measuring the temperatures in the US and then uses the manipulated data to further a political agenda. Increased bogus taxes and no energy policy, a combination for economic failure.

  9. jtom says:

    [snip]

    Is no one interested in enforcing the Hatch Act anymore?

  10. CodeTech says:

    Typical 60’s hippy attitude. Demonstrate, protest, make enough noise, and people will drop what they’re doing to see what’s going on. From the same generation that actually think they stopped the Vietnam war by protesting on the street and spitting on Vets.

    Even if his alarmism was right or justified, this is shameful and pathetic behavior from someone with NASA attached to his name.

  11. Luis Dias says:

    I really resent the call to “fire” a man for his own convictions. He is not in any sentence calling for an end to democracy, so this is a misleading, obnoxious, evil post.

    Remember, mr. Watts, when you want censorship done to a man for simply say what he thinks, if you would like to have the same treatment.

    There’s a reason for the first ammendment, you know. And it protects both unreasonable calls to peaceful actions by mr Hansen and your ridiculous calls for censorship of other people.

    Shame on you.

    REPLY: Luis, sir you are out of line. I made no call for censorship. That is a fabrication on your part. Hansen as scientist and government employee bound by the Hatch act is overstepping his bounds of employment. The issue is the terms of his employment, not free speech. As a US taxpayer it is my right to make this call for his dismissal. When a US government employee suggests that protests against the government he is employed by should be commenced because “the democratic process isn’t working” it becomes an issue of conflict of interest. I’m not ashamed to do so, nor do I care for your opinion that I should be. In fact you have inspired me to take my complaint to the next level. I urge others to do so as well. – Anthony

  12. Roy says:

    We really don’t want him fired. The last thing we want is Hansen with time on his hands and without anyone to curb his enthusiasms (even if only in principle). If he gets flung out of his present job, he will have no trouble finding sponsors and he may well end up making a far better living as a lobbyist. You think Gore has a high profile? Gore’s just the wam-up act (pun intended).

  13. Roy says:

    Err, “warm-up” act, that is.

  14. Richard deSousa says:

    Democratic process isn’t working?? Hansen’s is cherry picking again. He probably hasn’t seen the latest polls in the US which indicates the global warming crisis has taken a back seat to the economic crisis.

  15. A different William says:

    “the democratic process doesn’t seem to be working” just means “you plebians aren’t agreeing with me”

  16. Walt Stone says:

    Tim Conway, perhaps, William, but I’m seeing shades of the late Don Knotts in the fist shaking…

  17. AndrewWH says:

    I just wonder about the legal ramifications regarding a US government employee who interferes with the internal governmental functions of a friendly foreign power?

    OT – the Royal Society for Protection of Birds today announced that they are withdrawing their objections to wind farms after a new study found their impact on wildlife was less than expected.
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7959912.stm
    There’s a reversal of stance for you. I wonder how much Green pressure was put on them.
    “This sparrow isn’t dead, it’s just sleeping.”
    “YEs it is, it was hit by a wind generator blade.”
    “Naaa, it’s just concussed.”

  18. Mijaga says:

    Why is it that when a minority doesn’t get their own way, they think that the democratic process is broken? And instead of conducting some critical thinking to understand why they’re in the minority, they assume the majority is either stupid or delusional and must be coerced to their way of thinking.

  19. Bill Marsh says:

    It passes my understanding that this guy isn’t fired. I’m a federal employee and if I went to China and suggested civil disobedience was the way to go to help the Falon Gong, I’d be fired so fast (as well as arrested by the Chinese) it would make my head spin. Yet, Dr. Hansen can travel to England and advocate civil disobedience and suggest that the British form of government ‘isn’t working’ and continue to draw a paycheck from the taxpayer.

  20. RK says:

    Snark on: Can US gov’t employees be fired? Only private sector employees can be fired; not to mention harassed and embarrassed by our executive and legislative branches.

  21. Thomas says:

    I am baffled by the profound misunderstanding of “the democratic process”. Does Dr. Hansen honestly believe if his policies for curbing carbon emissions were up for a national referendum (assuming such referendums even existed in the United States) that any of them would pass using the one person one vote? What of the people who own the power stations, and work there, as well as the myriad of other industries? Do those people get one vote too or do they not count as they are the enemy?
    I am also horrified at Dr. Hansen’s outright rejection of our representative democracy. But sadly, that is the thread that seems to bind all environmental movements. It isn’t about “saving the planet” as much as it is about total and absolute power. We can see that in his statements above. Since the government won’t surrender power to him, Dr. Hansen appeals to the mob. He has therefore become a street thug with a press pass and that is a very dangerous combination.

  22. Johnny Honda says:

    He added that a scientific meeting in Copenhagen last week had made clear the “urgency of the science and the inaction taken by governments”.

    You all should follow the link to the “key messages”. There you can read things like:

    “societal transformation”
    “reducing inertia in social and economic systems” (=removing democratic systems)
    “enabling the shifts from ineffective governance and weak institutions to innovative leadership in government” (=dictatorship)

    What does this all have to do with science??

  23. UK John says:

    The Professor is probably blinded by self belief and self interest, he has gone a little bit OTT for me! Democracy means defending the rights of all of us to live as we want to.

    But maybe we are blinded by cynicism and mistrust?

  24. Neven says:

    Forget about AGW for a moment. Is there any serious person who thinks that the democratic process in the US works the way a democratic process should?

  25. layne says:

    So, the democratic process isn’t working?……

    very funny considering the Scientific Method hasn’t been working in his lab either….

  26. Perhaps we are the ones who do not understand his deep philosophy, we are behaving like heretics and we must be redeemed…Let us postrate before his august master, lord of the dark side, let us obbey his luciferian orders!!
    He want us to diminish our numbers, kill our females in order to not procreate more infidels like us.

  27. Aron says:

    The Guardian didn’t cover the Coventry protests because apparently almost no one showed up. The same thing happened with the DC protest by Power Shift. The Guardian hyped it up with several articles, saying it was going to be the biggest act of civil disobedience ever against climate change. Hardly anyone showed up so the Guardian didn’t run a main article on it (just a pitiful blog post which got little attention). They just act like “Let’s not draw attention to what a failure these protests are!”

    If one reads the comments for the Hansen article, it is clear that a lot of people simply distrust him.

    The same is true for George Monbiot who goes on his egomaniacal benders twice a day and each time readers berate him for either bullying small time companies or skeptics or set him straight about all the facts that he misrepresents. He is twice as manipulative and five times as obvious as his apostle Suzanne Goldenberg.

  28. Luis Dias says:

    Your reply is even more shameful. The inherent totalitarian tone of it is disgraceful.

    Tell me. If a teacher of a school resents the politics of the national government, shouldn’t he be able to protest peacefully against it?

    Specially if you have been promised something in an election and you feel cheated?

    Do you not see the evil of your rationale? Just because he has a public funded job, and even if you are legally entitled to call for his resignation, still, you should be ashamed of asking for his head because he makes public his views!

    The only way you would be right would be if he was the one responsible to put in practice the policies he advocates and felt he had not the political backup to do them. In that case, he would have to resign.

    Not in any other. And I am terribly sorry that you are unable to understand the basic point of this. Finally, I don’t mind being “out of line” if that means defending the first amendment. It resents me that I would even have to, in a contrarian blog as yours, that depends on it.

    REPLY:
    I’ve added a poll, let’s see if others agree with my “shameful” suggestion. I’m sure we’ll see you run around now to the other blogs and announce this poll and the need to influence it. I know the MO. It’s called “the democratic process”. Keep smiling Luis, life is too short to be angry all the time. – Anthony

  29. Gary from Chicagoland says:

    As Hansen states, “but it turns out that money is talking louder than the votes. So, I’m not surprised that people are getting frustrated.” So now he knows how climate change theorists feel, no grant money if AGW is not advocated. The scientific method is working, real data is now rising to the surface and money, politics and power is stepping aside.

  30. Aron says:

    Andrew, the migratory patterns of birds is always changing and adapting. This fact we learned at about 8 years old in primary school seems to have been abandoned to those who wish to believe that two plus two equals five.

  31. Bob Wood says:

    Be interesting to see if his demonstrators will have to bundle up with heavy clothing to keep warm from “global warming” like all the other demonstrations so far.

  32. John Egan says:

    Lighten up!

    The guy is still recovering from the frostbite he got in Washington earlier this month.

  33. Oliver Ramsay says:

    Don’t fire him! He’s doing more good for the Deniers than for the Warmers by undermining the mystique of the scientist, noble and pure, aloof from the vulgar preoccupations of mundane life.

  34. WrapUpWarm says:

    The Guardian environment pages have attacks on all sorts of things two that featured recently :

    1 Aga Cookers bad for the environment.
    2 Beards good for the environment.
    3 Those pesky white middle class males

    Even if the debates degenerate to a juvenile level they still allow posts although they sometimes pull posts, but in general the site allows both sides of the argument. Wheareas Real Climate will not engage in a debate.

    Should Mr Hansen be sacked? I think that is up to the americans but I cannot see a public servant in the uk being allowed such largesse to campaign politically.

    The more important reason he should be sacked is if it can be shown that he has manipulated the temperature record?

  35. John Laidlaw says:

    To be accurate, true democracy would mean an end to lobbying, and the removal of any elected official who is anything less than completely impartial. In other words, only the voice of the majority would make all decisions. I sincerely doubt Dr. Hansen would like that, as he believes he is right (as is his right).

    One further point; what exactly is a citizen of the USA doing questioning the democratic process in a foreign country? That’s the equivalent of Prime Minister Brown instructing President Obama on the subject. I don’t think that would get very far…

  36. Gary says:

    Tim Conway?

    Lucia sees a different similarity with http://rankexploits.com/musings/2009/separated-at-birth-the-simpsons-poster-contest/

    Democracy actually is working quite well in it’s usual bumbling way, monied interests notwithstanding. It gets subverted by the autocrats who use governmental powers to push an agenda. That’s where the failure is – the unelected bureaucrats and judges with axes to grind.

  37. WrapUpWarm says:

    The last post should have said three things not two?

  38. Chuck says:

    NASA is giving Hansen their implicit support by not firing or censoring him. I don’t suppose Hansen advocates the replacement of coal fired plants with nuclear plants? That would be a good idea. I haven’t been able to find what he proposes as an alternative. I sure hope it’s not that windmill and solar panel nonsense that currently supplies 1% of our energy needs and which the Obama administration proposes to double to 2% by spending untold $ billions!

  39. Luis Dias says:

    Mr Watts, don’t pretend you “know me” when you clearly don’t.

    I’m an independent thinker and I disregard both “hoi pollois” as the one you’re about to have in your poll, and any “tactics” that may bring other “sheep” to say otherwise. It’s fortuitous and meaningless.

    Even if 99.99% of the population were against the first amendment, I’d never agree.

    And you shouldn’t too. I won’t develop further why. It would be too condescending and patronizing to do so.

  40. David Ball says:

    What he is doing is taking his viewpoint out of the scientific arena and into the political arena. This will allow him to use his manipulated data without having to defend his scientific position. Very clever indeed. In the guise of “saving the earth”, he is distracting us all from what should be the main focus, is his theory falsifiable? Wouldn’t it be great if this subject wasn’t so political? Dr. Hansen is one of the many reasons it has become more politics than science.

  41. Gillespie Robertson says:

    Luis, I think you should read carefully what was first said by Anthony in reply to your post . You seem to have completely misunderstood it and your angry reaction to a rational comment is rather sad. I’m sure he values the first amendment as much as you, nor did he advocate censorship, nor was there anything obnoxious about what he said. He simply pointed out correctly and in very measured language that Mr. Hansen’s actions and statements are inappropriate for a senior government employee in terms of his employment. As a private citizen he may say what he wants. Many impartial observers of the AGW debate including myself think that he deserves to be fired for extreme attitudes (“death trains” full of the coal which has doe so much to benfit human kind) and inappropriate public behaviour. We also value the polite language and open-minded attitude of this site, with which your own outburst is in very clear contrast.

  42. John Galt says:

    When it comes to evaluating AGW, we always need to look to the evidence. I present Dr. Hansen as evidence ‘Exhibit A’ that AGW is a political movement, not a scientific one.

    I must echo the idea that firing Hansen will backfire. Imagine his claims of ‘censorship’ if he is fired! He will also have more time on his hands political activism.

    No, the best way to handle Hansen is to remind people of outrageous statements he makes and how his models have zero predictive value. Call on Hansen back up his claims with actual data. Demand Hansen release all his government work and make it publicly available. Make him justify the adjustments and data manipulations he uses to create the GISS temperature anomaly estimates.

    BTW: Does Hansen’s GISS work fall under the Freedom of Information Act? Can the government be compelled to release Hansen’s emails and other communication, journal entries, working notes, etc.?

  43. Luis Dias says:

    PS: I’d even add one more thing. I’d rather have a dr Hansen in his job knowing his bias than having a snob unbiased emotionless facade guy pretending to not having a bias in this story at all.

    If you knew of him distorting figures and facts in his job, then you’d have a case. If you had evidence that his bias is influencing his data, you’d have a case.

    But this isn’t such.

    Last, you’re not to tell me when to be angry or not. That is my call. [REPLY: You are correct on that point, feel free to be angry all you wish, might want to look at some of the GISS graphs here]

  44. George Bruce says:

    Luis, I suggest you actually read the First Amendment. Then you should spend sufficient time studying the cases and comments until you understand it. In your case, it might take a while. Only after that should you venture forth to lecture others on “free speech.”

  45. CodeTech says:

    The poll says it all… clearly not working. Imagine the audacity of people who would terminate employment for a violation of the terms of employment.

    And Luis Dias, I take GREAT OFFENSE at teachers who “exercise their free speech”… by indoctrinating their classes with crap. Teachers are supposed to follow a curriculum, not wander outside of it with their own interests, beliefs, and prejudices.

    I couldn’t care less what Hansen’s views are, or what “free speech” he wants to exercise. This isn’t even remotely close to a “free speech” issue. It’s about ABUSING HIS POSITION, using the good name of NASA to add weight to his personal opinions, and the implication that the US Government endorses his views and activities by allowing him to continue both being an activist and holding his position.

    Save the “free speech” tirade for something that really matters. For now, this guy is a loose cannon that must be stopped before he does any MORE damage.

  46. euan mearns says:

    Democracy bestows upon all individuals the right to have their say and provides for the will of the majority to prevail.

  47. schnurrp says:

    Fortunately for us democracy (including lobbying) is working except for one glaring example of judicial legislating when the Supreme Court ruled that CO2 is a dangerous pollutant and the EPA must either prove it is not or regulate it.

  48. Ron de Haan says:

    From http://www.seablogger.com where the article was discussed earlier:

    Mockery
    Friday, 20 Mar 09, politics

    “James Hansen thinks “the democratic process isn’t working” — because it is working, and his viewpoint has failed to persuade a majority. Now he will rationalize his way to thuggery — people’s democracy, one might call it, to be administered ultimately by the commissars of a People’s Republic, where the views of James Hansen will be accorded proper respect.

    Expect a similar evolution among the more passionate advocates of Barack Obama. When their Messiah is blocked by bickering in his own party, they will announce the failure of democracy, then they will try to destroy democracy in order to save it. When the O-bots come to your door, mock them as modern day missionaries for Gaia-worshipping freaks. They hate religion, and the accusation will drive them nuts.

    If we mock them, they will fail. They have no real sense of humor or proportion. Did you hear Obama’s quip about the “special Olympics?” That’s liberal humor — sneering at the disadvantaged. If a conservative said such a thing, imagine the outcry! But liberals mean well, we are told, and they prove it by spending other people’s money, so they get a free pass.

    Mock the buffoons, Hansen and Gore; mock the popinjay, Barack Obama. Laugh; don’t weep. This too will pass”.

  49. Pamela Gray says:

    My hunch is that as with weather pattern variation, level heads will prevail. Exactly what in the Hatch Act is his behavior violating? It seems a good opportunity to discuss this act.

  50. Abitbol says:

    Scientific facts must now be decided democratically in majority vote. Hurray!

  51. Pamela Gray says:

    Go here to read up on it. There is also a discussion on how to file a complaint.

    http://www.osc.gov/hatchact.htm

  52. Andrew says:

    [snip]

    Andrew

  53. Jim Watson says:

    Nat McQueen has it right on: I think James Hansen WANTS to be fire and he’s going to keep pushing until it happens.

    As a scientist, he must lie awake at night trying to figure out how to get out of this global warming trap he set for himself. If he goes out in a blaze of glory he’ll be a hero to the culture of protest we’ve cultivated in this country.

    And by the time the world figures out he was wrong, he’ll be long since retired on the sands of Bimini with a mai tai in his hand.

  54. Bill Marsh says:

    Mr. Dias,

    I am a US Federal employee, the same as Dr. Hansen. I respectfully submit your view is wrong. Employees of the Federal Government (of the US at least) are subject to the restrictions of the Hatch Act, which DOES limit free speech to an extent for Federal Employees. He is identified as a NASA employee in all of these articles, and, if he is wearing that ‘mantle’ to presumably enhance the impact of his views I think that makes a case that he is doing so ‘on duty’ and represents the views of NASA itself. In so doing he is arguably in violation of the Hatch Act, which prohibits such political activity while ‘on duty’. For instance, members of the military are allowed to attend political rallies of whatever persuasion, but they cannot wear their uniforms when doing so. Similarly Dr. Hansen can attend whatever rallies he desires as long a the government isn’t paying for his travel (people traveling on the government’s dime are ‘on duty’), and he does not identify himself as a NASA employee. Doing so is the equivalent of ‘wearing a uniform’.

    If Dr. Hansen is not being censored. He has been interviewed and quoted over a thousand times in the last couple of years, more than any other scientist I can think of. If he truly wants to pursue his advocacy, he should resign and do so to his hearts content, I have no issue with him doing so. I do have an issue with him doing what he is currently doing.

    Also, I think you should reconsider the use to the descriptor ‘evil’ in describing actions/statements of people on the blog. ‘Evil’ is a religious term and has no meaning in the context of this discussion. ‘Evil’ is not the opposite of ‘good’, it is the opposite of ‘Holy’. The term you’re looking for most likely is ‘bad’, not ‘evil’.

  55. Had a few comments on the Guardian about James Hansen, before the comments were closed…

    With over 500 comments, indeed the Guardian allows both sides to comment (even if there view is 100% pro AGW) and only extreme or personal attacks are deleted. My first comment (#2 in the overview) was:

    Indeed the beauty of democracy is that it is… slow. Thus in many cases (including the AGW scare), it is slow enough to see the scare passing without too much harm, before harm is done by actions which cost a lot of money without much/any effect.

    At one side I can understand Hansen’s frustration as an activist (I was an activist for a better environment for over 30 years), but I don’t understand that he testifies for Greenpeace which caused damage on a coal fired power plant (that is far from peaceful). Neither I do understand his stubborn refuse, as a scientist, to release the way that temperature stations are corrected for errors (the GISS global temperature trend nowadays is quite different from the Hadley Centre or the two satellite trends)…

  56. Phil. says:

    jtom (07:17:04) :
    [snip}

    Is no one interested in enforcing the Hatch Act anymore?

    Which part of the Hatch Act do you think he’s breaking?

  57. geo says:

    Every strongman everywhere and everywhen was just trying to make things better. The Benevolent Dictator model always beguiles some folks. When things weren’t going well in the early years of the American Civil War, there were many references to this Union General or that (Fremont, McClellan, etc) just about to march on Washington and take over the government to save the country.

    So far Hansen is still trying to line-dance. He says A (the race is in peril but democracy isn’t working) but won’t quite say B (therefore to save the race we must jettison democray). At least not yet. Perhaps he is waiting for the peepul to rise and overthrow current institutions and offer him the crown and sceptre.

  58. Ron de Haan says:

    This infact is also the work of Hanson: from http://www.icecap.us

    The biggest tax increase in US history:

    March 24, 2009
    Obama’s Climate Tax and EPA Ruling

    By The Institute for Energy Research

    When President Obama released his budget plan three weeks ago, it included a whopping $1.6 trillion in new taxes. The plan contained $989 billion in various tax increases and a $646 billion cap and trade tax. As we previously noted, if enacted, this would be the largest tax increase in American history.

    But it turns out the Administration’s budget did not reveal the entire truth. A top White House aide told Senate staffers that cap and trade tax would be much higher than the initially reported $646 billion. In fact, Jason Furman, the deputy director of the National Economic Council, told Senate staffers the tax would cost American taxpayers between $1.3 trillion and $1.9 trillion. A $1.6 trillion tax raise is huge-but a tax increase of $2.3 trillion or $2.9 trillion is astonishing. To put that in perspective, that is a tax increase of $7,500 to $9,500 per American. Let’s hope the cost of the President’s budget does not continue to escalate.

    By Ian Talley, Wall Street Journal

    See in this Wall Street Journal report on the EPA sending the White House a proposed finding that carbon dioxide is a danger to public health, a step that could trigger a clampdown on emissions of greenhouse gases across a wide swath of the economy. If approved by the White House Office of Management and Budget, the endangerment finding could clear the way for the EPA to use the Clean Air Act to control emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases believed to contribute to climate change. In effect, the government would treat carbon dioxide as a pollutant. The EPA submitted the proposed rule to the White House on Friday, according to federal records published Monday.

    Business groups such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers warn that if the EPA moves forward on regulation of CO2 under the Clean Air Act—instead of a measured legislative approach—it could hobble the already weak economy.

    Coal-fired power plants, oil refineries and domestic industries, such as energy-intensive paper, cement, fertilizer, steel, and glass manufacturers, worry that increased cost burdens imposed by climate-change laws will put them at a severe competitive disadvantage to their international peers that aren’t bound by similar environmental rules. Environmentalists have called for the endangerment finding, and say action by Congress or the Obama administration to curb greenhouse gases is necessary to halt the ill effects of climate change. (H/T Dr. Benny Peiser, CCNET)

  59. Peter Hearnden says:

    Judging by the poll so far it’s a win for the ‘sack him’ view by a N. Korean landslide. I wish I was surprised…

    Can someone tell me how many ‘Sack Hansen’ posts there have been here?

  60. Pamela Gray says:

    I am having a difficult time uncovering exactly which part of the Hatch Act this guy is in violation of. While being a federal employee, he can participate in political events and activities but not while on duty. If he is on personal leave, he can do what he appears to want to do unless I am misreading the revised act.

  61. Aron says:

    Here is a gross bit of manipulation that shows you how the Guardian works.

    Eco Soundings is the Guardian’s environmental editor John Vidal’s way of contaminating the internet with as much disinformation as possible. Small, almost bare articles that he can post often throughout a day instead of well researched articles that takes days to write.

    This is Vidal’s latest Eco Sounding

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2009/mar/24/lovelock-chernobyl-nuclear-waste-wildlife-radiation

    The whole thing from start to finish is one act of anti-nuclear manipulation.

    Vidal says “The hospitals of Ukraine and Belarus really are abnormally full of leukaemia victims.”

    Very few, around 60 people, died directly because of Chernobyl. Even the UN cut the number of deaths from the often mentioned thousands to dozens instead. Long-term deaths from radiation etc was less than 4000, this is less than the number of people who die from the cold in Britain each winter. Today it would be irrational to link a new sufferer of leukemia to Chernobyl.

    The UN wrote in its 2005 report on Chernobyl that the worst effects were not the deaths but the “damaging psychological impact due to a lack of accurate information…manifesting as negative self-assessments of health, belief in a shortened life expectancy, lack of initiative, and dependency on assistance from the state.”

    In other words, Ukrainians were made to believe they had little to look forward to, so they became hopeless.

    Vidal goes on to link to a BBC article to back up this selective factoid,“US scientists working in Ukraine for the last 17 years publish data showing that low-level radiation has actually led to a major reduction in bird and insect populations.”

    But that same BBC article isn’t as black and white as he thinks it is (he knows this of course but is being selective). The article in question goes on a bit, quoting a Ukrainian scientist:

    But some researchers have challenged the study, claiming that the lack of human activity in the exclusion zone has been beneficial for wildlife.
    Dr Sergii Gashchak, a researcher at the Chornobyl Center in Ukraine, dismissed the findings. He said that he drew “opposite conclusions” from the same data the team collected on birds.
    “Wildlife really thrives in Chernobyl area – due to the low level of [human] influence,” Dr Gashchak told BBC News.

    Gashchak is correct. Those US scientists Vidal quotes have not been in Ukraine long enough to know that before the Chernobyl disaster the whole area was unfit for bird species due to poor Communist environmental standards.

    There you have before your very eyes an act of manipulation by John Vidal (the same Champagne Socialist who thinks McDonald’s should forget about teenagers, the poor and other people on a right budget, and start serving haute cuisine instead!).

  62. alec kitson says:

    Re: The Guardian piece, a lively online debate evolved immediately in the comments section of this articles. Perhaps surprising was how many skeptics, disbelievers, appeared. Out of 500 comments (lordy, five hundred) I reckon skeptical postings equalled or outnumbered those of Hansen’s Kool Aid drinkers, and the skeptical postings received significantly more ‘endorsements’ than did the other side. I stumbled on the article fairly soon after it appeared so my entry was third in the sequence (I’m registered with the Guardian as ‘mascamote’) and was amused when the uncool started talking about ‘paid conspiracies’ and all that nonsense. Anyway, I dunno whether the volume of ‘skeptic’ postings represented a shift in opinion or what. I hope it was one more example of rational thinking and decent science winning out over the dopes.

    From Costa Rica…

  63. Bruce Cobb says:

    Imagine if you will, crowds “demonstrating” for lowered living standards worldwide, increased poverty, malnutrition and disease and higher mortality rates particularly among children. Then, imagine a “scientist” not only advocating such a thing, but leading the charge, and complaining that the only reason they haven’t been successful so far in their endeavor is due to “corporate lobbying”.
    In a normal world, these freaks would be reviled and ostracized. But, because AGW ideology has become an industry, supported by the MSM, politicians, and “scientists” going along to keep their careers and funding, along with the masses of gullible and scientifically illiterate believing it, or thinking “better safe than sorry”, we’re left in a sort of Orwellian/Twilight Zone nightmare.
    In the transportation system of modern day thought and belief, the “Death Trains” are those promulgated by the AGW/CC ideologues such as Hansen.
    I believe people are waking up, but the question is, will it be in time?

  64. Tom in Florida says:

    Apparently Mr Hansen knows as little about the U S federal government (for which he works) as he does about CO2 being a climate driver. The U S government is a representative republic not a democracy. Democracy stops at the State level. Sorry James, you don’t get one person one vote at the federal level.

    Hansen said:” but it turns out that money is talking louder than the votes”

    Absolutely correct James, [snip]

  65. hotrod says:

    Implicit in the right to free speech is the responsibility and obligation not to yell fire in a crowded theater.

    Mr. Hansen is violating that obligation and responsibility! He is intentionally (or through gross incompetence) using flawed models and manipulated data to advocate action that will result in enormous damage to the economy of the entire world and likely the deaths of thousands in the undeveloped countries due to ill conceived attempts to control the uncontrollable.

    He is in love with his own press clippings and instead of doing his job, he is using his title and position at NASA for his own gain, and to serve an agenda that is counter to the interests of the people (taxpayers) who pay his salary.

    Freedom of speech is not a defense against willful misrepresentation of the facts. That is why there are libel and slander laws. The right to freedom of speech is not absolute, it is only protected when it is done in good faith.

    Larry

  66. michel says:

    A year or so ago a group of American teenage virgins, or at least alleged virgins, took it into their heads to fly over to the UK to promote more chastity and sexual restraint here.

    Some of us looked at what has become a rather familiar spectacle over the years, and wondered why they did not stay at home, promote chastity there, and when they had done that successfully, come over again and tell us about it.

    Some of us wondered idly why people living in the US thought they had anything to teach the UK about chastity. Chastity seemed to be in singularly short supply there, and while it was deeply selfless of them to export the little they had, we felt rather like saying with Sir Philip Sydney, no, stay home, your need for it there is greater than mine for it here.

    Well, inquiring minds are asking themselves similar questions on the occasion of Hansen’s visits: why exactly he has chosen the UK to focus his mission on. Like, are there no power stations in the US that are worthy of his preaching? And we are feeling yet again that familiar sense of being unworthy of the attentions of this great preacher. Our need of him really is less than yours. We really are not emitting so much noxious CO2. Especially not per capita.

    But the view seems to be, among these visiting evangelists of all persuasions, Lord, make me chaste – but not yet. And also, when preaching to us, it seems to be, Do as we say, not as we do.

    How can we say tactfully but convincingly, that your efforts are more needed at home? That much as we like and admire and value America, one of the things we are starting to find just a bit irritating is the penchant of its citizenry to fly over and tell everyone else how to do things, while not doing them at home?

  67. pablo an ex pat says:

    Neven (07:42:07)

    Having personally observed the working of the political process in the UK versus the US I have to say that I prefer the US model with its system of checks and balances versus the UK parliamentary model which Winston Churchill famously described as an elected dictatorship.

    Even now with the Dems in control of the White House and the US House and very close to control in the US Senate it’s possible to block legislation. In the UK with a working Government majority in place it is not possible to do that.

    The upper chamber in the UK, The House of Lords can’t reject or stop Government legislation, it can try to amend it but can be ignored.

    Also by the way in terms of strict definition the US is not a Democracy, it’s a Republic.

    God Bless America, I love it here.

  68. Katherine says:

    James Hansen, a climate modeller with Nasa

    I like that. They demoted him from “scientist” to “modeller”. =)

  69. Mike Strong says:

    Luis Dias
    Mr. Hansen has no right to use his title and NASA credentials as a platform to voice his personal opinion, especially if he is urging civil disobedience. This has nothing to do with free speech. If he wants to go protest somewhere, he needs to lose the NASA title and revert to “James Hansen, Private Citizen”.

  70. Bill Illis says:

    He needs to be removed because he is making it impossible for objective climate scientists to do objective climate science.

    They get ostracized, in no small part to what Hansen has done over the last 20 years, if they present evidence that doesn’t start with “dangerous climate change …”

    Maybe we should slow down on coal-fired electricity but what global warming really needs is for Hansen to step aside so that better science can be done.

  71. Pamela Gray says:

    The economy has made a small (below the noise level) er…tiny dent in CO2 emissions. How do we like it so far? If Hansen and his followers get their way, we will be serving raw food in the ever expanding soup lines because no one can fire up the grill without paying a tax.

  72. Aron says:

    For those in the UK, watch BBC2 tonight at 9PM – Horizon : Why Can’t We Predict Earthquakes?

    Should be enlightening to watch computer models fail at predicting earthquakes, yet we are asked to believe that the much more complex climate system can be modeled.

  73. Alan Millar says:

    “Luis Dias (08:15:06) :

    PS: I’d even add one more thing. I’d rather have a dr Hansen in his job knowing his bias than having a snob unbiased emotionless facade guy pretending to not having a bias in this story at all.”

    That’s not the way it works Luis.

    In the UK a Civil Servant is not allowed to participate in public political matters in case it is seen to compromise his impartiality.

    EG If I was well known to be an avid supporter of AGW going so far as to call for action to be taken against people who take the opposite view (as per Hanson) how could any such member of the public have confidence in my dealings with him?

    Alan

  74. Bill Marsh says:

    Pamela Gray,

    I think a Hatch Act violation would be tough to prove, even though I personally think he is violating the act by allowing himself to be identified as a NASA Scientist at these rallies, which is probably why it isn’t being pursued.

    I think there may be some other regulations he has to be running afoul of. I can’t see any federal employee being allowed to travel to another country, whether on personal leave or official travel, and encourage it’s citizens to violate the laws of that country.

    I know that we would react poorly if some British civil servant came to the US and advocated that US citizens violate federal law by way of protest.

  75. Adam Gallon says:

    Is he doing all this globe-trotting in his own time or is it part of his paid work for NASA?

  76. Robinson says:

    Here’s something I think you’ll find interesting:

    Brain switches off rationality when given `expert advice’

    We’ve been searching for an explanation for all of this insanity. I think Scientists are finally making some progress.

  77. Changing data it is the same as lobbying: Means to get the desired end.

  78. Robert Austin says:

    While as a Canadian, I don’t know anything about the Hatch Act, but having had worked in government for many years, I experienced many issues where I had to bite my tongue and hide my personal views in order to do my duty in what I thought was an impartial and arms length manner. So it should be for Dr. Hansen. There is nothing stopping Dr. Hansen from resigning his position and dedicating his remaining life to his cause. On the other hand, firing the guy at this stage would only lead to his martyrdom at the hands of those of his persuasion.

  79. Pierre Gosselin says:

    He belongs in a padded room.

  80. Pearland Aggie says:

    El Nino study challenges global warming intensity link

    http://in.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idINIndia-38669820090324?sp=true

  81. lichanos says:

    Since when is a peaceful protest “civil disobedience?”

  82. Aron says:

    Employment in nearly all sectors is performance related. If you don’t perform well then you get demoted or get sacked.

    I don’t care much for the Hatch Act. I would fire Hansen because his performance is terrible. Every prediction he made has failed. His models have failed. And that failure has cost a lot of important money.

  83. Robert Coté says:

    Dr. Hansen should be sacked for several reasons. Right now he is bound by restrictions that prohibit any number of potential AGW advocacy efforts. Dr. Hansen needs to be released from these shackles.

    I seriously doubt that his leaving NASA will backfire. Any publicity will undoubtably come with new mainstream scrutiny. The MSM likes nothing more than tearing down the icons they erect.

  84. tallbloke says:

    Those blue skies and fluffy white clouds have been photoshopped in. The day of the demo last thursday was windy and cold. It had been a lovely week up until then. Now we have snow and hail forecast.

    Is Hansen a direct blood descendent of Thor?

  85. Alan the Brit says:

    Luis Dias:-)

    As a professional he should guard himself against the charge of abusing his position.

    A teacher has all the rights in the world to believe whatever he/she wants to believe, BUT, not to bring it into the classroom unless balancing their viewpoint!

    And another thing, I have asked you colonial chaps to stop allowing him to come here & telling us how to run our lives, we’ve got a left-wing government to do that for us. I can take a photo of a tube station for posterity purposes & end up tackled by an armed response team, carted off to the nearest detentions centre, arms behind my back, tied with plastic ties, just in case I am an international terrorist (you think I’m kidding don’t you?). This half-wit Hansen can come over here & mouth off incitement to civil disobedience & nobody does a thing under the strictest anti-terror laws on the planet inside a democracy. Only in the UK folks. Help us please, stay democratic & republic as long as you can!

  86. Stan says:

    If it weren’t for lobbying by environmental pressure groups then “Global Warming” wouldn’t even be an issue. It has to be said, they are very good at it.

    O/T – something has been bothering me for a while. The sun doesn’t have many spots and we know that this corresponds to poor wheat harvests (though not necessarily causes them). As I understand it, both the PDO and NAO have turned negative – how does that correlate to food production? Particularly in the US, Canada and Russia?

    I’m just wondering because winter arrived early last year and spring has sprung later this year – presumably shortening the growing season. If this does become a trend that lasts a decade or two – as even AGW supproters seem to be admitting – are we going to find it a struggle to feed 6 billion people?

  87. Phil. says:

    Bill Marsh (08:54:09) :
    Pamela Gray,

    I think a Hatch Act violation would be tough to prove, even though I personally think he is violating the act by allowing himself to be identified as a NASA Scientist at these rallies, which is probably why it isn’t being pursued.

    I think there may be some other regulations he has to be running afoul of. I can’t see any federal employee being allowed to travel to another country, whether on personal leave or official travel, and encourage it’s citizens to violate the laws of that country.

    Which UK laws is Hansen urging British citizens to break? The Hatch Act covers partisan political activity in the USA, in any case he would be allowed under that act to “attend and be active at political rallies and meetings”.

  88. lex says:

    Yeah, right, and when we stop the democratic process how do we check CO2 output is really going down?
    Or how do we check GW is reversed? And if not, what measures have to be taken as a next step?
    And how do we verify the results?
    This guy is so pre 1989!!!

  89. Michael says:

    @ Katherine (08:42:34) :

    James Hansen, a climate modeller with Nasa

    I like that. They demoted him from “scientist” to “modeller”. =)

    But they misspelled “meddler”

  90. Roy says:

    I’m not voting in the poll because there is no option of voting “No; it would be a tactical error to give him more free time and less supervision”.

  91. Phydeaux says:

    I think if Hansen is fired, he’ll become a martyr for the AGW proponents. They’ll use his firing to take everyone’s eyes off the ball, and shift to a discussion of how the deniers are trying to squelch debate. (e.g., see Luis Dias’s points above)

    In my view, it’s always better to counter stupid speech with rational, properly articulated argument. And so it is with Hansen. He gives skeptics almost unlimited opportunity to counter his sillines with logic. I say leave him to his soapbox. He’s doing the AGW crowd more harm than good.

  92. Pieter F says:

    This is too easy, but . . .
    That photo of him makes it look like he has his head in the clouds. Are those water vapor or CO2 clouds? It also appears he is looking down on us.

    REPLY: It is the photo that went with the article, at least he’s smiling. – Anthony

  93. The following is a link for those who are interested in studying the histoy of the green movement:
    http://www.spunk.org/texts/places/germany/sp001630/peter.html

  94. MC says:

    Hansens superior needs to give him a project to work on. Give him something to do besides run around the world. Who allows this guy to do such things?

  95. OT, but interesting:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messiah_complex_(self-concept)

    “(A) Messiah complex is a state in which the individual believes themselves to be, or destined to become, the saviour of the particular field, a group, an event, a time period, or in an extreme scenario, the world.”

  96. Ric Werme says:

    Ron de Haan (08:25:13) :

    This infact is also the work of Hanson: from http://www.icecap.us

    When President Obama released his budget plan three weeks ago, it included a whopping $1.6 trillion in new taxes. The plan contained $989 billion in various tax increases and a $646 billion cap and trade tax

    When Dr. Hansen spoke at the US Mensa Annual Colloquium He stated quite clearly that he was opposed to a cap and trade tax. He also stated quite clearly that he was in favor of a CO2 tax, but with the proceeds going back to American families, with an amount commensurate with family size. That way it would encourage conservation and further reward them with the penalty of the greater fuel users.

    Obama et al want the money to pay for all the stimulus and bailout packages and provide money for more spending.

    Either way it’s appalling to this Libertarian’s way of thought, but Hanson’s
    proposal is less bad.

    Also, he had a mostly adequate disclaimer that his presentation was his
    own personal view and not NASA/GISS.

  97. Steven Hill says:

    This is funny….

    “The famously cold winter of 1962/63 is now expected to occur about once every 1,000 years or more, compared with approximately every 100 to 200 years before 1850.”

    Wow, we have some serious new ability to determine weather over a thousand years now? Amazing!

  98. geo says:

    Forget the Hatch act. He’s a federal employee; that means he took an oath to defend the Constitution. Either he is pointing at the right to petition the government for redress of grievances, in which case that is absolutely still part of “Democracy”, or he is talking about something else more sinister that is in contravention of his oath.

    Tell us which it is, James. . . .

  99. Steven Hill says:

    In my opinion, Hansen causes NASA’s image to look very poor. I would find myself questioning anything they do if they allow Hansen to run roughshod like a loose cannon ball on the deck of the ship.

  100. Rhys Jaggar says:

    When will these goons realise that Britain will NOT HAVE ENOUGH ENERGY TO SATISFY ITS NEEDS if that power station doesn’t get built?

    The vote should be:
    a) If you vote to block this power station, do you agree to live without power in the winter months as we will need volunteers to do precisely that in order to get by?
    b) If the answer to a) is no, why do you expect those who voted to have it built to sacrifice their warmth for you moralisers in sandals?

    And finally, what the hell is a US citizen doing INTERFERING IN UK DOMESTIC POLITICS?

    We’re not killing anyone here, which is different to I-RACK when we were protesting about your Yankee apostles of shock and awe………

  101. John F. Hultquist says:

    Luis Dias (07:49:05) : “shameful”

    I told a veeeery liberal member of a local school board about Hansen and he felt as you do. Then I asked, “What would the school board do if one of its teachers promoted and helped barricade the high school doors so neither teachers, students, staff, or emergency personnel could go in or out?”
    He said, “We’d arrest such a person and prosecute.”
    In Hansen’s case the issue is he is supposed to be leading a science based organization. If he wants to promote his wild ideas about “death trains”, declaring skeptics as mentally deranged, and civil disobedience, then he should resign and go do that. There would be no call for censorship then – he would be totally free to speak his mind. As is, because of him we can no longer trust NASA. That’s shameful.

  102. B Kerr says:

    Aron (08:51:49) :

    “For those in the UK, watch BBC2 tonight at 9PM – Horizon : Why Can’t We Predict Earthquakes?”

    Health warning to UK viewers.
    “Follow the Catlin Arctic Survey on the BBC 6:00pm and 10:00pm news today.”

    6:00 pm I’ll be watch Eggheads where Science questions start with “In what year did ….”

    10:00 too late for me I’m a pensioner.

    Yet the BBC are doing a very good documentary on “Yellowstone”.
    The BBC at its best Educating and Reporting. No Political messages.

    The way that Lord Reith foresaw the BBC.
    I think that he would so ashamed now.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Reith,_1st_Baron_Reith

  103. Claude Harvey says:

    I think it is highly likely that Hansen is showing his true colors because he sees the writing on the wall. I think he knows he has based his entire professional career on a scientific lie that is soon to be exposed, both by science and by nature. He’s stepping off the scientific train and onto an emotion-driven, radical politics train because that is the only place where he won’t have to defend and explain himself to his fellows.

  104. mikef says:

    I think we are witnessing Mr Hansons next career move here. By soapboxing as much as possible and getting his name around he can look forward to a lucrative semi retirement doing the speeches/expert opinion scene.
    Its quite simple, he is not young any more, and does he want to continue driving to the same place every day doing the same job…esp a job that might get demoted or disappear in a few years time if climate continues to stick two fingers at his predictions. I’d prob do the same in his position, heh!
    It worked for Al Gore n’cest pas?

  105. George E. Smith says:

    US Constitution; Article IV, section 4 (in part); “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union, a Republican form of Government; and shall protect each of them against invasion; ….. ”
    Sorry if I got the punctuation wrong; I’m typing this from memory; and I haven’t memorized all the punctuation yet.

    So the USA is NOT a Democracy; it is a Republic; but it does use Democratic principles in some of its processes; such as electing Congressional Members. The States of course are free to organize theri Republican form as they wish; and of course they elect the President of the USA through the Electoral College process.

    But as to Dr James Hansen; probably according to the rules of Government service jobs, he should be fired; but not for his public utterances; but for his official job performance, in publishing “official data” that is sufficiently suspect, as to not be believeable by anyone wishing to make use of it.

    Other than that, I see no gain in firing him in relation to his public views, or with relation to Hatch Act violations. Maybe he does need to be on the carpet, having those rules explained to him.

    But as a “Scientist”, history will judge him, and people who have misused science for their own ends, have eventually been ostracised by history. Nothing can be more scurrilous than for scientists to use their positions of special knowledge to mislead the lay public about important scientific results fo personal agendas.

    George

  106. Juraj V. says:

    From the telegraph.co.uk link at 7:26:26
    ————————————–
    Peter Stott, Climate Scientist at the Met Office, said: “Despite the cold winter this year, the trend to milder and wetter winters is expected to continue, with snow and frost becoming less of a feature in the future.
    “The famously cold winter of 1962/63 is now expected to occur about once every 1,000 years or more, compared with approximately every 100 to 200 years before 1850.”
    ————————————–
    Man I envy your climate scientists. They can predict 1000 years into the future!

  107. Rick, michigan says:

    I’m not frustrated. Am I not a people?

  108. John in L du B says:

    James Hansen doesn’t seem to believe very strongly in his own convictions. If he really does he’d divest himself of any perceived confict of interest by retiring and crusading full time for carbon controls just the same as Steve McIntyre spends his retirment years analyzing data. Hansen must be in the position financially to do so since he’ll be 68 next week and he’s been Director of GISS since 1981 according to Wikipedia.

  109. Antonio San says:

    Indeed “one vote, one person” never seems to work when it doesn’t go your way… Mr. Hansen is a dangerous man and a totalitarian at heart.

  110. Bill Marsh says:

    Phil,

    “NASA’s chief climate scientist is in hot water with colleagues and at least one lawmaker after calling on citizens to engage in civil disobedience at what is being billed as the largest public protest of global warming ever in the United States.” 2/27/09

    Hansen’s testimony in defense of vandalism of a British Coal Plant is, in effect, an endorsement of ‘civil disobedience, of British law.

  111. crosspatch says:

    It seems to me that a certain Dominican named Giovanni Maria Tolosani had the same problem with the “democratic process” way back in 1546

  112. John F. Hultquist says:

    alec kitson (08:37:38) : “ Kool Aid drinkers”
    This won’t do much good but I say it anyway. I don’t know what Hansen and friends drink (Chardonnay?) but the reference to “kool aid” isn’t the best analogy here because the reference usually refers to the Jonestown tragedy. The idea was to kill everyone – not to induce them to follow you. And the kicker is – it was not Kool Aid!
    It was a British product, Fla-Vor-Aid.
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27204411/

  113. Mark says:

    I think direct action is needed to stop these environmentalists. Anybody with me?

  114. Brian J. BAKER says:

    Further to Bill Marsh, I hope he does go to China and try and organise demo against the Chinese building 1 coal fired station a week! I think the Chinese would accuse him of Imperialism. I also don’t think he would be treated with kid gloves. But isn’t that where Gavin Strong is based – him of Quebec Hydro, who can’t come back to the west as he has a few questions to answer about the Iraq Oil for Food programme.

  115. Aron says:

    They think they’re making progress…

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7961957.stm

    Did they ever take photos of the supposed ice that was cracking around them as they slept?

  116. Bill P says:

    Pamela,

    Reference to the Hatch Act is intriguing. I’d be curious to know which part of the act or its subsections Hansen violates, and how that violation could be used to take him out of office. Of course, the danger of dealing with Hansen under such legal parameters would give some credence to the accusation that he was being “muzzled”. He’s been claiming this for some time, notwithstanding his 1,000 appearances and publications.

    I think the only strategy for dealing with Hansen is to keep picking away at his bad science. His dependency upon predictive models and their fallacy, and his refusal to provide information are ultimately a betayal of public trust.

    In his end-of-conference address at Heartland, Hansen’s former supervisor, John Theon describes how he was disabused of his own global warming notions and came to be suspicious of Hansen’s models. The idea of predicting the future from models calibrated to (proxy-derived) past temperatures struck him as ludicrous. If you know the answer to begin with, he says, of course you can come up with a simulation that replicates (those graphs) every time. Yet, he says,

    …none of the climate models predicted the leveling off and cooling of the atmosphere that has occurred since 1998. This cooling has taken place even though the atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration has continued to rise.

    and

    As to the belief that computer models can forecast the Earth’s climate even a month from today, much less decades or even centuries into the future, appears to me to be a display of hubris of the first magnitude.

    On the same note, if anyone here can tolerate a little additional AGW advocacy, tonight’s (check local PBS stations) NOVA promises some aggravation. How does one respond to those pointing with great Cassandra-eyes at the shrinking glaciers?

    The program is “Extreme Ice” by James Balog. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/extremeice/

  117. MDM says:

    Anthony (per your reply to Luis): you’re upset simply because Hansen disregards the Hatch Act, and it has nothing at all to do with his stance on AGW?

  118. crosspatch says:

    Mark (10:29:22) :

    I consider myself environmentally conscious but what I resent deeply is people using “environmentalism” as a hook to hoodwink well-intended people into supporting a cynical grab for power. People are being duped in this case. Many people want to do what is right and ensure the Earth they leave behind for future generations is cleaner than the one they inherited. The problem in this case is that nobody has shown that CO2 is a problem.

    When someone controls energy production and use, they control the entire economy. There are two ways of regulating an engine … you can use the brake to regulate friction or you can use the throttle to regulate fuel. Politicians seeing pushback from the people in allowing them more direct control over the economy (modulating the brake) through taxation and redistribution of wealth, have stumbled upon this ingenious plan of a globally managed economy by regulating energy consumption. In order to do this and get away with it, they need a mechanism to make the people WANT them to do it. So they come up with “global warming” as a means to scare people into allowing them to manipulate global economic policy through the energy abstract.

    For example. if you want to redistribute wealth from rich countries to poor ones, you place energy restrictions on the rich ones and no such restrictions on the poor ones. This causes economic activity to move to those locations where increases in energy consumption are not cost prohibitive. You can’t ramp up from 5 plants to 10 plants without increasing CO2 footprint. In Europe it would cost you money to do so, above and beyond the cost of the plants. It becomes cost effective to move your plants to China or Brazil employing those people instead of yours.

    What “global warming” is, is a mechanism to use environmentalism as a ruse to get people to support something that exists only in theory and not in any actual observations. It the “greenhouse effect” is a brilliant way to do it because everyone has been in a greenhouse. You can tell any moron that the earth’s atmosphere is turning into a greenhouse and they will understand what you are trying to get them to understand. To refute the argument, you need math and physics that are beyond the grasp of most average people. 50% of the population is below the median intelligence level. It only takes 50% +1 for the “democratic process” to work.

    The entire scheme is about getting 50%+ of the population to “just believe” and support their global socioeconomic policies under the guise of “environmentalism”.

  119. EricH says:

    If I, as a English person, were to come to America and take a prominent role in a demonstration, on anything, I would, quite rightly, expect to be arrested and expelled from the USA, even though you believe in free speech as much as we do.

    I don’t think that will happen to him though because he is giving the UK government an ideal reason to raise taxes and that is the same reason that NASA won’t sack him; the government needs the money.

  120. Paddy says:

    To what extent does the EPA’s CO2 emissions endangerment finding rely upon NASA, GISS and NOAA modeling and data? This finding should provide a forum in which to challenge the corrupted weather and climate data and GC model based “science.” The endangerment finding cannot be duely deemed, it must be supported by the best available science.

    Get ready. This may be the best opportunity that the “deniers” will have to squelch AGWers.

  121. Dermot Carroll says:

    perhaps he’s a secret skeptic and now he’s panicking because he realizes we’re heading back to a cold period. If he can manage to get a last minute reduction in CO2 then he’ll be proven right as the world cools and go down in history as the great saver of the planet. lol

  122. John Galt says:

    @Luis Dias

    Your anger is baseless. You need to first read about the Hatch Act and the activities it forbids. Next, read what Anthony actually says.

    Requesting that Hansen be fired for violating the Hatch Act is not censorship, it’s asking that the law be enforced. It has nothing to do with the quality (or lack thereof) of his science and it is not an allegation of scientific fraud. It has to do with Hansen’s behavior and misconduct as a federal employee. Of course Hansen deserves due process in this matter, as does everyone.

    I personally believe that firing Hansen for violating the Hatch Act (which he has), is legally correct but probably not the right move politically. Firing Hansen will just make him a martyr to the cause. Advocating his firing seems to just encourage more of the same.

    Instead of firing Hansen, we should expose him as a political activist masquerading as a scientist. I believe he conducts very sloppy science and it appears he manipulates the data to get the results he wants.

    Has Hansen committed scientific fraud? I my opinion, yes. But that’s an issue separate from his repeated violations of the Hatch Act.

  123. Jamie says:

    John F. Hultquist:

    While, technically, you’re right, the term “kool-aid drinker” is commonly used for people who swallow the pronouncements of their messianic figures so completely as truth, that they will do anything (including things which are harmful to themselves) because their leader tells them it’s the right thing to do.

  124. crosspatch says:

    Another thing you can do is to follow the money. How much did Gandhi or Martin Luther King make from their stand on non-violence? They honestly believed in these principles. It wasn’t about money. How much money do Hansen and Gore make from “global warming” and what is the total amount of money pouring into “climate research”?

    I don’t exactly see Gore living in a simple off-grid shack out in the middle of Nowhere, Wyoming and preaching his doctrine from the back of a horse.

  125. D Johnson says:

    Luis Dias (08:08:28) :

    “I’m an independent thinker and I disregard both “hoi pollois” as the one you’re about to have in your poll, and any “tactics” that may bring other “sheep” to say otherwise. It’s fortuitous and meaningless.”

    Using dismissive terms such as “hoi pollois” and “sheep” to characterise those who hold a particular view demonstrates the same elitism that James Hansen exhibits. Should those you consider to be “hoi pollois” and “sheep” be permitted the right to vote, or would that be another failure of the democratic process?

    You both could benfit by showing a bit of humility.

  126. Luis Dias says:

    I don’t know if he reads this, but I just wanted to reply to mr. Bill Marsh.

    Mr Marsh, like I said previously, I don’t care if you are legally authorized to push mr Hansen to unemployment because of his views. I said it is wrong to do so. Ethically. Despite your obvious envy due to mr. Hansen not being wipped by saying what you can’t.

    About Evil being religious. I’m atheist, so I take your criticism with irony. There is nothing religious about the concept of Evil. It exists as well as Goodness. And I am entitled to say that censorship is evil, like it or not.

    Similarly Dr. Hansen can attend whatever rallies he desires as long a the government isn’t paying for his travel (people traveling on the government’s dime are ‘on duty’), and he does not identify himself as a NASA employee.

    I’d agree with you there. See I’m not an apologist?

    But that isn’t what’s posted here, now is it?

  127. jtom says:

    Phil. (08:23:26) :
    Which part of the Hatch Act do you think he’s breaking?

    Sec. 734.402 Expression of an employee’s individual opinion.

    (e) Otherwise participate fully in public affairs, except as
    prohibited by other Federal law, in a manner which does not compromise
    his or her efficiency or integrity as an employee or the neutrality,
    efficiency, or integrity of the agency or instrumentality of the United
    States Government in which he or she is employed.

    He has lost his scientific neutrality, is diminishing the integrity of the agency in which he is employed, and if he has participated in civil disobedience on federal property, has been in violation of Federal law.

  128. jtom says:

    Penalties for Violating the Hatch Act

    An employee who violates the Hatch Act shall be removed from their position, and funds appropriated for the position from which removed thereafter may not be used to pay the employee or individual. However, if the Merit Systems Protection Board finds by unanimous vote that the violation does not warrant removal, a penalty of not less than 30 days’ suspension without pay shall be imposed by direction of the Board.

  129. terry46 says:

    Luis Dias
    It we were ,even though we are not,having global warming and Anthony Watts was spewing were having glogal cooling and , which we are entering ,we must act now to stop global cooling or we will all die and the goverment must act now to heat the planet would you still fill Anthony deserves to speak his mind or would you want to shut him up???????

  130. Roy says:

    OT, but B. Kerr did mention the Catlin Arctic Survey above. According to the BBC : “Pen Hadow, Martin Hartley and Ann Daniels have experienced torrid conditions since being dropped on to the ice three weeks ago.”

    I guess an organization that can get “negative feedback” backwards shouldn’t surprise me when it completely reverses the meaning of the word “torrid”, but it is a very funny.

  131. Gary Pearse says:

    Anthony:

    I thought you might be amused about what the Catlin Expedition fantasizes about!!!

    “I talked to them late last night. They sounded happy and excited. It’s resupply day for them. That means extra rations of food, fresh socks and thermals and the thing they fantasize most about, an extra 5-litre can of fuel. With the latter they can heat the tent to their hearts content, dry their clothes, thaw out their sleeping bags and warm body parts that have been cold for the last 15 days, most importantly their toes.”

    http://www.catlinarcticsurvey.com/No_Go

    Having a good supply of fuel and damn the CO2 is what one fantasizes about in the arctic.

  132. Dave Wendt says:

    I used to think that it was imperative that Hansen be removed from the government payroll, but as his antics have become increasingly delusional I’m coming around to the view that he may be more valuable if left in place. I suspect, that one of the reasons the opinion polls on AGW are heading south is that Hansen’s frequent appearances are exposing many, who don’t follow this very closely, to the quality of the “scientists” who “settled” all the science twenty years ago. It may not rank up there with six feet of snow in the backyard as a primary driver of the changing climate of AGW love, but I think Hansen’s desperate floundering will eventually contribute more to the public’s cooling affection for warmist propaganda and carbon demonization, than CO2 ever has to changes in the actual climate.

  133. rickM says:

    Luis Diaz apparently doesn’t undertand the Hatch Act.

    Go read it, then come back and spout more of the same line please.

    http://www.osc.gov/ha_fed.htm
    http://www.osc.gov/hatchact.htm

    He has, if not crossed the line, is now standing on it with these statements.

  134. Indiana Bones says:

    Roy (09:30:16) :

    “I’m not voting in the poll because there is no option of voting ‘No; it would be a tactical error to give him more free time and less supervision’.”

    Unfortunately there has been no supervision. Hansen convinces us the entire agency needs a overhaul.

    To continue to give the Scott Trust’s Guardian “newspaper” regular coverage is questionable. The Guardian, Hansen and Gore are the last gasp for the collapsing AGW campaign. Were there even a shred of supportable science behind AGW, I could understand it. But as the Guardian now functions more like Soros’ Move On – it seems strange to re-publish it on a contrarian site.

    Luis Dias: Joe McCarthy, a Senator from Wisconsin was allowed to spew vitriol on government time. He was eventually censured by the Senate for abuse of power and false accusations. Using a government office and the appearance of authority to disseminate false (or at least unproven) information is a betrayal of the First Amendment.

  135. wmanny says:

    To Hansen, a couple of quotations:

    Mencken: “The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false face for the urge to rule it.”

    Napoleon: “Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.”

    Hansen ceased being a scientist a while ago. Now, in his overreaching, it appears he is searching for a legacy.

  136. CodeTech says:

    Having a good supply of fuel and damn the CO2 is what one fantasizes about in the arctic

    Well that’s ridiculous. Didn’t they make arrangements for wind and solar? From what I can see, they have no shortage of wind! Solar… not so much.

  137. Aron says:

    You can hear not just read all this disinformation and Marxist greenwash in this Guardian podcast

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/audio/2009/mar/20/computer-games-artificial-intelligence-jim-hansen

    You just have to love the wording in the URL!!! :D

  138. John H.- 55 says:

    I’d like to thank Luis for his contributions. Luis Dias (07:23:31) : Luis Dias (07:49:05) : Luis Dias (08:08:28) :

    He demonstrated fully the agitated, hypocritical and irrational state of the energized global warming activist.
    Having much experience with these types I have little doubt Luis’ outrage and his own obnoxiousness leaves him wanting more than civil unrest to “help democracy out”.
    His lecture on censorship is boiler plate rhetoric often used by those most likely to justify genuine censorship. After all when a greater cause is at a stake does preservation of free speech really matter? Of course not.
    For these people, Luis and friends, the first amendment and all others are optional. And if they decree a higher value in their mission these inconvenient rights are expendable.
    What happens when “peaceful actions” are not working as Hansen says democracy is not working?
    Well history tells us additional steps must be taken. This is when the peaceful become the totalitarians.

    Luis, you’re not doing a very good job of shaming Anthony. Quite the contrary it is your tone which signals a desire for control.

    Your lesson on teachers and elections is a disconnected panic in search of validation for your aggressive demands that Anthony himself be silent.
    There is much trouble in your own rationale.
    Your avoidance of the substantive reasons for the call for Hansen’s termination reveals a fanatic’s bias seeking to recast an issue in an easier form to criticize. That is a weak person’s approach to debate.

    I wonder just how far “out of line” you are willing to go?
    It should be instructional that your comments remain in full here on Anthony’s “contrarion blog”. I hope you grasp this basic point.

    It’s certainly fair game for one to “pretend to know” you by speculating and comparing your approach to to others.
    But here again it appears you would demand some control?
    You see here, I am expressing my own independent thinking.

    Now what about your idea that “Even if 99.99% of the population were against the first amendment”?

    Study that now. It’s a preposterous use of what if, you’re not so special and no one here has indicated any opposition to the first amendment, at all.
    No surprise you “won’t develop further why” you think there is.
    And yes your superior self would come across as condescending and patronizing. Among other not so favorable ways.

    As for “Hansen in his job knowing his bias”?
    What a clever way to encapsulate all of Hansen’s misbehavior into an admirable innocence of bias.
    Demonstrating again your avoidance of the substantive reasons for the call for Hansen’s termination.

    Really Luis, who’s the snob here? Or snobs? I’d say it’s a toss up between you and Hansen.

    Bottom line is you need to bone up on the many misrepresentations Hansen has made.
    That way your anger would be actually justified and useful, plus I’d like you a whole lot more. :)

  139. Henry Phipps says:

    I regret to reveal just how skeptical I’ve become in my old age, but the likelihood of Hansen being sacked is remote. More likely, he will be promoted to an even more ridiculous post, created just for him. Some day, he will refuse to “heel’ after a direct order from The One, and he will join the other expendables thrown under the Barack Obama Low-Carbon Perpetual Emotion Campaign Bus.

    “Out of control” in England portends “out of control” in the USA. And Control Is The Goal in The One’s regime. Someday, Hansen will be ignored or ridiculed, because time will pass and lies don’t endure.

    “Forsan et haec olim meminisse iuvabit – Virgil. ” My Latin is a bit rusty, but I make this to mean “Perhaps someday these things, too, will be a joy to recall.”

    Henry

  140. Crosspatch:¨You can tell any moron that the earth’s atmosphere is turning into a greenhouse and they will understand what you are trying to get them to understand¨
    We can oppose this nonsense with the fact (and repeat it wherever and whensoever is possible, for the sake of mankind):
    AIR CAN NOT HOLD HEAT ENOUGH TIME COMPARED WITH WATER, IT JUST HOLDS 3,227 TIMES LESS HEAT THAN WATER. THEY WANT YOU TO BELIEVE THAT YOU CAN WARM YOUR FEET WITH A BOTTLE FILLED WITH AIR, EARTH IS OPEN TO SPACE AND THERE WOULD GO ALL THE HEAT WE RECEIVE FROM THE SUN IF WE SHOULD NOT HAVE THE OCEANS TO KEEP IT.

  141. M White says:

    OT but remember the attempts to seed the ocean with iron?

    “Setback for climate technical fix”

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7959570.stm

    “But within two weeks, the algae were being eaten by tiny creatures called copepods, which were then in turn eaten by amphipods, a larger type of crustacean.The net result was that far less carbon dioxide was absorbed and sent to the sea floor than scientists had anticipated.”

    Thought it might be of interest.

  142. Dave Wendt says:

    Slightly OT, but demonstrating ,quite convincingly, how listening to Algore and Hansen contribute to serious cases of cranio-rectal insertion syndrome is this story out of the UK
    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article5950442.ece?Submitted=true.
    One of the commenters wondered if emigration would be allowed, or if a more permanent solution was required.

  143. Boudu says:

    I want to change my vote. Having thought about it I think it would be better for Hansen to continue with his demonstrably bad ‘science’ then when the inevitable happens and the AGW fraud is acknowledged by the mainstream media he can be dumped quickly and we can move on. And all those scientists who went along with his nonsense can pretend they knew he was mad all along. Everyone saves face and we can move on to the next crisis. Ocean acidification anyone ?

  144. B Kerr says:

    “Aron (10:37:19) :
    They think they’re making progress…
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7961957.stm

    That is an interesting video clip.
    Martin fighting to put on his frozen clothing.

    I bet Billy Connolly “A Scot in the Arctic” did not have that problem!
    Billy just sang and played his banjo.

    Martin’s clothes look frozen and they look very very cold.
    He has to really fight to get his WWF PARKA on. It shows his name ‘MARTIN’.
    He rubs his hands to warm up, which clearly helps!

    Yet I cannot see his breath.
    In cold weather I am used to seeing clouds of water vapour in my face.
    At -40 F or C, who cares, surely we should see water vapour from Martins breathing? Or is it that cold that the water vapour freezes in the lungs?

    Yet last week they were complaining about their tents icing up with their breathing. Something not right.

    (In the Pinewood Studio film “Oh What a Lovely War”, Richard Attenborough yelled to the actors; “No one can see your breath, rub their hands together to make it look cold”.)

  145. Håkan B says:

    This is totaly insane, EON has been forced to close down two fully functional nuclear reactors at Barsebäck Sweden, mainly due to protests from danish greenes , okey swedish greenes share the responsibility too, but nevertheless, isn’t Hansen a nuclear proponent, EON whould have been glad to build a nuclear plant in GB.

  146. Keith says:

    Hi folks, long time reader, first time poster.

    Like several of the earlier posters, I am a Federal employee. The Hatch Act is surprisingly forgiving, it’s main focus is against PARTISAN political activity. Assuming Dr. Hansen is a member of the Senior Executive Service, he may ATTEND political meetings and rallies, but may not ORGANIZE OR MANAGE them. It is hard to imagine his extremely active participation in the ridiculous DC power plant rally as being mere attendance,
    but there may be a high bar to pass on that one. There are all sorts of piddly specific violations that will get you canned, like wearing a partisan political button, or passing out campaign literature. However, that is more useful for canning low-level clerks who get excited about a family member’s run for city council. Proving that someone “organized or managed” a rally, versus just actively attended…good luck with that.

    He may run into some problems with his constant use of his NASA affiliation to push his agenda. Some people have opined that he is trying to get fired to become a martyr. Possible, but that should have been easier during the Bush years. My guess is that he is unable to control himself now that he is so much in tune with the current President and his appointees. He may be in for a rude awakening though. The Office of Special Counsel investigates Hatch Act violations. Generally speaking, these guys are straight shooters. Even under President Bush, when the OSC under Scott Bloch had a weak reputation, Lurita Doan of GSA was convicted of a Hatch Act violation. She was appointed by President Bus. Guess we’ll see if OSC has to act on the good doctor before too much time has passed.

    Any way, this guy gets way too much air time for a government employee. I am a nobody, and if I transmitted ANYTHING to a reporter without it being cleared by my Public Affairs Office, I’d probably get a suspension and possibly fired. It is galling to see this guy running around like a political appointee. He is clearly speaking opinion rather than science.

  147. UK John says:

    I live and work in Coventry where the Professor was.

    One “fact” he stated on the local televised news was truly amazing!

    The local TV interviewer asked why Professor Hansen wasn’t protesting about all the CO2 emmissions coming from China and India, and was stuck in Coventry! and the Great Man said that the UK was historically responsible for more CO2 emmissions (that were still hanging around in the atmosphere), than the whole of the developing world. The way he had worked this out remained unclear.

    Now I know this silly little country of mine has always punched well above its weight, but that is a truly outstanding “fact”. Isambard Kingdom Brunel would be very proud.

    Of course it could be that the Professor was talking BS

  148. George Patch says:

    What Hansen doesn’t realize is that undemocratic processes run in both directions. While he may think he’ll get a stronger voice going in this direction, he could just as easily lose any voice he ever had.

    The proper thing for him to do is join in the debate, but since he does not want to answer the critics he cries like a child.

  149. crosspatch says:

    I believe the best way to refute the argument is with the “salt house”. Make a “greenhouse” out of glass, make a “greenhouse” out of salt crystal slab. Place a thermometer in each. Maybe even place a pan of water in each one with its own thermometer. Shine a heat light on it.

    Salt is transparent to both visible and infrared. Glass is less transparent to infrared, acts to represent CO2. Now watch the temperature in the salt “house” rise faster and reach a higher temperature. The “greenhouse” with the material less transparent to IR is cooler, not hotter than the one transparent to IR. Now change “land use” by carpeting the floor of the “greenhouses” with different materials … green carpet, grey rock, white rock, black rock, water … see what happens with each.

    Great science fair project.

  150. ….That is why some guy named Al moved nearer the ocean…but..surprinsingly, by some already known “effect” it rapidly cool down, making the PDO change, and, worst than that, provoking earthquakes too.

  151. Mike Ryan says:

    Alan the Brit,

    “A teacher has all the rights in the world to believe whatever he/she wants to believe, BUT, not to bring it into the classroom unless balancing their viewpoint!”

    Quite right, but what happened after 100 pupils in my school were taken to see Age of the Stupid? Was that followed up by a balancing presentation on the case against AGW? What do you reckon?

    On the other hand I wonder what would happen if a teacher told his class that AGW was a myth and just showed his pupils videos of Prof Bob Carter from YouTube?

    Schools are becoming less places of learning and more and more places for indoctrinating children with whatever views the government happens to support.

  152. Aron says:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7959667.stm

    It is part of a much bigger plan: President Obama wants to spend $150bn over 10 years on a massive expansion of renewable energy.
    He says it will cut the country’s dependance on foreign oil, create five “green-collar” jobs and help tackle climate change.

    ;-)

  153. Roger Clague says:

    Luiss Diaz said

    ‘Just because he has a public funded job, and even if you are legally entitled to call for his resignation, still, you should be ashamed of asking for his head because he makes public his views!
    The only way you would be right would be if he was the one responsible to put in practice the policies he advocates ‘

    Luis makes a good point.

    This discussion should not be a personal attack on Hansen. Such attacks are often, rightly ridiculed on this blog.

    The poster is wrong to call for Hansen to be sacked. He should make an official complaint, if he thinks he has a case. He should not use a science blog.

    In my opinion Hansen has not broken the Hatch Act.

    NASA employees are not barred from being ‘active at political rallies and meetings’.

    The 1993 amendment says, It is the policy of the Congress that employees should be encouraged to exercise fully, freely, and without fear of penalty nor reprisal, and to the extent not expressly prohibited by law, their right to participate or to refrain from participating in the political processes of the Nation.

    They may be foolish when doing so, but that is for us to establish with evidence and logic.
    The authoritarian responses to Hansen exercising free speech are as worrying as Hansen’s intolerance of his opponents.

    Get back to the science. It is working. Read the interesting thread about the Alaska volcano explosions.

    No more ‘ad hominem’ attacks please.

  154. maksimovich says:

    M White (11:23:48) :

    The net result was that far less carbon dioxide was absorbed and sent to the sea floor than scientists had anticipated.”

    The experiment was a success.Any scientist who had not “Anticipated” hierarchical predation would be considered an idiot.

    Seawifs captured the bloom here.

    http://oceancolor.gsfc.nasa.gov/FEATURE/IMAGES/A2009045144500.LOHAFEX.chl.jpg

  155. Bill Marsh says:

    Luis,

    “And I am entitled to say that censorship is evil, like it or not..”

    You certainly are entitled to say that and I am entitled to disagree and say it is a misuse of the concept. Freedom of speech works both ways, yes?

    “Mr Marsh, like I said previously, I don’t care if you are legally authorized to push mr Hansen to unemployment because of his views.”

    This is an incorrect statement of my motivations. At no time have I ever stated that he should be fired because of his views. I could care less what he thinks or says. What I would ‘push him to the unemployment lines’ for is not his views, but his behavior in violating his organizations ethics and laws of the US. There’s a difference.

  156. Aron says:

    B Kerr, something is odd about the second video on that BBC article. It’s dark, it’s night and it should be -40C or less yet the reporter is wearing a light jacket, his face is uncovered but normal coloured and there is no vapour when he speaks. He’s not shivering much either. Can someone explain that?

    It’s the second video on this page

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7961957.stm

  157. Ross says:

    Luis Dias (07:49:05) :
    Finally, I don’t mind being “out of line” if that means defending the first amendment.

    The First Amendment does not extend to yelling [falsely] “Fire” in a crowded theater [which many of his statements are equivalent to] nor to inciting the direct harm to another individual – which several of Mr. Hansen’s pronouncements [commandments?] do and all in the name of his very questionable climate models.

  158. Smokey says:

    I have to disagree with Roger Clague, who says it’s his opinion that Hansen hasn’t broken the Hatch Act.

    Well, it’s my opinion that he has, Roger — by not making it clear that he is speaking as a private citizen. He never corrects the numerous British newspaper reports that identify him as head of NASA/GISS.

    And I believe Hansen uses NASA/GISS resources in his travels. Prove me wrong, Roger… oh, that’s right: NASA is completely uncooperative when questions like that are asked by members of the taxpaying public. See, it’s a secret.

    The U.S. government is doing nothing to rein in Hansen. Therefore, they are condoning his vicious attacks on legal, law-abiding, low cost energy providers. By taking no action, they are approving of his politicking as a NASA spokesman.

    If that’s an ‘ad hominem’ attack, Roger, you’ve got some learning to do. It is James Hansen who is guilty of ad hominem attacks.

  159. Bill Marsh says:

    Luis,

    I’d also point out that you haven’t called censorship evil. If you had I might agree. In your posts you’ve applied the term ‘evil’ to Anthony through his post and that usage is what I take issue with.

    You’ve called Anthony’s post evil – “He is not in any sentence calling for an end to democracy, so this is a misleading, obnoxious, evil post.”

    You’ve called his rationale evil – “Do you not see the evil of your rationale?”

    I did a text search of the comments and nowhere did you call censorship evil except in your last reply to me.

  160. AndyS says:

    I don’t suppose Dr. Hanson’s activities here in England will make a lot of difference to the way things work out in the end. We may not lead the world in many areas any more, but our supply of home grown buffoons is still the equal of any. Hanson is just one of a chorus. One thing intrigues me though, does GISS make an adjustment to it’s figures to offset the AGW caused as he jets around the planet or have NASA devloped a glider he can use to visit these shores? Or maybe he is a keen yachtsman. I can’t believe he might be a hypocrit. Can he?

  161. Phil. says:

    Bill Marsh (10:20:52) :
    Phil,

    “NASA’s chief climate scientist is in hot water with colleagues and at least one lawmaker after calling on citizens to engage in civil disobedience at what is being billed as the largest public protest of global warming ever in the United States.” 2/27/09

    Hansen’s testimony in defense of vandalism of a British Coal Plant is, in effect, an endorsement of ‘civil disobedience, of British law.

    He was testifying as an expert witness about climate change and the role of coal in it, at a trial, it takes some rather fancy footwork to construe that as ‘endorsing civil disobedience’! His testimony didn’t even mention the actions of the protestors, by your logic murderers shouldn’t have defense attorneys?

  162. John K. Sutherland says:

    So the Arctic expedition has an extra 5 litres of fuel to burn in their tent. I wonder what the carbon dioxide level in the tent is for them to breath after that. If they burn it too fast, we may not hear further from them. RIP.

  163. Bob Shapiro says:

    A couple of points:
    1. If I were Hansen’s boss, I probably would fire him because of fraudulent activity masquerading as science – in other words for not doing his job.

    However, I would not associate my action with the Hatch Act, which is a “Political Reasons” law. From http://www.osc.gov/ha_fed.htm#may, the Hatch Act says,

    “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:
    o on duty
    o in a government office
    o wearing an official uniform
    o using a government vehicle
    * wear partisan political buttons on duty”

    If Hansen engages in any illegal activity, I could use that as grounds, but just political activity, much as I might despise that activity, is not cause for firing him.

    2. This thread was entirely political – not about science. Many of the entries, on both sides, have ranged from merely illogical to approaching drooling lunacy. It wouldn’t take many more of this type of thread for me to question my desire to continue visiting this site.

  164. Smokey says:

    Aron (12:01:05),

    I watched the video, and you’re right, there is no noticeable vapor being exhaled. This is hard to explain at night, in minus 40° cold.

    Then I watched the first video. What a trooper that guy is! What a tough guy! What a martyr! What a HE-RO!

    OK, that was sarcasm. I couldn’t even finish watching the guy plainly mugging for the camera, struggling like the Three Stooges hanging wallpaper to get his jacket on, when he could have put it in front of the radiant heater for ten minutes and put it on normally.

    This is the first time I’ve tuned in to these jokers. I doubt that I’ll listen to their staged adventure again — unless someone unexpectedly gets eaten by a Polar bear. Now that I’d even pay admission to see!

  165. Pamela Gray says:

    The iron experiment was likely carried out in a warm phase. Plankton blooms and survives because of upwelling cold water filled with nutrients that support plankton growth. It is also very likely that predation is decreased because those very conditions prevent predators from overcoming the plankton growth. Nature has fixed the timing of plankton bloom to control for nutrient availability and predator scarcity. Throwing iron in the ocean does not begin to approach what nature has figured out is the right mix. However, I’ll bet that there will be folks who will claim that oceanic sinks are not nearly what they thought they were and will fix the model to reflect this “new breakthrough” in carbon cycle facts.

    pffft

  166. Aron says:

    You guys might know about this but Ed Milliband tried a bit of Marxist rabble rousing too when he said activists should take their direct action campaigns to different countries. A bit imperialist that I might add. No surprise to see the Guardian is here to inform us…or rouse us.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/dec/08/ed-miliband-climate-politics-environment

    Not long after what appeared to be government support for direct action came a string of protests against development that the British government supports!

    http://thejournal.parker-joseph.co.uk/blog/_archives/2008/12/8/4012567.html

    Since then, after the imprisonment of several animal rights activists, and after a High Court judge condemned direct action, Milliband has shut up about direct action. He must have had his wrists slapped and realised that the interests of some close to government were outweighed by the interests of others even closer to government.

  167. Bill McClure says:

    Jim Hansen what to say? I don’t agree with his theory on climate change. However every event or news article like this one only serve to destroy his reputation among thinking individuals. I say let him get all the attention he is doing a great job of destroying the AGW agenda. More interesting to me is who is protectiong him and why he has been protected for so long.

  168. rephelan says:

    Pamela Gray (08:20:36) :

    Thanks, Pamela, for the link. I have seen those pages before and came to the same conclusion then as now: James Hansen is, unfortunately, not prohibited by the provisions of the Hatch Act from engaging in partisan political activity, while proving (legally speaking, of course) that any of his activities are covered by any of the actions prohibited to employees of his category are slim. Those prohibited activities are :

    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:
    o on duty
    o in a government office
    o wearing an official uniform
    o using a government vehicle
    • wear partisan political buttons on duty

    I believe his activities are unethical, but I don’t see the Hatch Act as applicable. Now, if someone could show he had deliberately misrepresented his data for the purpose of influencing legislation….. but that is what this blog is about, in part, and no one has found that smoking gun.

  169. Aron says:

    Smokey et al,

    He also takes his hands out of his pockets close to the end of the video and reveals that he is wearing fingerless gloves. WTF? Is he made of fire, did he eat lots of Ready Brek, does he defy reality, did he only come out of the tent for a second or was that shot elsewhere?

  170. John Galt says:

    OT: Scientists in possible cold fusion breakthrough

    http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.a67cf72fe27770f9ec992da18169937d.a1&show_article=1

    But does it use carbon fuels?

  171. Smokey (12:05:51) :
    And I believe Hansen uses NASA/GISS resources in his travels. Prove me wrong, Roger… oh, that’s right: NASA is completely uncooperative when questions like that are asked by members of the taxpaying public. See, it’s a secret.

    I can prove you right. Hansen was here in Norway just a few days ago, and met with our Environment Minister Erik Solheim, who exploited the relationship to NASA that Hansen has

    “Jobs at NASA
    Solheim stressed that he is an unusual climate champion, because he is the director of NASA, the U.S. Space program, and is not employed in an environmental protection organization.

    – This gives you extra attention and credibility in many groups who are skeptical to environment activists, said Solheim.”

    http://www.dagbladet.no/2009/03/16/nyheter/miljo/innenriks/klima/regjeringen/5319845/

  172. George E. Smith says:

    “”” M White (11:23:48) :

    OT but remember the attempts to seed the ocean with iron?

    “Setback for climate technical fix”

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7959570.stm

    “But within two weeks, the algae were being eaten by tiny creatures called copepods, which were then in turn eaten by amphipods, a larger type of crustacean.The net result was that far less carbon dioxide was absorbed and sent to the sea floor than scientists had anticipated.”

    Thought it might be of interest. “””

    Well I wouldn’t read to much into that particularly the part:- “far less carbon dioxide was absorbed and sent to the sea floor than scientists had anticipated.”

    I would have said this instead:- “far less carbon dioxide was absorbed and sent to the sea floor than THOSE scientists had anticipated.”

    There’s no mystery to the fact that phytoplankton feeds zooplankton (call them copepods if you like), which in turn feeds larger species and so on up the ocean food chain.

    Part of the oceanic problem has been that badly thought out fishing policies; like scooping up menhaden and other bait fish species to make omega-3 snake oil for unwitting snake oil customers.

    As a result there hasn’t been proper predation on the zooplankton, by one time plentiful bait fishes, so the zoo-plankton (copepods) ate themselves into starvation. (their skeletons are raining down on the decks of the Titanic in one of the most studied ocean columns on earth.

    Of course if you grow more phytoplankton via iron doping; you will get a zooplankton explosion, if you don’t also recover the bait fish species by curbing the omega-3 snake oil mythology.

    The depletion of game fish species by gross overfishing should have left plenty of bait fishes to control the zooplankton populations; but if you have another bunch of idiots scarfing up every bait fish they can get ehri hands on; they not only depress the game fish stocks; but they wreck the rest of the food chain as well.

    So stop with the quack medicine rackets, and the iron doping will work the way it is supposed to; and if those “Scientists” had thought about the whole system, even they would have seen that with the present lack of food chain balance, that their project would yield abnormal results.

    George

  173. Just Want Truth... says:

    Who does James Hansen think he is?

    I sent an email to NASA when James Hansen did the Washington protest. They said that (para) what he does is not necessarily a reflection of NASA policy. But if James Hansen didn’t have the letters N-A-S-A attached to his name NO ONE would pay a bit of attention to him. And there is an unspoken understanding that since the letters N-A-S-A are attached to his name his views ARE NASA’s views.

    Hansen must know this full well. He can’t be so stupid that he doesn’t.

    Hansen abuses his title at NASA. Or maybe this is actually what NASA wants and it’s not an abuse at all.

    This is what is unspoken :

    What Jakes Hansen does is fully agreed upon, and approved, by NASA.

    If this is not the case then NASA had better soon make some public clarifications.

  174. Smokey says:

    Bob Shapiro,

    I agree with you that this one particular thread, unlike almost all the others on WUWT, is about politics. The title refers to the “democratic process.” That isn’t science, that is politics. In fact, it refers to the politicization of science.

    The site owner has exclusive discretion in these matters. And the fact that you also put in your 2¢ worth makes the opinion expressed in your last paragraph moot.

    Since James Hansen’s entire purpose was political, how else should it be addressed? Remember that Hansen has adamantly refused to engage in any real debate over his purported science. The fact that he runs and hides from real debate over the science tells you all you need to know about whether he is speaking as a scientist, or as a politician.

    Someone brought up a good point in a previous comment: a soldier can express himself — but not when in uniform. Hansen never makes it clear that he is speaking as a private individual; instead, he revels in the fact that he is speaking as head of NASA/GISS. He never corrects reporters on this point, and he never issues such a disclaimer prior to giving an interview.

    Suppose that the United States Surgeon General traveled to another country and, speaking as the Surgeon General, began endorsing eugenics. Would that be A-OK?

  175. Bill McClure says:

    Stan (09:16:08) :

    O/T – something has been bothering me for a while. The sun doesn’t have many spots and we know that this corresponds to poor wheat harvests (though not necessarily causes them). As I understand it, both the PDO and NAO have turned negative – how does that correlate to food production? Particularly in the US, Canada and
    I farm. but the best answer to your question who knows. Some of the corn crop in the northern United states is still unharvested because of a late spring and wet fall. We could have a great discussion as to whether that is climate or weather. We will all know more by this fall about your question but don’ make any bets in the futures market on the price of corn,soybeans or wheat. These crops are grown in so many parts of the world even if the world cooled some yields would still meet our needs.

  176. B Kerr says:

    Aron (12:01:05) :

    “B Kerr, something is odd about the second video on that BBC article. It’s dark, it’s night and it should be -40C ”

    He looks as warm as toast.
    Do not think he had problems getting into that PARKA.
    No gloves on when he demonstrates ice pack movement at 00:57 into the video.
    Think I’d have gloves on.

  177. Roger Sowell says:

    Re the Hatch Act:

    “To better understand the Hatch Act in effect today, an understanding of its history is helpful. The Act was first enacted in 1939 out of concerns about the harmful effects of political activities by government workers. The 1939 Act affected only federal employees. A year later the Act was amended in two ways important to this case. First, coverage was extended to state and local employees. That extension was an exercise of Congress’s spending power, as the law was limited to state and local employment “in connection with any activity which is financed in whole or in part by laws or grants made by the United States or any federal agency.” 5 U.S.C. 118k(a) (1958). Second, the 1940 amendments brought District of Columbia employees within the Act’s coverage as federal employees.

    In 1942 the Act was amended again, this time introducing a teacher exception, applicable to teachers in any state, locality, or the District of Columbia. . . . In 1966, the Act was recodified and bifurcated into the two separate chapters of Title 5 where the provisions appear today: (applying to state and local employees) and (applying to federal employees). The recodification did not materially change the law, at least as it pertains to the teacher exception, which was maintained in both new sections. In part, 7324(c) at that time read: “Subsection (a) of this subsection does not apply to an individual employed by an educational or research institution, establishment, agency, or system which is supported in whole or in part by the District of Columbia.” 5 U.S.C. 7324(c) (1970).

    Starting in the mid-seventies, several attempts were made to relax the Act’s prohibitions generally. Those attempts culminated in amendments that were enacted in 1993, which, most significantly, retracted the Act’s prohibition against “tak[ing] an active part in political management or in political campaigns.” Compare id. 7324(a)(2) with 5 U.S.C. 7323(a) (2000). The 1993 amendments also removed the DC teacher exception that had been codified at 7324(c). The rationale for its removal, as pointed out by Briggs and not contested by the government, is unexplained in the legislative history. ”

    source: Briggs v Merit Systems Protection Board (Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, 2003)

    The test used by the US Supreme Court is from Pickering v. Board of Education, 391 U.S. 563 (1968), where “the [Supreme] Court set forth a balancing test between two competing factors: “The problem in any case is to arrive at a balance between the interests of the teacher, as a citizen, in commenting upon matters of public concern and the interest of the State, as an employer, in promoting the efficiency of the public services it performs through its employees.” ”

    Some additional U.S. Supreme Court cases concerning free speech by federal employees on matters of public concern may be found here:

    Rankin v. McPherson, 483 U.S. 378 (1987);
    Connick v. Myers 461 U.S. 138 (1983);
    UNITED STATES v. NATIONAL TREASURY EMPLOYEES UNION, 513 U.S. 454 (1995);
    Perry v. Sindermann, 408 U.S. 593 (1972)

  178. Just Want Truth... says:

    “Bill McClure (12:36:55) : I say let him get all the attention he is doing a great job of destroying the AGW agenda.”

    As long a ‘NASA’ is attached to his name AGW is not being harmed. It is only being helped.

    NASA MUST KNOW THIS FULL WELL

  179. DaveCF says:

    Another Canadian ex-government type piping in. No ‘Hatch Act’ up here in the frozen wasteland, but we do have rules regarding misuse of position and government property. Hansen wrote to Australia on (reportedly) NASA letterhead and that becomes theft of government property if used for private purposes, whatever country. Yup, misuse of a single sheet of paper is “theft under $5000″. I’m old enough to remember the bilingual slogan “Misuse is abuse/Mauvaise usage, c’est gaspillage”. I agree that firing Hansen would be counterproductive, but he could well qualify for demotion or a substantial fine. Then there is the issue of his performance and the accuracy of his predictions. Altogether, it appears to be a sad end to a scientific career that veered off the rails and into advocacy.

  180. Manfred says:

    how can we expect to receive any unbiased research or data from a person with such extremist views ?

  181. Jeff Id says:

    Money certainly is getting more votes. Without money this whole AGW extremist push wouldn’t exist and we would be having reasonable discussion of true warming amounts and effects rather than the obviously exaggerated rubbish spouted by Hansen.

  182. Roger Clague says:

    Smokey,

    Hansen is free to speak at a political meeting as the head of Nasa/GISS. It is a space research institute. He does not have anything to do with power generation. We are free to ignore or oppose him.

    Politicking is good, that is what this thread is. Hansen is not a spokesman for NASA
    If you think he is breaking the law then make a complaint. Don’t you think he checked his activities with NASA lawyers? Don’t you think he can afford a trip to UK?

    Is the US government condoning vicious attacks? Lighten up; ridicule is more effective and more fun.

    Ross

    Britain is not like a crowded theatre. We are not about to stampede anywhere. We are a mature, but flawed, democracy.
    Karl Marx, a German social scientist, researched and unsuccessfully advocted his extreme views in London in the 19th century.

  183. Stephen Brown says:

    More prattle from one of our so-called ‘politicians’ about Climate Change. Imagine, we have to put up with this sort of rubbish on a daily basis in our newspapers here in the UK. Please would the USA keep its home-grown agitators at home?

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/mar/24/wind-farms-opposition-ed-miliband

  184. Just Want Truth... says:

    “A different William (07:28:55) : “the democratic process doesn’t seem to be working” just means “you plebians aren’t agreeing with me” ”

    I was thinking something exaxctly along the same lines.

    He wants our minds to be as small as his.

  185. Aron (12:43:08) :
    Smokey et al,
    He also takes his hands out of his pockets close to the end of the video and reveals that he is wearing fingerless gloves. WTF? Is he made of fire, did he eat lots of Ready Brek, does he defy reality, did he only come out of the tent for a second or was that shot elsewhere?

    Maybe it is just after burning the 5L fuel, resulting in a CO2 cloud causing very strong positive feedback…. ?

    :-)

  186. CodeTech says:

    Regarding the polar trekkers:

    -40c with wind chill is pretty much meaningless. It could just as well be -10c with a lot of wind, or -38c with hardly any. Wind chill is not part of temperature, it is a subjective measure. If you’re in a tent with the wind blocked, and it’s only -10C, your little heater is going to keep you above visible-breath temperature.

    Regarding Hansen:

    I still say he should be fired, simply for the black mark is has given and is giving to NASA. My own personal opinion of NASA has dropped considerably since I’ve been watching this man’s antics, mostly just because I know that where an organization suffers one, they will suffer many. How many more are there like him there? Maybe they didn’t need to fix the o-ring problem because of global warming (ie. no more cold nights before launch day). Maybe insulation is falling off the external tank because of global warming (although, that one is closer to the truth).

  187. Dave Wendt says:

    Phil. (12:17:30) :

    He was testifying as an expert witness about climate change and the role of coal in it, at a trial, it takes some rather fancy footwork to construe that as ‘endorsing civil disobedience’! His testimony didn’t even mention the actions of the protestors, by your logic murderers shouldn’t have defense attorneys?

    The key element of the defense presented by the accused vandals was that their criminal conduct was justified by the impending doom of AGW. Mr. Hansen testified, knowingly in support of the notion that his “scientific” conclusions override the rights of anyone who disagrees with him to free from criminal mischief, or worse. You seem to think that is a defensible position. I, and I think most people capable of reason, do not.

  188. Retired BChE says:

    The Guardian may be one-sided in its opinions, but at last there is a partial break in the MSM. Last Sunday the Tampa Tribune had a major article by Bjorn Lomborg on the front page of its section called “Views”. The title was, “COAL IS STILL KING OF THE HILL”. He does not dispute the AGW views on CO2, but points out that renewable energy amounts to only about 0.5% of the world’s energy demand, and that wind power is phenomenally more expensive than coal-based. The last paragraph reads as follows: “Coal contributes strongly to global warming, but no amount of political theater can alter the inescapable fact that it also provides benefits that we cannot yet replicate with renewable energy. Braving arrest with Hollywood stars is a diversion. Declaring victory over global warming will take a lot more pragmatism and a lot more work.” Lomborg is stated to be the director of the Copenhagen Consensus Center, and author of “The Skeptical Environmentalist.” I sent an email to the paper applauding their publishing the article, but adding that 800 scientists at the recent meeting in New York disputed the idea that CO2 causes significant global warming, and that water vapor is the main greenhouse gas, not CO2.

  189. Wondering Aloud says:

    Funny and ironic a man who owes all of his fame, influence, and most of his personal wealth to scaremongering; complaining about money influencing the issue. It sure does, if not for the scare stories and the government funding that requires more scarry stories to keep the money flowing this entire AGW story would have been filed in the historical humor sections long ago.

    Here we do see him showing his true colors, a fascist, who puts his political agenda not only ahead of science but ahead of the lives of people everywhere.

  190. janama says:

    I voted no – one of only 40 so far. Freedom of speech is more important than whether or not Dr Hansen is doing right or wrong by protesting. If he is denied his right to protest, then so are all government employees and so am I were I one.

    Now – had Anthony added the option “should he be fired for incompetent handling of and manipulation of public data” I might have reconsidered.

  191. Bruce Cobb says:

    Roger Clague, James Hansen is abusing his position at NASA and notoriety as an expert on climate science to promulgate what can only be deemed as political actions.
    Whatever abuse he receives in this case is well-deserved, and as such, not ad hominem in nature. The highly political side to this debate can not simply be ignored, and to suggest otherwise is simply being disingenuous on your part.
    It is perfectly legitimate to call for him to be sacked. He has abused his position for far too long now, and we pay his salary. His objectivity as a scientist is questionable at best, and IMHO, in addition to him being fired there should be an investigation of possible malfeasance on his part.

  192. BarryW says:

    This is from the Office of Special Counsel Handout on the Hatch Act.

    May not use their official authority or influence to interfere with an election
    • May not solicit, accept or receive political contributions unless both individuals are members of the same federal labor organization or employee organization and the one solicited is not a subordinate employee
    • May not knowingly solicit or discourage the political activity of any person who has business before the agency
    • May not engage in political activity while on duty
    • May not engage in political activity in any government office

  193. JimB says:

    “The democratic process is supposed to be one person one vote, but it turns out that money is talking louder than the votes. So, I’m not surprised that people are getting frustrated. I think that peaceful demonstration is not out of order, because we’re running out of time.”

    I’m going to have to search for the report that mentioned this, but I recall recently reading (maybe on WUWT) that there were 4 green lobbyist for every congressperson on the hill.

    And btw?…I agree. The process ISN’T working, otherwise, the global warming issue would be dead and buried.

    JimB

  194. Mike D. says:

    Here’s how it goes down in the USA, Luis. Hansen works for me; I don’t work for him. I pay his salary; he doesn’t pay mine. He is a public servant, I am the public. Get it? Hansen servant, me master.

    Nobody has a right to a government job. Every government employee ought to be subject to firing in a heartbeat if the public wearies of them.

    Hansen advocates lawbreaking (civil disobedience) while pocketing my money, paid to him in compliance with the law. So which is it? Rule of law or anarchy? If he despairs of the law, he can try to change it, but by breaking the law he sunders his protection under it.

    We tolerate dissent here better than any country in the history of the world. But that doesn’t mean dissenters get to slop at the public trough. To my knowledge nobody else in the public employ is engaging in civil disobedience in foreign countries. Hansen is special that way, and he should be canned forthwith because of it.

  195. Just Want Truth... says:

    As I’m reading comments I can see some are thinking James Hansen is acting upon some brilliant plan that will end in him being fired and then viewed as a martyr.

    Winters have been too cold and long all across the world, both in the Northern and Southern Hemispheres. There has been record cold, some of it severe record cold, happening the last two years. Half of the population are already questioning global warming, some are even making jokes about it. The other half must be having feelings of uncertainty too.

    James Hansen getting let go from NASA would not be viewed as martyrdom.

    If the earth was warming, if there was reports of record heat, some of it severe record heat, then if NASA had let Hansen go for his global warming views–that would be martyrdom–THAT ISN”T GOING TO HAPPEN.

  196. Steven Hill says:

    I have seen no proof that Hansen is correct, it’s just propaganda based on an opinion.

    Why are people not enraged that the US is still in Iraq? I am sick of double standards.

    Hansen and Obama are frauds in my opinion

    Now, there’s some freedom of speech for you.

  197. Craig Loehle says:

    Some people here seem unfamiliar with the Hatch Act. It was enacted because politicians at all levels were ordering civil servants under their jurisdiction to act as campaign workers (among other problems). On the Hatch Act from Wikipedia:
    The original Act forbids intimidation or bribery of voters and restricted political campaign activities by federal employees. It prohibits using any public funds designated for relief or public works for electoral purposes. It also forbids officials paid with federal funds from using promises of jobs, promotion, financial assistance, contracts, or any other benefit to coerce campaign contributions or political support.

    The most restrictive measure was brought about by Republicans in the Senate. It dictates that persons below the policymaking level in the executive branch of the federal government must not only refrain from political practices that would be illegal for any citizen but must abstain from “any active part” in political campaigns.

  198. Roger Knights says:

    michel (08:41:37) wrote:
    “A year or so ago a group of American teenage virgins, or at least alleged virgins, took it into their heads to fly over to the UK to promote more chastity and sexual restraint here.

    “Some of us looked at what has become a rather familiar spectacle over the years, and wondered why they did not stay at home, promote chastity there, and when they had done that successfully, come over again and tell us about it.

    “Some of us wondered idly why people living in the US thought they had anything to teach the UK about chastity. Chastity seemed to be in singularly short supply there,”

    They should have flown where they were needed: Mt. Redoubt!

  199. Just Want Truth... says:

    Roger Sowell (12:48:26) :

    Thank you Roger for the post! It’s good to see some applications of it.

    Could you translate it into english for those who got lost while reading it, just something simple :

    Is James Hansen violating the Hatch Act or not?

  200. JimB says:

    “The more important reason he should be sacked is if it can be shown that he has manipulated the temperature record?”

    We know he’s manipulated the record. He just won’t tell anyone HOW.

    And yes, he should be fired for that, TOO. He’s being paid by me to do science. Science by it’s very nature needs to be transparent. He is breaking this fundamental law, and he’s doing it on my dime.

    JimB

  201. Tim Clark says:

    Pamela Gray (08:19:00) :
    My hunch is that as with weather pattern variation, level heads will prevail. Exactly what in the Hatch Act is his behavior violating? It seems a good opportunity to discuss this act.

    From the Hatch Act:

    (d) Participate fully in public affairs,
    except as prohibited by other Federal
    law, in a manner which does not compromise
    his or her efficiency or integrity
    as an employee or the neutrality,
    efficiency, or integrity of the agency or
    instrumentality of the United States
    Government or the District of Columbia
    Government in which he or she is
    employed.

    How about that?

    Or from the Dept. of Commerce:

    You may not participate as a Government official in a matter that will
    have a direct and predictable effect on your financial interests; on the financial interests of your spouse, minor children, household members, general partners, outside employers, or prospective employers; or on the financial interests of an organization in which you serve as a trustee, officer, or board member. This includes a matter that affects a company in which you own stock.

    Does he own stock in any Green Company or nuclear firm (as opposed to bad carbon)?

  202. Cold Play says:

    michel (08:41:37) : Posted :-

    A year or so ago a group of American teenage virgins, or at least alleged virgins, took it into their heads to fly over to the UK to promote more chastity and sexual restraint here. Why do I get all the good news too late?
    End of post
    MMMM???

    A year later a white middle class guy who didn’t attend the ICCC flew over to the uk to send us all to sleep.

    Maybe he should be deported from the UK, but please don’t campaign for his dismissal because then he will have more free time to travel to the UK.

    Also he keeps telling us things will happen in ten years, Charlie Windos says 100 months the government says 20 years. Those guys who watch the ice bet it would all disappear next year.

    Maybe those virgins would like to revisit and come and look at the fairies at the bottom of my garden.

  203. superDBA says:

    Perhaps it’s not best to fire him, but a long term study of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet might be in order. Oh, and I’m sorry, but there is no budget for radios or satellite phones or the like, but we will send a dog team out once a month with some WWII era C rations (I recommend the B1-A units!) but there won’t be any room to carry mail back.
    Oh, and we’re going to have to give his database to an administrator without an agenda. The new administrator will have to supply not only the raw-RAW data but supporting data in an unmodified form so that the users can perform and defend their own “adjustments”. It’s only fair.
    Looking forward to seeing the results of his study when he returns in oh… 50 years or so.

  204. JimB says:

    “Pamela Gray (08:34:17) :

    I am having a difficult time uncovering exactly which part of the Hatch Act this guy is in violation of. While being a federal employee, he can participate in political events and activities but not while on duty. If he is on personal leave, he can do what he appears to want to do unless I am misreading the revised act.”

    Have to say I agree with Pamela here. I just read what I believe are the applicable sections, and I’m not sure what line he crossed, unless you say that because of his position, he’s always “on”, or working?

    JimB

  205. B Kerr says:

    janama (13:04:16) :

    “Freedom of speech is more important…”

    Agreed whole heartedly.
    I will defend Dr Hansen’s right to his views and freedom of free speech.
    I most certainly do not agree with him but I will defend his right to have those views.

    Will he defend my right to my views?
    Or would he prefer that I was in the Haig Court to be judged for Crimes Against Humanity?

  206. Roger Knights says:

    jorgekafkazar (09:47:44) quoted wikipedia:
    “(A) Messiah complex is a state in which the individual believes themselves to be, or destined to become, the saviour of the particular field, a group, an event, a time period, or in an extreme scenario, the world.”

    Mencken phrased it better: “the messianic delusion.

    There’s a well known book, Malignant Self Love: Narcissism Revisited by Sam Vaknin, in which this world-saving delusion is linked to narcissism.

  207. Steven Hill says:

    New Al Gore book coming this fall
    1 hour ago

    NEW YORK (AP) — Nobel laureate’s Al Gore’s follow-up to his best-selling “An Inconvenient Truth,” originally planned for last spring, is coming out this fall with a new title.

    Publisher Rodale Books announced Tuesday that the former vice president’s book, “Our Choice,” will be released in November, printed on 100 percent recycled paper. The book, which proposes solutions to the global warming crisis documented in “Inconvenient Truth,” was called “The Path to Survival” when first announced two years ago.

    “An Inconvenient Truth” was published in 2006 and was a companion book to the Academy Award-winning documentary of the same name.

  208. Public officials issuing “official” sunspots numbers, officially adjusted data…
    The trouble here is the word “public”, if changed to “private” things would be totally different.

  209. B Kerr says:

    Cold Play (13:22:35) :

    “Maybe he should be deported from the UK, but please don’t campaign for his dismissal because then he will have more free time to travel to the UK.”

    Listen, when real trouble makers are on there way here to the UK our Government acts with speed. Real criminals do not even get in. So there!!

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/celebritynews/2159979/Martha-Stewart-refused-entry-to-the-UK.html

    That sorted her out!

    Makes you wonder.

  210. Aron says:

    Messiah complex is a state in which the individual believes themselves to be, or destined to become, the saviour of the particular field, a group, an event, a time period, or in an extreme scenario, the world.”

    Note that radicals who suffer from a Messianic Complex and propose authoritarian solutions for saving the world also advocate facial hair.

    Example 1
    Example 2
    Example 3

    What is the facial hair thing about? Scaring children so they’re easier to indoctrinate? ;-p

  211. Steven Hill :
    ““Our Choice,” will be released in November, printed on 100 percent recycled paper.”
    Filthy indeed… I told you he was going to do something tremendous just before the coming summer…really goreful. (Remembers me of H.P.Lovecraft’s “Cthulu Myths”….)

  212. Smokey says:

    …the former vice president’s book, “Our Choice,” will be… printed on 100 percent recycled paper.

    Does 100% recycled paper surely makes up for the excessive waste that the former Vice President emits? It sounds more like what a hypocrite would brag about: click

    Al Gore is a genuine scoundrel. Like Elmer Gantry, but without Gantry’s redeeming qualities.

    If Al Gore actually believed what he is selling, then he would be a traitor to the human race for his private plane flights, his five mansions, and — like the UN/IPCC partying on white wine, brie and lobster at the Bali climate conference — his profligate waste of resources [Gore's utility bill is more than 10X the average American's. But he's special].

    Simply put, Al doesn’t believe what he’s selling. He still has a big stake in Occidental Petroleum, so he is contributing to enormous amounts of CO2 being emitted into the atmosphere.

    If Gore believed what he’s saying, he would lead the way by example. And if Gore’s followers believed what Al is selling, they would be after him with torches and pitchforks for selling out humanity.

    But they all know Al is selling a pig in a poke. Other folks are beginning to understand it, too.

  213. Bob Shapiro says:

    Smokey:

    I absolutely agree with you that Anthony, as owner, may post whatever he chooses. And, the political nature of the article would not have been off-putting to me had it not been for the large number of nasty posts (on both sides).

    I merely was trying to be a good customer of this site. A good customer makes a complaint, which he hopes can be addressed. A bad customer just walks away from your business without an explanation… or even a clue that there was a problem.

  214. Chris R says:

    To ,

    Anthony already provided the rationale. This man is going far beyond the terms of his employment! There is a reason why Federal government employees are barred from explicitly taking part in political activities–it’s because their privileged position allows them too much power if they do.

    Dr. Hansen is perfectly within his rights as a PRIVATE CITIZEN to say anything he wants. When he is speaking as a FEDERAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE, he is subject to limitations. The Hatch Act specifically prohibits employees who are Senior Executive Service (SES) from taking part in partisan politcal activity. I am sure Dr. Hansen is in the SES pay grades; he would have been briefed about what was and was not permissible when promoted.

  215. Ray says:

    That’s a great picture of him… his head is in the clouds.

  216. Dodgy Geezer says:

    “So, the democratic process isn’t working?…… very funny considering the Scientific Method hasn’t been working in his lab either….” Layne

    Yes. When doing science (which is an elite process) the warmers claim it should be democratic, and we should go by the votes of ‘the majority’ of scientists. When doing politics (which should be democratic) they claim it ought to be elite, and the world must listen to them.

    Should we be surprised that when it’s getting colder they claim it’s really starting to heat up…?

  217. Ken Hall says:

    Luis Dias (08:08:28) :

    I, for one, am delighted that you value the first amendment rights to free speech and clearly and willingly demonstrate your right to free speech with your posts.

    I only wish the AGW alarmist community was likewise inclined. The leaders of this community not only want to prevent and shut down free-speech and the debate and any and all contradictory hypothesis, evidence, arguments etc… But they have also spoken many times in different forums of their desire to reduce the human population by nine-tenths. This goes far beyond free-speech. They want to remove the American right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness altogether, on a GLOBAL scale.

    I can link to a long list of quotes if you like to support this assertion, but you may find it more believable IF you researched this yourself.

    As for whether Dr Hansen should be fired for his ‘personal’ beliefs? Well, If I advocated publicly against my employer in the way he does against his, I would be fired. This is NOT an attack on his personal beliefs, nor his right to express them. Merely an opinion on whether he should be allowed to instigate and incite direct action against his own employer.

    If he REALLY believes what he prophesises, then why does he continue to agree to be employed by the one organisation that has the largest carbon footprint on the entire PLANET? That would be the American Government.

    The Military component of the American Government (including the contribution by directly hired private military and defence contractors) alone has a greater carbon footprint than most nations. NASA is heavily involved in the military and with military defence contractors. How, therefore, can such a leading advocate of AGW take payment from the worst offenders, the biggest polluters, the most evil of all the carbon producers on earth? Surely, as a matter of conscience, he should resign in protest at them? Anything less is utter hypocrisy of the worst kind.

    I also take great exception to being lectured on carbon abuse by a man whose own carbon footprint is at least 1000 times greater than my own. I have not flown at all in 5 years, How many times has Dr. Hansen boarded an aircraft during that time? I also have a small home and live 15 minutes walk from where I work. Dr Hansen produces and wastes far more carbon than I and he has the gall to lecture on carbon usage!

    I cannot see any reason for him to keep his job.

  218. Roger Knights says:

    I wrote:
    “There’s a well known book, Malignant Self Love: Narcissism Revisited by Sam Vaknin, in which this world-saving delusion is linked to narcissism.”

    That was too broad. Messianism is tinged with narcissism when it is associated with grandiosity and grandstanding (attention-seeking).

  219. Leon Brozyna says:

    Perhaps what the good doctor is upset about is the fact that the democratic process works only too well and all us stupid peasants refuse to swallow the kool-aid he’s dispensing.

    Fire him so he can join up with Gore for a world tag-team tour and hand over the reains to a statistician.

  220. Louis Hissink says:

    Quite frankly I think Hansen believes the Venus CO2 model and fears we will end up like that planet if we don’t curb our CO2 emissions.

    The only way to kill this whole scam is to kill the runaway greenhouse on Venus hypothesis.

    Maybe then Hansen will change his mind.

  221. Roger Sowell says:

    @Just Want Truth… (13:20:26) :

    Roger Sowell (12:48:26) :

    “Thank you Roger for the post! It’s good to see some applications of it.

    Could you translate it into english for those who got lost while reading it, just something simple :

    Is James Hansen violating the Hatch Act or not?”

    I suspect that Dr. Hansen is not in violation of the Hatch Act.

    The amount of press devoted to his activities and speeches, and the calls for his dismissal lead me to believe that if he could have been found in violation of the Hatch Act, he would have been by now.

    The key issue is whether his topic is a matter of “public concern.” The constitution gives special consideration to speech about matters of public concern. All citizens, including public employees, have the First Amendment right to speak out on matters of public concern. Global warming or climate change has very likely become a matter of public concern (and that may be the understatement of the year).

    In New York Times v Sullivan (a famous case on Free Speech from 1964), the Supreme Court said “[D]ebate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open, and . . . may well include vehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials.”

    The Court also said, “statements criticizing public policy and the implementation of it must be . . . protected. ” (this was from a different case, Bond v Floyd, in 1966)

    This supports the view that debate on matters of public concern, or public issues, is so important that even strong attacks on government and public officials are allowed.

    It appears to me that Dr. Hansen’s statements match the bits on “statements criticizing public policy,” and “vehement, caustic, and unpleasantly sharp attacks on government…”

    One appropriate response to the speeches or writings by Dr. Hansen is what we see here on WUWT, more free speech either opposing or defending his views.

    Other appropriate responses are to make speeches, write letters to leading newspapers, send emails to friends and colleagues, leave comments on news articles, participate in public protests (peaceful, and with permits where required), stand on a street corner with a sign, hand out leaflets, wear clothes with slogans on them, even make and post short videos on public video sites such as youtube. All of these are protected forms of Free Speech.

    The Constitution was written with the concept that all views are welcome in the marketplace of ideas, and that marketplace would sort out the good from the bad. A little public ridicule is allowed, also.

    The worst thing we could have is censorship of opinions on public matters, or even what the Court refers to as “a chilling effect on Free Speech.” The chilling effect occurs when a person hesitates to speak out for fear of reprisal, such as losing his/her job.

    The marketplace of ideas is supposed to laugh at persons with laughable ideas, and applaud persons whose ideas have merit and are supported by facts.

    Each of us plays a role in the marketplace of ideas, and we can laugh at or applaud those ideas as we see fit. Or, we can bring forth topics for debate.

  222. cormac says:

    Does even one reader of this blog ever wonder if Hansen is actually right?
    i.e. wonder whether his alarm stems from a correct interpretation of the available data, as a professional scientist in the area?
    It’s not impossible – and his is not a lone voice. I read the comments on this blog from time to time, and thank my lucky stars that the science in my own area (Big Bang cosmology) can be quietly debated amongst neutral professionals…

  223. Ken Hall says:

    Well I am heartened by the fact that more people will willingly pay good money to listen to David Icke talk for seven hours (about his theories on the global elite being reptilian alien hybrids), without any mainstream media publicity at all before hand, than will turn up to protest for free alongside Dr Hansen despite many thousands of pounds worth of free mainstream media publicity beforehand.

    When Dr Hansen cannot draw crowds like David Icke, despite the media’s best efforts, then he must know that his hypothesis is unsupportable by observational empirical evidence and the public KNOW IT.

  224. Allen63 says:

    I think it would be a big mistake to call for Hansen’s dismissal. To do so admits that he is effective. Moreover, it calls to question one’s own motives.

    Rather, let his “over the top” publicity stunts and remarks serve to define the pro-AGW camp. Continue to point out his scientific foibles. But, don’t try any direct efforts against the man — just his ideas.

  225. Rod Smith says:

    Maybe I missed something, but isn’t Hansen, acting as a U.S. Government employee, injecting himself the the political processes of a foreign country.

    This probably has nothing to do with the Hatch Act, but it is surely poor judgement, and likely prohibited by some U.S. law or other.

    Can anyone here argue that this is proper conduct?

  226. Justin Sane says:

    Why can’t the politicians ever see that those that mobilize, write letters, protest etc. are actually the minority. What you see is their entire forces, whereas us silent majority are always overlooked because we refuse to protest. As for democracy I think he has the situation completely backwards. Just where does this clown get the money, and time off to participate in all this insurrection?

  227. Stephen Brown says:

    OMG!
    Have you seen this obscene site?

    http://www.optimumpopulation.org/

    Liebensraum anyone?

  228. Robinson says:

    I think some of you should be more circumspect. Obama spending billions on new forms of energy is GOOD. Why? Because we send over a trillion dollars a year overseas to some pretty distasteful regimes. Sure, they give us the money back (buying our treasury bonds), but we are in debt to them and that’s not good.

    Now, continue arguing that AGW is a load of tripe (as I do), but do so not because you are “pro-oil”, but because you are “pro public trust in the scientific process”.

  229. Just Want Truth... says:

    “Keith (11:31:36) : The Office of Special Counsel investigates Hatch Act violations”

    Can complaints be sent to this office?

  230. DR says:

    Roy Spencer left NASA for the very same reason Hansen should…..

  231. Pkatt says:

    I have to admit..
    http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/razingappalachia/mtop.html
    http://science.nationalgeographic.com/science/enlarge/strip-mine.html

    I am against that as well. However, cap and trade will not stop these practices. They are not intended to clean up or stop anything. They are intended to tax us. I think Hansen’s Koolaid might be wearing off and he is starting to realize that the gov has no intention of making the Star Trek future Im sure he dreams of. I think its sadly humorous that we find ourselves in the same boat, for completely different reasons. The time and effort spent to propagate AWG could have been spent to clean up stuff like this, and worse.

    If Hansen is taking vacation and protesting, then its free speech. However since he is using his NASA credentials to further his agenda, which he freely admits to at his columbia.edu site.. then its time for him to go. Im curious though.. who employs him Columbia U, or Nasa .. or both?? Second question. Whose dime was he on for these trips to protest?

    http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2007/20070723_OldKingCoalII.pdf

    A sample

  232. Mac says:

    “The democratic process is supposed to be one person one vote, but it turns out that money is talking louder than the votes. So, I’m not surprised that people are getting frustrated. I think that peaceful demonstration is not out of order, because we’re running out of time.”

    Translation

    People aren’t listening to me. I’m so important and I tell people there is global warming and show it every month in my monthly reports. Why aren’t people listening to me. I’m NASA for crying out loud. Listen to me please. Make me feel bigger than i am!

  233. Ian says:

    Too much focus on the Hatch Act. Look at it this way. If an employee of Exxon was actively lobbying against the actions of Exxon should Exxon be able to fire her, or would people say this is a violation of free speech? If you worked for coke and you spoke on television about how coke was poison … Well that’s free speech right … so you shouldn’t be fired? Ridiculous of course! Of course you can and should be fired. You won’t be locked up fro your opinion, but having a job is not a right.

    So same with Mr. Hansen. He is being overly political (can there be doubt about this … seriously??) It doesn’t matter if he is being non-partisan … he inappropriately using his position for political adovocacy that conflicts with his work where objectivity is ‘supposedly’ required … THAT IS ENOUGH. There would be no debate if he worked for a private company? Why is the fact that he is a public employee different? If he worked as an executive for Ford and the ‘Board’ or the ‘shareholders’ considered his advocacy inappropriate .. that is grounds for dismissal. Having a job is not a ‘right’ … you ‘can’ say whatever you want, but you also ‘can’ be fired for saying it … that is soo obvious (at least to people who work in the private sector anyways!!) that it is embarassing to have to point this out to the likes of Luis.

    By the way … Anthony has a right to free speech too, right? How is calling for someone’s dismissal evil? You mean all those people who called for the impeachment of George Bush were evil? Who knew … I just thought they were excersizing their free speech, or does free speech only go in one direction .. i.e. the one you want it to?

    Anthony can do and say whatever he likes. Its his blog. I don’t understand how you can’t see the contradiction in condemning him for using his right to free speech?!?!?

  234. I would suggest to recycle back the new Al´s book ““Our Choice,” (without reading it, of course) by turning it into liquid, in a first step, or else, into cellulose microfibers, in a second step.
    Details at:
    http://www.giurfa.com/microfiber.pdf

  235. mikef says:

    Guys….whenever we talk about this (we…sorry, ‘you’…I’m a newbie!) it all comes down to this simple fact…
    Does the CO2 emitted by us make a diff to temps/climate?

    Everything else is distraction/socio/political/philosphy…which we humans choose to value as our own personal ideals so we will never agree.
    So….I’m kinda with Jo Nova a bit on this. Just state the facts. So Hanson should be countered with fact, not emotion.

    Of course, Hanson may be right, but it looks unlikely as Josh Willis gets pushed ever closer to admitting the oceans have been cooling.

    Now my question, which I hope someone can tell me…
    We know that CO2 is now 380ppm and 100 years ago it was 280ppm give or take a ppm.
    So…the clincher is, how much of that 100ppm increase is ours, how much is natural. If its all human, then Hanson may be on to something. If our contribution to the INCREASE is tiny, then that is the fact to keep throwing around (although I believe that the lower CO2% amount grabs more heat from the sun – as the % goes up it cannot grab any more…is that the right laymans way of understanding it?).

    Has anyone done the math (beyond me I’m afraid!)

  236. david elder says:

    Don’t worry Mr Hansen, democracy is already dead. The Religious Right has overthrown it and the US constitution and replaced it with a theocracy. Beheadings for adultery are only a matter of time. You can see this sinister trend in the entire voting pattern of the US since 2006. Or so we keep hearing down here in Australia from the sages of America. Well, maybe Hansen’s brand of surrogate religion will go very well with this new world order . . .

  237. geophys55 says:

    “Tim Conway, perhaps, William, but I’m seeing shades of the late Don Knotts in the fist shaking…”

    Now, cut it out, you guys! I got way to much respect for both Conway and Knotts to see either playing Hansen. They always played good-natured duffuses who wouldn’t hurt a fly or say a bad word about anybody.

    However, he does kinda remind me of the Picard-clone in Star Trek Nemesis. Whaddayathinkothat?

  238. Just Want Truth... says:

    ” Steven Hill (13:40:11) :

    New Al Gore book … follow-up to his best-selling “An Inconvenient Truth,”… “Our Choice,” ”

    If he makes another movie will it look like this?

    YouTube video :

  239. kurt says:

    After skimming through the Hatch Act and the agency regulations promulgated under it, there does not seem to be any issue raised by Hansen’s statements/protests. The Hatch Act forbids partisan political activity by some federal employees, which is narrowly defined to include only activities directed to assist a person or party when running for office. In other words, the protests/speeches by Hansen are not considered to be “political activity” as meant by the Hatch Act. In fact, the regulations expressly state that federal employees may engage in advocacy regarding “nonpartisan” (i.e. not associated with a candidate or political party) political or social issues, which is what the global warming issue is.

    Someone above quoted a regulation stating that an employee may participate fully in public affairs in a manner that does not compromise the integrity of either them or the agency that they are employed by. This regulation is not really relevant as it does not proscribe any activity; to the contrary, it states what is permissible. You can’t take a regulation like that and impose a reverse regulation that proscribes participating in public affairs in a manner that is alleged to compromise their integrity, or that of their employer agency, when there is no actual regulation that expressly forbids that conduct.

    Don’t read this as an endorsement of Hansen’s activities. I think the guy is a loose canon that hasn’t a shred of objectivity regarding the influence of CO2 on climate. The guy insults our intelligence with grandiose claims that he fully understands how the world actually works to the point of, not only being able to determine that the world has “tipping points” that can’t be recovered from, but is able to calculate precisely where these tipping points occur, and by the way, don’t bother asking for actual proof of this ability – we should just accept that he’s inbued with a sufficient intellect that his word on the matter is golden.

  240. John F. Hultquist says:

    Roy (11:00:58) : “torrid” Love this! Folks, if you missed it — go back.

    UK John (11:38:29) UK’s CO2: Hansen thinks it hangs around 200 years.
    That’s not even close, but the real number is hard to get.

    Bill McClure (12:47:35) : implication of food production:
    Solar Cycle 24: Implications for the United States by Archibald (2008)
    If it gets as cold as Archibald thinks it will, Canadian wheat farmers are in trouble. This was on the web – can’t locate it now:

    janama (13:04:16) : “freedom of speech”
    FOS isn’t being questioned. The issue is: Has Hansen as a scientist and administrator gone beyond a “fuzzy” line the folks on this thread can’t seem to agree on. Further, freedom of speech works both ways. I (and others) can claim it is shameful that NASA has lost stature as a scientific organization because of Hansen and that AGW is false – but he thinks we are treasonous for getting in his way.

    who? I lost track of where this was mentioned
    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article5950442.ece?Submitted=true
    “JONATHON PORRITT, one of Gordon Brown’s leading green advisers, is to warn that Britain must drastically reduce its population if it is to build a sustainable society.”
    Britain’s population now: 61 m
    projected in 2031: 71 m
    Desired population 30 m
    If you want to get to 30 while adding 10 you will have to get rid of 41 million people in 22 years. Thus, there are 1,863,636 that will have to die, leave, or be shot each year. Leaving doesn’t do any good, it just moves the problem elsewhere. So assume one-half die. That gives 931,818 people that need to be removed. That is about 2,550 per day disappearing – via a new government agency. Now there’s a program everyone will get behind!

  241. Aron says:

    I think many are missing the point that if outlets like the Guardian entertain a man like Hansen then naturally he’ll go from bad to worse because the media isn’t critical of him. They use him to get their scary stories, but he isn’t quite aware of how he has been used, abused and made worse.

    The Guardian should be taken to task for being an agitating and divisive influence. Their journalists frequently, daily, make huge errors in reporting scientific issues and even more regularly side with political groups who openly advocate the destruction of a free society.

    Just look at their front page right now. They’re siding with Hamas and claiming that Israelis use Palestinians as human shields. Shouldn’t the Guardian be criticising Hamas for not only indoctrinating children in racism and suicide but also using civilians as shields for many many years? Or is the Guardian just like the Badder-Meinhoff group, the Red Army Faction or the Red Brigade, in the belief that supporting Islamist groups is a good cover for attacking Jews?

    It is also no secret that many Eco-socialists are under the impression that “Jews run the world” and that hurting industry is the same as destroying Jewish business.

    Radicalism has always had an anti-Semitic streak to it. It’s no wonder that they have been exploiting the Holocaust to achieve their ends. Anybody who cared about what happened to those six million victims would not play around with their memories for political gain.

  242. Dan Murphy says:

    While I do not normally write to government agencies to complain, this afternoon I sent the following note to a number of e-mail addresses listed on the NASA headquarters website. I suggest those of you who wish to do a little bit more than comment on this fine blog consider complaining to NASA yourselves. Futile? Probably, but better than doing nothing, and there is a small chance our voice will have an impact. Feel free to use any or all (or none) of the note I sent:

    “To whom it may concern:

    For many years I have been a supporter of NASA and your mission, but that has recently changed. To me, you had represented the best that science can offer a society, and your efforts were worth devoting many more resources than you were given by Congress.

    My opinion has recently changed. While in many areas you are still doing worthwhile science, in others, you are directly contributing to the sacrifice of science on the altar of political correctness.

    I speak of course of Jim Hansen, and his issue advocacy hiding behind flawed science, and flawed scientific method. In his official capacity at NASA he is promoting a viewpoint about human caused global warming that has little hard science to support it, and he endangers the support NASA receives for all of its other efforts. (Note: Unproven climate models are NOT hard science: GIGO. Hiding your methodology, so that other scientists cannot validate your results is NOT hard science.)

    I will be writing my Congressmen requesting that they defund NASA completely, unless you take some basic steps to restore integrity to your organization. You have at least 2 options to accomplish this. One option is for you to remind Dr. Hansen that he is a scientist, not a politician or activist, and that he needs to refrain from partisan or controversial political activities and statements when representing himself as a NASA employee. (He is free to do what he likes in this area when he is not representing himself as a NASA official.) You must also require him to release to the general scientific community details of his corrections of raw global temperature data, so that others can properly review, replicate and criticize his findings. Much of the global warming hysteria is fueled by the temperature numbers generated by Dr. Hansen and his staff. These numbers are “adjusted” but Dr. Hansen hides how he does the adjustments, and that worries other scientists as all of Dr. Hansen’s adjustments seem to be for higher temperatures.

    The other course of action is for you to fire Dr. Hansen immediately.

    There may be other appropriate courses of action for you to take, but I would prefer you select the first of the two I have listed above. Restore transparency to the scientific process at NASA. Require Dr. Hansen to conduct his research and present his findings with full transparency, as this alone will restore confidence in the information he releases on behalf of NASA. Do not allow him to continue as a loose cannon, damaging the reputation of all of NASA in pursuit of his political agenda.

    Sincerely,

    Dan Murphy”

  243. Psi says:

    Claude Harvey (09:59:14) :

    I think it is highly likely that Hansen is showing his true colors because he sees the writing on the wall. I think he knows he has based his entire professional career on a scientific lie that is soon to be exposed, both by science and by nature. He’s stepping off the scientific train and onto an emotion-driven, radical politics train because that is the only place where he won’t have to defend and explain himself to his fellows.

    I think your analysis is correct. I just stepped off the train he’s stepping on to. During the 1990s, it seems to me that the evidence was supporting the AGW models. By 2009, the divergenc between those models and the reality they purport to explain and predict, has become so tenuous that anyone capable of being led by evidence, must be prepared to doubt the “consensus.” That leaves Hansen and Gore et al, tragically, nowhere to get but to sever their ties more and more from the real science.

    On the issue of Dr. Hansen’s employment, I am divided between the view that his public entanglements constitute a conflict of interest with his professional responsibility and the view that he is becoming so ridiculous that he is best left where he is, to avoid any risk of turning him into a martyr. A hard call.

  244. Just Want Truth... says:

    It looks like according to this video there won’t be a sequel to An Inconvenient Truth movie like there is for the book (for now, so don’t hold your breath) :

    http://revver.com/video/900276/an-inconvenient-truth-sequel/

    We’ll have to settle for the

    parody video :

  245. geophys55 says:

    BTW, Hansen works for me, the US taxpayer and if his vision is implemented, I will be massively impacted in a very negative way.

    Yup, he’s fired!

  246. Robert Wykoff says:

    Many people asked what laws Dr. Hansen is encouraging people to break in the UK. Well, for one, he is encouraging people to destroy coal plants. He spoke in defense of some environmentalists that did just that a month or two ago. I don’t remember the exact words, but the court basically found the vandalism was justified because the coal plant was endangering the earth.

  247. JimB says:

    “cormac (14:37:53) :

    Does even one reader of this blog ever wonder if Hansen is actually right?
    i.e. wonder whether his alarm stems from a correct interpretation of the available data, as a professional scientist in the area?
    It’s not impossible – and his is not a lone voice. I read the comments on this blog from time to time, and thank my lucky stars that the science in my own area (Big Bang cosmology) can be quietly debated amongst neutral professionals…”

    Cormac,
    The issue that most folks here have with Hansen is the same issue we have with Gavin, Mann, et al., that being that they refuse to release their methodology. Hansen “adjusts” temperatures. How?…why?…what’s the formulat?…he won’t release it. Why?…what’s being hidden? Then on top to that come the outrageous claims, the outrageous predictions…which historically have been shown to not come true. One would think this would make him even MORE transparent with his data/formulas/methodology, not LESS so.

    Is he right? Hope not. Why not show us the stuff so that others can truely peer-review it and say “Hey…this guy’s got something here!”…or say “Hey…turns out there’s a good reason he was hiding this…it’s total garbage.”

    JimB

  248. Neo says:

    Hasn’t Hansen violated the “Hatch Act” ?

    Reply: It’s best to read the thread before commenting. ~dbstealey, mod.

  249. Smokey says:

    J.F. Hultquist:

    “JONATHON PORRITT, one of Gordon Brown’s leading green advisers, is to warn that Britain must drastically reduce its population if it is to build a sustainable society.”

    What these neo-Stalinists never define is “sustainable.”

    Britain currently has a very sustainable population. In fact, it sustains wave after wave of new immigrants. No one involuntarily goes hungry there. Just as in America, the poorest are the most over-fed and obese. And if the British government got out of the medicine business, its citizens would not have to endure the long waiting lists that government intervention causes.

    “Sustainability” is a Stalinist code word, just as “robust” is an alarmist code word. When you see it, you know where they’re coming from. George Orwell would know, too.

  250. D. King says:

    This is what you get when you steal a kid’s lunch money.
    Now give it back!

  251. Rob says:

    Interesting post at Jennifer`s blog.

    The Available Evidence Does Not Support Fossil Fuels as the Source of Increasing Concentrations of Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide (Part 1)

    http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/

  252. John F. Hultquist says:

    mikef (15:22:02) : Has anyone done the math?

    There is math, physics, chemistry, and a lot of hard work. However, there is (was) almost no temperature increase, now it is going down. CO2 by humans can not be the cause. And there are several natural processes that explain the ups and downs. One informative paper is:
    Two Natural Components of the Recent Climate Change by Akasofu, here:
    http://people.iarc.uaf.edu/~sakasofu/pdf/two_natural_components_recent_climate_change.pdf

  253. Ron de Haan says:

    This is funny:
    John Coleman at ICCC sings, “Nah-nah-nah-nah, naw-naw-naw-naw, hey-hey-hey, good bye!” to the anthropogenic global warming movement

    http://algorelied.com/?p=992

  254. SteveSadlov says:

    I blame Bush 43. His silence (at least the silence of the NASA leaders) was his tacit agreement with Hansen’s POV. Recall the “addicted to oil” comments and other not-so-Freudian slips. Bush is somewhat of a Greenie in his own rights. Part of that “Austin ambiance” he soaked up as Governor of Texas, although, likely rooted in his Ivy League years being with all the hippies and radicals at Yale. From a political capital perspective, once a lame duck after 2006, Bush could have thrown Hansen out on the street with no skin off his back. That he did not do it speaks volumes. W was essentially greasing the skids for the current crowd of AGW fanatics. The fix is in folks, and we are all going to be taxed out the wazoo for all activity, especially activities which generate CO2.

  255. klausb says:

    Anthony,
    O/T here, but in one of the threads in the last days,
    there was something about BBC re: article about ocean
    acidification, ” Setback for climate technical fix”

    I e-mailed to the editor of that article,
    Richard.Black2@bbc.co.uk
    and explained that the right term would be “less alcaline”,
    because we’re still above pH 7.0

    Respone was:

    …. “acidification” is the accepted term now ….

    AGW at it’s max, science doesn’t matter, “accepted terms”
    do matter. As I read “1984” – still beeing young then,
    I did see it at a very worse case scenario.
    And I was already ironed by Phillip K. Dick, William Tenn and John Brunner.

    Hummh, somehow my nightmares became reality.

    KlausB

  256. Jeff Alberts says:

    tallbloke (09:11:52) :

    Those blue skies and fluffy white clouds have been photoshopped in. The day of the demo last thursday was windy and cold. It had been a lovely week up until then. Now we have snow and hail forecast.

    Is Hansen a direct blood descendent of Thor?

    More like Loki.

  257. Bill McClure says:

    John F. Hultquist (15:28:34) :

    Bill McClure (12:47:35) : implication of food production:
    Solar Cycle 24: Implications for the United States by Archibald (2008)
    If it gets as cold as Archibald thinks it will, Canadian wheat farmers are in trouble. This was on the web – can’t locate it now:

    John
    no argument with the canadian wheat farmer looking at fewer acres. They produced wheat on 25 million acres in 2008. But the ground in the Conservation reserve program CRP in the usa totals 34 million acgeshttp://www.biomassmagazine.com/article.jsp?article_id=1867 . This ground is at a minimum suitable for wheat production. And I agree they produce differnt varaties in Canadia from the central USA. Then we produce hay on 61 millions acres in the USAhttp://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/usda/nass/CropProdSu//2000s/2008/CropProdSu-01-11-2008.pdf. Many of these acge are suitable for crop production at a lower yield. My point is there are loads of acres is the USA that can be used for Wheat production or other crops if the dire prediction of a colder Canadia come true. My own 400 acres used to be 50% in crop production and 50% pasture hay. Today it is more ecomical to raise grass since my particular soils are not as productive as the top soils in Iowa,Illinlois etc. If crop prices move to a higher level sure I can make a management change and grow more corn ,soybeans or wheat.
    I’m not worried about these dire predictions or food shortages yet. They are even going to release seed corn that will produce well in a drought.

  258. John F. Hultquist says:

    mikef (15:22:02) Part II regarding “Has anyone done the math?”

    Getting a good background on this issue is a tough slog, requiring many hours of reading. This particular thread is a little different, being both a sad and funny (political) diversion while we are waiting to see if Mt. Redoubt really blows its top, if the three folks walking to the North Pole get eaten by polar bears or freeze, or some other weird thing. Actually we are waiting on some new science to fill in some of the things we don’t know, ‘cause the science isn’t settled.
    Meanwhile, scroll back to the top of the page and under RECENT POSTS, pick one and start that reading.

  259. Håkan B says:

    Aron (12:01:05)

    Absoloutly ridicoulous, studio work guaranteed, in my military service in sweden during late 60’s 40 c below 0 was not unusual, behaving like this guy would have caused you severe freeze injuries. Trick is to have a heavy coat of wool and linen and see to warm it up before you go on your one or two hour guard. City boys trying to play explorers!

  260. Dave Wendt says:

    You have to hand Hansen one thing, he sure can generate a heckuva comment thread. I thought my link to the Porrit story had been lost in the deluge, but evidently at least one person followed it. This guy makes even Old Dr. Jim seem like a reasonable and moderate fellow.
    Anthony;
    On another note, you might want to have your moderaters urge a little more prudence on those commenting on those valiant Arctic researchers. Just because the drive by media was willing to give the TOTUS a pass, for his snarky comment about the Special Olympics on Leno’s show, it doesn’t mean they wouldn’t gladly unleash a hoard of rabid investigators to do a full monty Sarah Palin- Joe the Plumber proctoscopy on you, if they discovered how your commenters are heartlessly abusing the mentally challenged.

  261. Ken Hall says:

    “JONATHON PORRITT, one of Gordon Brown’s leading green advisers, is to warn that Britain must drastically reduce its population if it is to build a sustainable society.”

    As I have posted before, When Hitler killed 10,000,000 people he was branded a monster. When Climate Alarmists want to kill BILLIONS, they are given the Nobel Peace Prize.

  262. John F. Hultquist says:

    klausb (16:12:36) : about ocean acidification

    Reminds me of Bill C’s line about the definition of “is”
    Anyway, take a break from the BBC and read this:

    CO2, Global Warming and Coral Reefs: Prospects for the Future
    Craig D. Idso

    http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/originals/coral_co2_warming.pdf

  263. Just Want Truth... says:

    “DR (15:08:47) : Roy Spencer left NASA for the very same reason Hansen should…..”

    I don’t think you have the stories straight.

  264. AllenM says:

    Is Mr Hansen “stopping off” in the UK from his official trip to Copenhagen? If he is, then even if he is on annual leave he is still in official travel status. He would have to have this deviation in travel approved by his supervisor and he would still be on official travel until he returns to his point of origin. There are also special rules for government officials on travel outside of the US. Even if Mr. Hansen is paying for the deviation in travel he is still on official travel. At least, that is the way it was explained to me for the 32 years that I worked for the US Gov.

  265. theduke says:

    It’s not the democratic process that isn’t working. It’s the science of Hansen and others that isn’t working. A lot of people simply don’t believe that they’ve proved their case. I’m one of them.

  266. John Galt says:


    cormac (14:37:53) :

    Does even one reader of this blog ever wonder if Hansen is actually right?
    i.e. wonder whether his alarm stems from a correct interpretation of the available data, as a professional scientist in the area?
    It’s not impossible – and his is not a lone voice. I read the comments on this blog from time to time, and thank my lucky stars that the science in my own area (Big Bang cosmology) can be quietly debated amongst neutral professionals…

    Yes, I did consider the possibility that Hansen may be right, but with each passing year and each outrageous statement from Hansen it’s become quite clear that there is no evidence to support him.

    Listen to the man. Hansen is no longer talking about science. He’s a new-age guru, preaching the evils of western civilization and the green utopia that awaits us if we just do what he says.

    Let’s break this down for you. Here are some highlights:

    * No greenhouse warming signature in the atmosphere

    * Warming precedes CO2 increases by hundreds of years

    * CO2 continues to increase faster than predicted, but the climate is not warming

    * No runaway greenhouse effect has ever occurred in the past. CO2 has been high after ice ages have begun.

    * Hockey stick is a statistical falsification

    * Climate models have no demonstrated predictive power. You are no doubt familiar with Einstein’s theory of Special Relativity? You know it was tested by comparing actual observations with the predicted results and you know the results matched the prediction. Had results not matched predictions, Special Relativity would have been falsified and shown to be incorrect. The actual climate has likewise falsified the climate models used by Hansen and the IPCC.

    Hope this helps.

  267. klausb says:

    “The democatic process isn’t working?”
    Yup, read why, here:

    “An Enemy of the People” – Hernrik Ibsen,
    the remarks of Dr. Stockmann:
    http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext00/aeotp10.txt

  268. bill says:

    A few hours ago people were claiming Hanson and his supporters were all modifying data in order to continue receiving fat funding checks from their governments.

    Hanson now stands up and puts his belief in his research results before any thought of staying in his well paid employment. He and others must be very sure of their research to put their lifestyle on the line.

    Is he wrong to stand up for what he truly believes? It cannot be the easy option (unless NASA is fully backing hime)

    PS Nuclear is not an option – there are insufficient reservers for more than a few decades of a fully nuclear future – its all about energy balance:
    http://www.stormsmith.nl/report20071013/

  269. Robert Bateman says:

    We pay carbon taxes on everything, NASA goes back to the Moon and then on to Mars. Please take Hansen up there.
    After you fire him.

  270. David Cane says:

    John Galt (12:43:37) :

    OT: Scientists in possible cold fusion breakthrough

    http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.a67cf72fe27770f9ec992da18169937d.a1&show_article=1

    There is a whole area of LENR physics (Low Energy Nuclear Reactions), below ground state H2, the Millsian Effect at Blacklight, that is just about to come forward. These scientists at SPAWAR have been paving the way (against severe backlash.) The odd thing is that clean, new energy physics will not make AGWs happy. Which is yet another tip as to their real agenda. It is not to develop clean, renewable energy. It is to control population.

    The sad part is they cannot muster the integrity or honesty to admit that. But then, who would want to admit to planned genocide?

  271. Ron de Haan says:

    The British Democracy is also responsible for Global Warming.

    So Hansen leads protests in GB against coal power plants and runways:
    http://climaterealists.com/news.php?id=3015&linkbox=true

  272. Just Want Truth... says:

    “bill (17:01:09) : A few hours ago people were claiming Hanson and his supporters were all modifying data”

    Have you compared GISS to other data sources?

  273. Smokey says:

    bill (17:01:09),

    Apparently you are unaware of the extent to which James Hansen has cashed in on his position as head of NASA/GISS.

    Investor’s Business Daily reported that James Hansen was funded by, among others, George Soros. And when Hansen claimed the story wasn’t true, IBD refused to retract their published report.

    If Hansen was telling the truth, he certainly would have an airtight civil case against IBD. Conclusion: Hansen is lying. QED.

    James Hansen has been showered with large cash payoffs by other organizations with a pro-AGW agenda in addition to the $720,000 he got from George Soros.

    The [Teresa] Heinz Foundation paid James Hansen $250,000 for his “work on global warming.” [Who is Hansen now beholden to? The taxpayers who pay his salary? Or Soros, Heinz and others?]

    Hansen pocketed another half a million dollars, cash, from the pro-AGW Dan David foundation — again to promote AGW/CO2 propaganda.

    Hansen also received payola from the Gorebot himself. And all those payoffs are just the ones that we know about.

    James Hansen is bought and paid for by a cabal of shady anti-science, anti-West groups. As we can see, Hansen obviously does their bidding.

    So now you know why the salary Hansen gets from NASA doesn’t matter one way or another. He is paid lavish compensation by the groups he is working for. And they aren’t your ordinary taxpayers.

  274. Smokey says:

    “Have you compared GISS with other data sources?”

    Yes, let’s look at that: click

  275. What is the facial hair thing about? Scaring children so they’re easier to indoctrinate? ;-p”

    It’s so when we enter the Second Maunder, their cheeks won’t get frostbitten.

    “OT: Scientists in possible cold fusion breakthrough”

    Last time it was from the Melvin Dumar Institute of Woo-Woo Technology. Nice timing, though.

    “I am having a difficult time uncovering exactly which part of the Hatch Act this guy is in violation of. “

    The part about crying “Aieee!” and being an Egghead in a public place.

  276. Ron de Haan says:

    From a political view nothing has changed.
    Have a look at what Archy Bunker had to say about democrats and energy:

  277. Richard Hill says:

    I voted against dismissal.
    At present, his comments possibly doing more harm than good to his cause.
    It would be good to talk privately to a couple of IPCC lead authors
    and ask them what they think confidentially about H’s statements.
    I agree that dismissal would only turn him into a martyr.
    His direct bosses might be happy with his work.
    After all the first mission of a bureaucracy is to grow and H’s publicity
    is possibly helping NASA get its budgets through.
    If you dont like what someone is saying, ridiculing them
    is often the best response. How far is H away from being a figure of fun?

  278. Leftymartin says:

    Calls to fire Hansen are misplaced.

    Bob Carter touched upon this at the recent ICCC – the man has become a complete and utter joke – the court jester he once declined to “joust” with. Leave him where he is – he is making a spectacle of himself and is doing more than any other single individual to show that AGW alarmism is a religious cult, and as science is more or less bankrupt.

  279. Bill McClure says:

    Smokey (17:23:57) :

    “Have you compared GISS with other data sources?”

    Yes, let’s look at that: click

    Sorry if I was misunderstood. If you think it will get colder or warmer.That is not my point. We have millions acres of land in the USA that can produce the corn,soybean or other crops we need that are either in CRP or other wise idle. They are just not the highly productive acres growing crops today.

  280. Smokey says:

    “…the Melvin Dumar Institute of Woo-Woo Technology.”

    LOL! I remember him.

  281. J.Hansford says:

    Well Mr Hanson may well be right… But it isn’t his side that isn’t under threat of tyranny.

    I suggest that Mr Hanson himself is a despotic individual who’s corrupting influence has been harmful to any who would view the world differently than himself…. But of course that is just my opinion, others may differ.

  282. deadwood says:

    Oliver Ramsay (07:57:04) :

    Don’t fire him! He’s doing more good for the Deniers than for the Warmers. . .

    Sir, I deny nothing. I firmly state the facts. And those facts do not support Hansen’s side of the AGW debate.

  283. Smokey says:

    Bill McClure,

    Sorry, I did misunderstand you. But the graph is interesting, isn’t it? Should we go with the consensus?

  284. J.Hansford says:

    oops correction…….. But it isn’t his side that IS under threat of tyranny….

    One day I’ll learn to proof read.

  285. DR says:

    @ just want the truth:

    You thunk wrong.

    It was on his now defunct website, but I found another source here:

    Per Roy Spencer:
    http://www.reason.com/news/show/116478.html
    “I left NASA for a few reasons,” replied Spencer via e-mail, “But probably the main reason was not being able to openly give my opinions on global warming.” He explained that as NASA employees, scientists are also seen as representatives of NASA, and they are supposed to coordinate media interviews (and especially congressional testimony) through the agency’s public affairs office and management. “NASA management has never liked being ‘blindsided’ when they read the morning newspaper,” noted Spencer. He added, “They also like everyone in NASA to be singing the same tune (which I have never understood from a science point of view).” Spencer called Hansen “an excellent scientist.” He concluded, “When I worked for NASA, I just tried to play by the rules, and resigned when I decided I didn’t want to play any longer. Jim Hansen has much more political capital to spend than I had, and if I was in his position and believed as he does, I might well be doing the same thing he is doing now.”

    and

    http://www.drroyspencer.com/2009/01/another-nasa-defection-to-the-skeptics-camp/
    “In truth, it wasn’t Hansen who was muzzled, but it was me in the Clinton-Gore years, who was asked to keep my mouth shut about my skeptical views. That was fine…if a little annoying. At least the flap Hansen caused has managed to force NASA to say that their scientists no longer have to march in lock-step on scientific issues. That’s a good thing.”

    He followed the rules. Hansen does not, but now has set a precedent whereby any government employed scientist should be able to speak their mind, but we know what happens to those that disagree with the “consensus” don’t we?

    Now, amidst the 1400+ interviews Hansen has given including Congressional testimonies, would you care to demonstrate how Hansen was “muzzled”?

  286. Manfred says:

    firing mr. hansen would at least serve to reminder to some of his collegues, that science should be based on hard facts and not on adjusted data, belief or other personal or political agendas.

  287. Bill McClure says:

    Smokey (17:44:25) :

    “Bill McClure,

    Sorry, I did misunderstand you. But the graph is interesting, isn’t it? Should we go with the consensus?”

    You do make it interesting here.
    BTW my wife doesn’t understand me either. any help there

  288. Mr Lynn says:

    Roy (11:00:58) :
    OT, but B. Kerr did mention the Catlin Arctic Survey above. According to the BBC : “Pen Hadow, Martin Hartley and Ann Daniels have experienced torrid conditions since being dropped on to the ice three weeks ago.”

    I guess an organization that can get “negative feedback” backwards shouldn’t surprise me when it completely reverses the meaning of the word “torrid”, but it is a very funny.

    Reminds me that when our daughter was just learning the language, she came up with “boiling cold”!

    /Mr Lynn

  289. Ohioholic says:

    Just had to say this, I don’t usually comment on the more politically toned things, the man’s picture bears an eerie resemblance to the clown from the movie version of ‘It’.

  290. 3x2 says:

    I’m going to abstain on the vote, mainly because I think JH ranting is more damaging to AGW than his silence. Every time he opens his mouth the impartiality (in the scientific sense) of GISS and by implication NASA takes a tumble.

    I have to say that I feel a little sorry for his (GISS) underlings really.

    OT but the Catlin “Arctic Survey” “pushing forward” – My money is still on the Polar Bears.

  291. klockarman says:

    OK, I read the post and quickly scanned the comments section, but please pardon me if I’m being redundant here, but I just don’t have the time to read through 285 comments (my congrats to Anthony for a very succesful blog, thougth).

    Anyway I posted this on my blog last week, and it is video of Hansen being confronted (while SNOW is falling) at the Capitol Climate Action protest, and Hansen’s reply:

    Interviewer: Are you here as an employee of NASA?

    James Hansen: No! Of course not. I’m here, I’m on vacation today.

    Interviewer: You’re here as a private citizen then?

    Hansen: Yes, of course.

    Interviewer: Some people are going to say, “But you’re James Hansen, you’re always, you’re always identified with NASA”, and they’re saying you’re splitting hairs.

    Hansen: I’m also a Columbia University adjunct professor, I mean I, uh, haven’t given up my rights as a US citizen, and freedom of speech is one of them.

    And the entire video is here…

    http://algorelied.com/?p=948

  292. Chuck says:

    Maybe what is happening is that people see through the switch from “global warming” to “climate Change” to be exactly what it is- a PR move when it was obvious tha the earth has not been warming for the last 10 years. And somehow, if people decide they don’t want to be taxed to death by a theory that was created by those that want to demonize the West by the bogus and every changing global warming/cooling/changing crowd …. then we should just protest them b/c we are running out of time.
    I just hope enough people wise up to the climate change con to make them all look like the nodding heads that they are are ….

  293. Robert Bateman says:

    When the climate turned in the Grand Minimums, the marginal lands were abandoned. During Grand Maximums, the marginal lands are brought back into production, as the population inevitably outstripped the good lands.
    If Hansen has his way, we will return to those brutal times.
    Rising cost of Energy has always taken marginal lands out of production.
    For the US, Cap & Trade is a death sentence no matter how well written or intentioned. They will find a way to pervert it, and in doing so, drive the maximum amount of land out of production.

  294. Mark N says:

    Gosh! Some of us have gone positively [snip] over this.

  295. Just Want Truth... says:

    “Smokey (17:23:57) :

    “Have you compared GISS with other data sources?”

    Yes, let’s look at that: click”

    This graph is a little easier to read :

    http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v1/n4/fig_tab/ngeo157_F1.html

    You can see that GISS starts to depart from where it had been tracking at around the year 2000. By 2004 even an unlearned eye can see the departure. And by 2006 it is laughably arrant.

  296. Allan M R MacRae says:

    May I caution against demonizing anyone in this debate, including Hanson.

    The Warmist crowd demonized many serious scientists early in this debate, falsely claiming they were “in the pay of big oil”, etc. As a result, several skeptic scientists have received death threats, and worse.

    We do not want to encourage this sort of reprehensible behaviour.

    Hanson is out of line – but he is his own worst enemy, and has no credibility among intelligent people.

    Regards, Allan

  297. bill says:

    Smokey (17:23:57) :
    Not sure where you got your data from.
    I just downloaded HADCRUT3V and GISTEMP sets, plotted them over the same time span and got this result:
    http://img111.imageshack.us/img111/3525/hadcrutgisstemp.jpg

    Both linear curve fits have similar slopes 5.88e-3 vs 5.96e-3 deg C/year

    I see no lies here, do you?

    Bill

  298. BarryW says:

    I think he should be played by Wallace Shaw (who played Vizzini in the Princess Bride). link “Inconceivable!”

  299. Mr Lynn says:

    cormac (14:37:53) :
    Does even one reader of this blog ever wonder if Hansen is actually right?
    i.e. wonder whether his alarm stems from a correct interpretation of the available data, as a professional scientist in the area?
    It’s not impossible – and his is not a lone voice. I read the comments on this blog from time to time, and thank my lucky stars that the science in my own area (Big Bang cosmology) can be quietly debated amongst neutral professionals…

    Oh? Ask Professor Halton Arp, who dared to suggest that visible connections between objects of different redshifts were evidence redshift is not necessarily a measure of distance, that intrinsic redshift is not only possible but an observational fact, a view which suggests in turn that the theory of the expanding universe and the Big Bang is wrong.

    Professor Arp, despite his strong credentials in the profession, was been ridden out of meetings and journals (not unlike the experience of AGW ‘skeptics’). See his fascinating book, Seeing Red: Redshifts, Cosmology and Academic Science, Aperion (August 1998).

    It’s not just climate science that is apparently held captive by an intransigent orthodoxy.

    /Mr Lynn

  300. Squidly says:

    Mark (10:29:22) :

    I think direct action is needed to stop these environmentalists. Anybody with me?

    I am!

    I dare an environmentalist to step one foot on my property! I will exercise my 2nd amendment right, as I would have to view it as an imminent threat to my wellbeing and that of my family and neighbors!

  301. Chris R. says:

    To bill,

    Your comment of 17:01 contains the following:

    “PS Nuclear is not an option – there are insufficient reservers for more than a few decades of a fully nuclear future – its all about energy balance:”

    This is inane. The source material you linked gives a bogus sense of being accurate–but it omits the fact that “breeder reactors”–which can produce new fuel while in operation–have been built and have been operated. The French, who have heavily committed to nuclear power, operated breeders for years. Current breeder reactor technology can produce about 20% more fuel per year than is consumed.

  302. H.R. says:

    Lead photo…? ‘Homer’ Hansen.

    Hi-diddly-ho! Of course I should be expected to recognize my own neighbor.

    Signed,

    Ned Flanders
    Owner
    The Leftorium
    Springfield, USA

  303. I feel for Hansen he is betting the farm on AGW just like Gore and his arctic ice prediction (3.5 Years to go).

    The man could have been remembered for a great contribution to climate studies, but alas he took his research far too seriously and never once entertained that he may be wrong. Then he started to believe his own press, convinced himself that his opinions were of such value that the “Government” was censoring him, urged by activists (lobbyists without the paycheck) he ventured farther and farther afield and shriller in his calls while on his crusade to save the planet, which served to isolate and marginalize him until now he looks around and cannot understand why everyone is not just doing what he says.

    So now he may very well be be the object of historical obscurity or even ridicule after such a distinguished career and accomplishments.

    It is kind of sad.

  304. Squidly says:

    Aron (10:37:19) :

    They think they’re making progress…

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7961957.stm

    Did they ever take photos of the supposed ice that was cracking around them as they slept?

    Excerpt:

    Pen Hadow – the first person to walk solo, unsupported to the North Pole – said the conditions faced by the team at the beginning of the trek were among the worst he had ever seen in the region.

    But I thought it was supposed to be getting toasty warm up there.

  305. crosspatch says:

    We are going to begin shipment of our spent fuel to India for use in their breeders soon. What is really “inane” was Carter’s notion that we should just bury our fuel that has only 5% of its energy expended rather than reprocess it and extract up to 90% of the energy.

    Google for an article in Scientific American from December 2005 titled “Smarter Use of Nuclear Waste”. You can find it in PDF. It is worth reading.

  306. Smokey says:

    bill: “I see no lies here, do you?”

    I don’t understand what ‘lies’ you’re talking about, bill. I never mentioned any lies.

    My post @17:20:18 was in response to your post of 17:01:09 — in which you stated that “Hanson now stands up and puts his belief in his research results before any thought of staying in his well paid employment.”

    [But Hansen is not so sure of his research that he is willing to publicly debate it with his skeptical peers.]

    I provided links to some pretty damning evidence that Hansen takes what amounts to bribes, which derail him from impartial science, and into paid advocacy — while he is still taking a salary from taxpayers.

    Those links referred to the payola that James Hansen received from pro-AGW groups and individuals.

    But instead, you’re changing the subject, to a chart that you just plotted yourself.

    Let’s stay on point here, bill: You contend that Hansen is risking his salary by advocating for AGW alarmism. I say that he is being paid to thwart the impartial science that the taxpaying public has a right to expect, by taking these huge bundles of cash from advocacy groups and individuals.

    It’s not surprising that you would want to change the subject. But before we get into graphs — which I have plenty of — please explain why it’s OK for a person in Hansen’s position to take payments from these advocacy groups while he’s on the public payroll. And from George Soros — a convicted felon.

  307. bill says:

    Chris R. (19:04:39) :
    There is thorium as well. But this requires highly enriched uranium to start it
    The problem is, how long before breeders are on line (are there operational designs available?). Security and forcing our descendants to look after a wastes 150 years after they were last produced just does not sit easy with me.
    Bill

  308. bill says:

    Chris R. (19:04:39) :
    PS can you give me a link to more reliable information please.

  309. Manfred says:

    uranium from seawater is not far from being a profitabel operation and the amount is “endless” (from human perspective).

    http://peakoildebunked.blogspot.com/2006/01/207-uranium-from-seawater-part-1.html
    http://peakoildebunked.blogspot.com/2006/01/208-uranium-from-seawater-part-2.html

    another link in german that that shows that reserves are anyways much bigger than often described
    http://www.areva-np.com/de/liblocal/docs/Germany_pdf/Uran_final.pdf

  310. bill says:

    Smokey (19:16:10) :
    I cannot debate on a subject of bribes as I have no evidence. If there were real evidence don’t you think this would have given sufficient ammunition to Hanson’s opposition for a lawful arrest?
    AND talking of bribes and corruption without absolute proof puts WUWT at risk of legal action, take care!
    Bill

  311. Smokey says:

    Chris R.,

    I notice that Mr. bill gives an unsupported opinion — and then in his next post, he demands that you put up more information. More “reliable” information.

    Yo, bill, there’s this thing called google… try it yourself some time.

    And regarding bribes: I gave you chapter and verse. When someone pays a public servant upwards of a million dollars, IMHO that amounts to a bribe. Investor’s Business Daily said essentially the same thing. I notice you can’t seem to refute the info I linked to. But give it a try, I’d like to hear your take on it. As a taxpayer and all.

  312. I think y;all are being very mean to poor Mr Hansen.

    His needs are shurely very simple.

    More rope.

  313. Bill McClure says:

    Just want to clarify there seem to be two Bill’s here tonight. I always use my full name. I sat next to another Bill in High School and it was confusing for both of us

  314. WakeUpMaggy says:

    “As a US taxpayer it is my right to make this call for his dismissal. When a US government employee suggests that protests against the government he is employed by should be commenced because “the democratic process isn’t working” it becomes an issue of conflict of interest. I’m not ashamed to do so, nor do I care for your opinion that I should be. In fact you have inspired me to take my complaint to the next level. I urge others to do so as well. – Anthony”

    Do you have a mailing list for action Anthony, what in the heck can we do? Liberal speak is nothing but stinkin’ thinkin”, renaming and constant obfuscation. It’s an imaginary reality.

  315. bill says:

    Smokey my graph was in response to this comment of yours:
    “Have you compared GISS with other data sources?”
    Yes, let’s look at that: click

    Manfred (19:23:25) :
    uranium from seawater is not far from being a profitabel operation and the amount is “endless” (from human perspective)

    My comment about energy balance (budget) was all about this the energy to extract uranium from low grade sources such as the sea requires more energy than will be produced. (its explained in the reference).
    The Japanese have developed a passive extraction method using a special polymer. But it is worth doing the maths on the polymer requirements for a rate of extraction that can feed the world yellow cake.

  316. crosspatch says:

    “The problem is, how long before breeders are on line”

    Breeder reactors have been “online” for decades. We had an idea for both types of plants on the same site. You would have one kind of reactor producing energy and the other kind reprocessing the fuel. The waste produced from reprocessing decays in hundreds of years rather than thousands and is less dangerous making storage less of a problem. There is also much less of it.

    Clinton/Gore killed that project. I believe it was called the “combined fuel cycle” project or something like that. Read the SI article I mentioned above if you can find it in a web search.

  317. Retired Engineer John says:

    Anthony, I read your website regularily and enjoy it. You are doing a lot of good in exposing AGW. The Hatch Act is intended to curb partisan political activity and does not apply here. However; Hansen is breaking other NASA rules. NASA does not permit direct contact between employees and members of Congress on NASA work except through official channels. This rule is not strongly enforced and Hansen has established patrons in Congress that make him too hot for NASA to handle. He probably made the trip on NASA money. You will have to get your lawyer to submitt a Freedon of Information Act request to find out that information. Your request will experience numerous delays unless it is also released to the press.
    Good luck, Retired Engineer John

  318. April E. Coggins says:

    Hansen is the Bernie Madoff of global warming. He is going mad trying to keep all the balls in the air.

  319. anna v says:

    OT IMPORTANT

    http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25239707-23109,00.html

    Obama invites online questions

    Reuters

    US President Barack Obama today encouraged Americans to submit their questions about the economy over the internet and said he will answer some of them live on the White House website on Friday.

    Why is this coming from australia?

    Since popularity of questions is the order, how about the best science blog US participants forming a good question on the relevance of CO2 to climate and economy?

  320. Squidly says:

    M White (11:23:48) :

    “Setback for climate technical fix”

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7959570.stm

    “But within two weeks, the algae were being eaten by tiny creatures called copepods, which were then in turn eaten by amphipods, a larger type of crustacean.The net result was that far less carbon dioxide was absorbed and sent to the sea floor than scientists had anticipated.”

    HAhahaaa…. that’s funny!

    I had heard about ideas along these lines, I didn’t realize that someone was actually going to attempt this, but the first thing I thought when I first heard of the idea was “wouldn’t something just come along and eat up all that algae?” … sure enough, I guess I’m not as dumb as I thought I was. :-)

  321. savethesharks says:

    Crosspatch wrote: “I consider myself environmentally conscious but what I resent deeply is people using “environmentalism” as a hook to hoodwink well-intended people into supporting a cynical grab for power. People are being duped in this case. Many people want to do what is right and ensure the Earth they leave behind for future generations is cleaner than the one they inherited. The problem in this case is that nobody has shown that CO2 is a problem.

    When someone controls energy production and use, they control the entire economy. There are two ways of regulating an engine … you can use the brake to regulate friction or you can use the throttle to regulate fuel. Politicians seeing pushback from the people in allowing them more direct control over the economy (modulating the brake) through taxation and redistribution of wealth, have stumbled upon this ingenious plan of a globally managed economy by regulating energy consumption. In order to do this and get away with it, they need a mechanism to make the people WANT them to do it. So they come up with “global warming” as a means to scare people into allowing them to manipulate global economic policy through the energy abstract.”

    That is one of the most eloquent descriptions of the problem at hand I have seen yet.

    I am saving it for further reference. Many thanks, Crosspatch.

    Chris
    Norfolk, VA

  322. Jim Ryan says:

    betting the farm on AGW

    That’s just it. They’re going for glory. If AGW is real, they get glory, a place in history. Great upside. If no AGW, then there’s a downside of some damage to career, but it’s not intolerable, considering the upside, even as the likelihood of AGW holding true diminishes.

  323. savethesharks says:

    Mike D. wrote: “Here’s how it goes down in the USA, Luis. Hansen works for me; I don’t work for him. I pay his salary; he doesn’t pay mine. He is a public servant, I am the public. Get it? Hansen servant, me master.

    Nobody has a right to a government job. Every government employee ought to be subject to firing in a heartbeat if the public wearies of them.”

    Brilliantly written. Thanks.
    Chris
    Norfolk, VA

  324. Manfred says:

    @bill (19:41:36)

    only considering the amount of polymer required, you need 350 kg polymer to harvest approx. 1.5 kg uranium per year. (of course further energy is required to build the support structures and to harvest, on the other side the polymere is recycable – i just want to keep this simple)

    the energy content of 1.5 kg uranium equals 350*1.5 = 525 mill kg of coal.

    therefore the energy of the harvested uranium exceeds the energy of the polymer IN LESS THAN 1 DAY.

    references:

    “…We submerged three adsorption cages in the Pacific Ocean at a depth of 20 m at 7 km offshore of Japan. The three adsorption cages consisted of stacks of 52 000 sheets of the uranium-specific non-woven fabric with a total mass of 350 kg. The total amount of uranium recovered by the nonwoven fabric was >1 kg in terms of yellow cake during a total submersion time of 240 days in the ocean…”

    http://peakoildebunked.blogspot.com/2006/01/207-uranium-from-seawater-part-1.html

    “The energy content of a kilogram of uranium or thorium, if spent nuclear fuel is reprocessed and fully utilized, is equivalent to about 3.5 million kilograms of coal.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_development

  325. Ross says:

    Roger Clague (12:52:33) :

    Ross
    Britain is not like a crowded theatre. We are not about to stampede anywhere. We are a mature, but flawed, democracy.

    Britain is, in my opinion, still a great country and the one from which we have derived much, if not most of our system of laws. [Nevertheless, I suspect that falsely yelling "Fire!" in a crowded British theater would be strongly discouraged, especially if it resulted in panic and bodily harm.]

    To the best of my knowledge, though, Britain does not have a “First Amendment” [i.e., the first of ten of our Bill of Rights] as referred to by Mr. Dias and about which my comments were made.

    In my opinion many of Mr. Hansen’s pronouncements and calls to action [made in the USA, subject to US law] are false alarms, based on flawed climate models. Many people may suffer severe harm from the results of his actions; this even includes many young impressionable schoolchildren who have been so indoctrinated by AGW alarmism that they have nightmares from fear that they are guilty of some great wrongdoing.

    OT: just curious, when the British make a toast is the response spelled “Here, here!” or “Hear, hear!”?

    [REPLY - The latter. ~ Evan]

  326. evanmjones says:

    OT, but as it’s a political-type thread, good news.

    If I understand it correctly, Obama has decoupled carbon credits from the budget bill, which means the thing actually has to rise or fall on its *ahem* merits.

  327. anna v says:

    Ross and Evan

    OT: just curious, when the British make a toast is the response spelled “Here, here!” or “Hear, hear!”?

    [REPLY - The latter. ~ Evan]

    More OT but funny titbit: Where in the byzantine liturgy the text reaches ” sophia orthi” , let us listen to the “right wisdom” of the gospel,( as in orthodoxy), Because : “orthi” phonetically also means “standing” the whole congregation gets up and listens standing.

  328. Roger Knights says:

    According to the BBC : “Pen Hadow, Martin Hartley and Ann Daniels have experienced torrid conditions …

    That’s a misprint for “horrid,” a word more often used in the UK than here.

  329. evanmjones says:

    BTW my wife doesn’t understand me either. any help there

    Yes. Count your blessings. (The above being one of them.)

    And be careful what you wish for.

    anna: #B^1

  330. Roger Knights says:

    For more on the promise of breeder reactors, see the book Prescription for the Planet, here:

    I’ve read, in a post on the SeekingAlpha.com site, that there have been major uranium finds in Kazakhstan (Borot-land) recently. I googled for uranium discoveries and got several hits. I suspect a price rise would draw in more reserves.

  331. Bobby Lane says:

    Although I think it is well past warranted for him to get fired for crossing the line one too many times, I still think the man should get due process if such process is necessary to terminate his employment. Despite not having much faith in the legal system, much less a beauracratic legal system, I still think his due process rights have to be upheld. The reason I do is that, if the shoe were on the other foot, and he were upholding the side of debate that most of us at this site embrace, and there were gobs of people on some website calling for his firing, we’d want every just action due him before he lost his job. Obviously there would be a lot to gain and/or lose depending on which side you fall on if he does get fired (which I do not expect) for both him and us at that point were that the case. That such is not the case does not negate those points. There is plenty of evidence of his misdeeds during US gov’t service. He should be brought before a disciplinary committee, tried on the evidence, and dismissed from tax payer employment. Unless agency rules allow his supervisor to terminate him without committee actions that is.

  332. Ray says:

    It is just amazing how many comments this post has got. In any way you look at it, the guy attracts attention.

  333. crosspatch says:

    One other advantage of fast neutron reactors is that you can use them to process all kinds of nuclear waste besides just reactor fuel. You can, for example, use transmutation to convert very long lived isotopes into different isotopes with shorter half-lives. This reduces the length of time that materiel must be sequestered from the environment.

  334. Bobby Lane says:

    Bill,

    Actually I think you are mistaken there. Talking is free speech, even of bribes. Plus, Hansen is a well known enough person, thanks to his advocacy, that he would fall outside of the normal slander-libel laws that protect private citizens. And you underestimate the huge negative waves of press this would generate even IF Hansen could be proven to have accepted bribes. There is no way any public figure is going to take a chance on this issue, especially with the Republicans hanging by a thread in Congress and heading into the 2010 elections. And simply nobody else with any real power in government cares because all the big shots, like Obama, Pelosi, Reid, etc are all sold-out to the AGW religion. Nobody wants to butt heads with them. On bribes, like Gore, Hansen would only cry out that he did it because the planet needed saving and he had exhausted normal means (like telling the straight truth) so he needed to use extraordinary means to get ‘the message’ out to the public. This cry of persecution by the mean money-grubbing industrialist-captive right-wingers would be repeated 24/7 on the cable news channels until you could sing it like a mantra in your sleep. So please, spare us the shallow rationalizations.

  335. Ross says:

    [REPLY - The latter. ~ Evan]

    Thanks Evan; it was a minor itch that I didn’t know how to scratch.

  336. WakeUpMaggy says:

    Flipped Out over the Political Unreality.

    “Just last week we highlighted a story claiming Global Warming would reduce the world’s population by more than 5 billion people, and now the solution to global warming is halve a country’s population. Tell me, if dramatic population reduction is the only solution to avoiding the calamitous result of…dramatic population reduction, then what, exactly, is the point?”

    So frigging WHAT? answering my own frustrated quotation. Who in the hell CARES?

    We are all going to DIE! (Is that some kind of new information for humanity by text through their cell phone?) Then we all scream, on TV Reality shows, OH MY GAWD! Surprise!!!! you dumb sucker, guess what, you are going to DIE! (sooner than you have prepared for) (Dumbass left his wife and four kids with no life insurance, spent it on pokies and beer.)

    So what if everyone on earth dies of “natural causes” from failure to adapt to rising seas, heat waves, asteroid hits, volcanoes, tsunami, food shortage, diseases, war between tribes, and basic, retarded FAILURE TO ADAPT?

    We are ALL going to die very soon and of ALL natural causes, murder, suicide, drug abuse, cancer, vitamin d deficiency, melanoma, Alzheimers, heart disease, old age, drowning in a bucket, strangling in our cot from a shoelace. Someone had better get used to it. “Get over it” These are all really NATURAL CAUSES, unless one is deluded about the nature of man and his world.

    Do we have so few elders and children that death is unreal now? A myth?

    How did we get so disoriented from our natural state?

    What kind of new eternal utopia do these nutcases have in mind anyway? What do they think is natural to the human condition? Has no one ever been to school, or have too many ineducables been to “school”? We studied utopianism so many years ago.

    Who is leaving a legacy of children and grandchildren anymore who even cares? Not Europe, not even ” special”New Zealand. Who would imagine that this deliberate infertility could save the earth? Save th earth from what, the sun compared to the humans? ( I cannot speak the p word anymore) P-a-n-t. Hangman.

    The earth has taken care of herself just fine without us for gadzillions of minutes and hours, days, months, years and millennia, and we fret over our lightbulbs and cow farts that actually do nothing but feed our rhubarb.

    What incredible narcissism we have. Outlaw mirrors and still waters.

    I have a lot of question marks in this post, who can answer?

  337. savethesharks says:

    Hansen needs to be OUSTED (not just “fired”).

    So the “democratic” process doesn’t work for him anymore??

    Well…for his case (and others like him)…neither does it work for us!!

    Fight CO2 fire with CO2 fire….I always say….

    Anybody up for a civil disobedience protest where we wrest this megalomaniac from power??

    Hey it has happened many times before and there is no reason it can’t happen now.

    Hansen needs to be REMOVED. He travels the world seeking a revolution?

    Well guess what: With that “revolution” he will have to contend with a more potent COUNTER-REVOLUTION staring him right in his smirking face!!

    What a disgusting, revolting, and reprehensible chapter in American history that people like THIS are in power and control all of the misinformation across the globe.

    Orwell would be intrigued by Hansen, no doubt. A character for his book, for sure.

    Long live the republic!

    CHRIS
    Norfolk, VA, U.S.A. [such as it is]

  338. evanmjones says:

    Ross: No sweat. (History has to be good for something.)

  339. savethesharks says:

    If Hansen was not bad enough…you have his pal Obama capitalising on the tragedy of the floods in North Dakota with his global warming remarks.

    PAY NO MIND THAT THIS WAS SNOWIEST WINTER EVER RECORDED IN NORTH DAKOTA!! And all that snow has to melt…

    Mr. Commander-In-Chief: To say a ludicrous statement like you did today…how ******* stupid do you think we are??

    OK….sorry…um….I get it…. a lot of us are stupid enough to believe your claims.

    But for the rest of us…and all of the intelligentsia that you are beginning to marginalize and alienate on the issue of AGW [from both sides of the aisle] you are treading on very thin ice with such careless words (or thick ice as the case may be).

    Long live the repubilc! {LOL I’m not sure I am saying that]

    Chris
    Norfolk, VA, U.S.A. [such as it is]

  340. evanmjones says:

    I wouldn’t call the Soros money a bribe. (Hansen didn’t change his stance on account of it.) But it does seem to me as if it’s a bit of a conflict of interest.

  341. savethesharks says:

    WakeUpMaggy (21:25:53) :

    No need to answer any of your questions. They are all rhetorical and a damn powerful statement of fact.

    Thanks for that….I needed that….and am saving it for future reference.

    Damn well said!

    Chris
    Norfolk, VA

  342. Tim L says:

    President ‘has four years to save Earth’

    Barack Obama has only four years to save the world according to Nasa scientist Jim Hansen…
    warning!!! NEW WORLD ORDER !!!!! you get this?????
    do you?

    anna v Why is this coming from australia?
    could it be the lib’s control the presses of the usa? humm?
    that might get snipped lol
    thank you mods for the time and effert u put into all these bloggs

  343. WakeUpMaggy says:

    Thank Chris,

    I thought I was on a demented rant . There is just no perspective anymore. I needed the feedback.

    (Until the 30-40’s start trying to support their destitute parents and demented grand parents)

    This seems like a safe place for realists to try to get a grip, FGS! Isn’t it? Tell me! This is about the only place I’ve found any objectivity, aside from Solarcyle24.com

    “To desire, therefore, reality, is the quest of prayer”

  344. Paul R says:

    It’s a shame I find myself on the same side of the debate as you people who, Didn’t Listen. What we’re going to miss out on is the chance to do fake panic deaths while attending Hansen and co’s anti coal protest rallies.

    http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/103844

  345. savethesharks says:

    WakeUpMaggy (22:14:22) :

    Yeah. Objectivity. You gotta love that tried and true friend of pure unadulterated logic!

    Funny that you mentioned solarcycle24 I toggle back and forth to that site too (see my latest post LOL).

    Hang in there. You get it. A LOT of us get it. We just gotta figure out how to mobilse and take down this ******* 800-pound gorilla that is wreaking havoc on the public (and private) scientific trust.

    Besides being in interesting times with all of the human controversy that is ensuing because we have complete IDIOTS that have highjacked the scientific world [I won't mention any names.....Hansen, Gore, Holdren]…we also live in historic times in regards to the natural world.

    And with that I leave you with the mantra for 2009….something that is repeated oft and again….day after day:

    The sun is blank. No sunspots.
    The sun is blank. No sunspots.
    The sun is blank. No sunspots.
    Ad infinitum.

    Well I have stayed up way to late. To bed!

    Hang in there. And….let’s mobilise!

    Long live the Republic!

    Chris
    Norfolk, VA

  346. savethesharks says:

    Paul R (22:22:14) :
    “It’s a shame I find myself on the same side of the debate as you people who, Didn’t Listen. What we’re going to miss out on is the chance to do fake panic deaths while attending Hansen and co’s anti coal protest rallies.

    http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/103844

    HAHA leave it to the best animated programs out there to level high criticism.

    Thanks for that.

    Chris
    Norfolk, VA

  347. Just Want Truth... says:

    “evanmjones (20:33:37) : If I understand it correctly, Obama has decoupled carbon credits from the budget bill, which means the thing actually has to rise or fall on its *ahem* merits.”

    Do you have links to this story? Thanks.

  348. Lance says:

    Yeah know, I had to skip a few hundred posts on this thread, just to say……
    I agree with you all, and in all honesty, I voted to fire that creep on a knee jerk reaction to the poll. But he has his right and I would never think about firing someone for thinking something contrary to the norm.
    That said, he SHOULD be fired for misrepresentation/falsification of true data by hiding real temperatures and readings under concocted proxies.
    All ignoring REAL scientific understanding/proven truths that we have a rational understanding of.
    AND the same person is controling recordings(proxy) of temperature readings paid for by the public, yeah, a public paid employee lying about real temperature data.

    John the other hand,

    For a modeler, …. he does not a bad job of manipulating data to get his desired result, even without real data to prove his theory. For what ever reason( he maybe a good speaker or pontificator
    ), he has a cultist personality. And that can go along way with AGW crowd.

  349. Manfred says:

    Manfred (20:19:14) :

    correction:

    extracting uranium from seawater:

    experimental data 350 kg polymer for 1.5 kg uran in 1 year

    Energy density in MJ/kg:
    natural uranium (0.72% U235): 648000
    petrol approx. :40
    http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energiedichte

    uranium: 1.5*648000 = 972000
    polymer: 350*40 = 14000

    14000/972000 * 365 days = 5.3 days

    extracting uranium from sea water has a positve energy balance after approx. 5 days.
    (this requires, however, that 100% of the energy stored in uranium is used. conventional nuclear power stations use only approx. 10%)
    http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kernkraftwerk

  350. Stefan says:

    WakeUpMaggie wrote: “What incredible narcissism we have.”

    Very true.

    People who want to save the world so that they are the ones who save the world.

    May be a deeper emotional drive than just the pursuit of science funding.

  351. Brendan H says:

    Smokey: “If Hansen was telling the truth, he certainly would have an airtight civil case against IBD. Conclusion: Hansen is lying. QED.”

    Not necessarily. The IBD is careful to parse its claims: “Hansen was packaged for the media by Soros’ flagship “philanthropy,” by as much as $720,000”; and “That may have meant that Hansen had media flacks help him get on the evening news…”.

    In other words, Hansen may have received PR help to the value of somewhere between $1 and $720,000. Lots of wriggle from there for the IBD. And for you.

    It’s true that Hansen won prizes from the Heinz Foundation and the Dan David Foundation for his work in science. But many people receive prizes for science, and from some unlikely sources. For example, Rolls Royce the car-maker offers a science prize to teachers.

    Hansen’s prizes have been widely publicised. Somewhat transparent “payola”, especially when the information is only a google away.

  352. AEGeneral says:

    Well, on a more uplifting note, it appears cap & trade has been scrapped for now, which Hansen probably views as a good thing. Democrats are striking it from the budget:

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/03/25/democrats-knife-obamas-budget/

    It’s also becoming clear that Obama’s controversial global warming initiative has experienced a setback, as neither House nor Senate Democrats are directly incorporating into their budget plans Obama’s controversial “cap-and-trade” system for auctioning permits to emit greenhouse gases.

  353. wolfemann says:

    Fired… no. However, I do think his superiors should tell him to tone it down, and begin the due process… process.

    Nobody should ever be fired for advocating civil disobedience – so long as they are not under contract to not do so. However, if you are under contract to not go out and, say, advocate for criminals because they agree with you, then y’know what?

    Step 2 of Civil Disobedience: There are consequences. Suck ‘em up.

  354. twawki says:

    I would think that as a government employee Hansen would also be guilty of the charge of misleading the public. When you consider the huge sums wasted on AGW this is not a small offence.

  355. Mr Lynn says:

    Roger Knights (21:08:57) :
    For more on the promise of breeder reactors, see the book Prescription for the Planet, here:

    Fast breeders are definitely the way to go in the long run, but let’s not forget that there’s nothing wrong with oil and coal and natural gas.

    I want a bumper sticker that says:

    CO2 IS GOOD FOR PLANTS, GOOD FOR THE EARTH
    AND GOOD FOR YOU!

    Back on topic, one of the Amazon reviewers of the aforementioned book writes, “Having been ‘anti-nuclear’ since the French started exploding islands in my part of the world, I never would have picked up, let alone read this book, without solid recommendations: James Hansen and Barry Brook.”

    So maybe this answers someone’s query further up this thread, as to whether Hansen is pro-nuke or not.

    /Mr Lynn

  356. “evanmjones (20:33:37) : If I understand it correctly, Obama has decoupled carbon credits from the budget bill, which means the thing actually has to rise or fall on its *ahem* merits.”

    Do you have links to this story? Thanks.
    P.S. – Sorry, forgot to tell you great post!

  357. Aron says:

    As you all know by now, I love revealing the hypocrisy and manipulative behaviour of Guardian journalists.

    I save all news articles I read as PDFs. This allows me to put a journalist or media outlet on the spot if they try to bury or change a news item, and it also means I can quickly find information I need if I don’t have internet.

    Here’s a current example of a news article slyly changed in response to comments by readers.

    http://img165.imageshack.us/img165/4924/goldenberg.jpg

    Yesterday our dear Suzanne Goldenberg (yes, the sexist, racist, ageist Holocaust exploiter) published an article about an eco-terrorist with the sympathetic headline “Serving 22 years: the environmentalist who fell victim to US anti-terror laws”

    Readers quickly commented that the environmentalist in question was moonbat mad and deserved to be locked up.

    Goldenberg duly changed the headline to “Activist or terrorist? Mild-mannered eco-militant serving 22 years for arson”

    With that headline change Goldenberg felt she covered her backside from looking like a terrorist sympathiser, but the question still remains why does she have to ask us if the convict is an activist or a terrorist, and why does Goldenberg now call her ‘mild-mannered’?

    The sympathy for a terrorist remains despite the headline change.

  358. Uncivil Servant says:

    Long time lurker, first-time poster, so have mercy if this is a bit OT.

    I’ve been wondering for a while now why scientists – surely intelligent people, surely people one could rely on to have a wide range of knowledge and conviction – can be so narrowly, obsessively, focused on one particular aspect of their field and at the same time be so resilient to anything contrary to the “consensus”.

    What also struck me is the sacrosanct nature of peer-review as my own academic experiences have shown me time and again that the emphasis is clearly on “peer”, not on “review”.

    Then I came across this astonishing book, which I invite all of you to read because it is truly enlightening (and no, this is not a hidden advertisement of any sort), Disciplined Minds by Jeff Schmidt.

    More on Mr Schmidt and his book on his site: http://disciplinedminds.tripod.com/

  359. Phil. says:

    Ross (20:22:17) :
    Roger Clague (12:52:33) :

    Ross
    Britain is not like a crowded theatre. We are not about to stampede anywhere. We are a mature, but flawed, democracy.

    Britain is, in my opinion, still a great country and the one from which we have derived much, if not most of our system of laws.

    Including the US Bill of Rights, see English Bill of Rights, 1689.

    To the best of my knowledge, though, Britain does not have a “First Amendment” [i.e., the first of ten of our Bill of Rights] as referred to by Mr. Dias and about which my comments were made.

    Actually it does, see for example “Human Rights Act 1998″.

  360. hotrod says:

    “evanmjones (20:33:37) : If I understand it correctly, Obama has decoupled carbon credits from the budget bill, which means the thing actually has to rise or fall on its *ahem* merits.”

    Do you have links to this story? Thanks.

    Hmmmm —
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/03/25/obama-helped-fund-carbon-scheme/

    Larry

  361. Adam Gallon says:

    Today’s The Daily Telegraph notes that Europe’s having its best snow in living memory.
    “And the snow just kept on falling….”
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/snowandski/5044863/Ski-in-Champery-where-the-snow-just-keeps-on-falling….html
    “The exceptional snowfall in the Alps this winter means that you should be able to ski in Switzerland’s Champéry, nestling at the feet of the Dents du Midi, right until the end of the season on April 26.”
    I first skiied in mainland Europe in ’85 (IIRC). Went to Andorra at about this time of the year.
    Bugger all snow, just a single slope, covered in a miserable, wet/icy snow, with a small river flowing down the middle come late afternoon, surrounded by bare rock.
    Current conditions in Andorra?
    Lower slopes: 100 cm
    Upper slopes: 210 cm
    Elsewhere?
    Canada
    “Large snowfalls fell at some resorts on the western coast of Canada at the end of last week, especially Whistler (244cm). 35cm of powder fell on Friday night giving fantastic conditions for the weekend. The Ski Club rep in Whistler said the weather on Sunday was fantastic and perfect to enjoy the great snow”
    Austria
    “Snow has been falling once again across some of Austria. Most of the snow either fell on Friday night or Sunday night so conditions are very good everywhere”
    France
    “The sun is still shining in France. The whole of last week was gloriously sunny and the temperatures varied from very mild to very cold early on”
    Italy
    “Sauze d’Oulx (120/240cm) also has good conditions but they are typical of spring. Fairly warm weather, with temperatures above freezing, has made the snow very soft in the afternoon sun and hard in the morning. An above average base depth for this point in the season means the coverage is still great all over the runs so there is no need to worry of bare patches developing yet.”
    USA
    “Colorado is finally receiving some fresh snow on Monday and it is due to get heavier through the week! ”
    “The heaviest of the snow in America has fallen in California. The Tahoe resorts especially received loads of fresh snow on Sunday and it is still falling on Monday morning. 61cm of powder fell on Sunday at Squaw Valley (140/432cm) so you can enjoy fantastic snow both on and off piste. Heavenly (224/295cm) also received nearly 60cm of powder.”
    “Over on the east coast snow has also been falling. 10cm fell at Stowe (53/174cm) on Saturday night. This brings their season’s snowfall so far to 28ft, which is more common at resorts on the west coast than the east. Four lifts are closed at Stowe on Monday, leaving nine running”
    28 feet!!!!!!!!!!! of snow!
    Hell’s bells, we get 28mm here & the whole country grinds to a halt.
    Still, it’s only weather, isn’t it.

  362. Elizabeth says:

    Fact is, Hansen works for the government. His employers should be nervous to hear him make statements such as, the democratic process isn’t “working.” This implies he’d like to see carbon evildoers thrown in prison, much like our friend David Suzuki.

  363. Brian in Alaska says:

    Hansen’s a tax-eater at a failed bureaucracy. Fire the lot of them, this economy doesn’t need more parasites with agendas. In short, get your hand out of my pocket and get a real job, Mr. Hansen.

    On a related note, where is our Mencken to point out the idiocies of the power-hungry? I’m tempted to ask why god has forsaken us, then I remember I’m an atheist. Be that as it may, the current crop of what passes for journalists seem to think that reporting consists of whooping and hollering about the predictions of our impending doom uttered by tax-funded “scientists”. All they really accomplish is to stampede the herd, frighten the children and drive the remnant to the internet to ferret out what the truth is.

  364. Roger Knights says:

    “I’ve been wondering for a while now why scientists … can be so narrowly, obsessively, focused on one particular aspect of their field and at the same time be so resilient to anything contrary to the “consensus”.”
    Schmidt’s book explains why: grad students are indoctrinated with and/or “selected for” please-the-teacher (or the authorities) syndrome.

  365. Eric says:

    Anthony Wrote:
    “REPLY: Luis, sir you are out of line. I made no call for censorship. That is a fabrication on your part. Hansen as scientist and government employee bound by the Hatch act is overstepping his bounds of employment. The issue is the terms of his employment, not free speech. As a US taxpayer it is my right to make this call for his dismissal. When a US government employee suggests that protests against the government he is employed by should be commenced because “the democratic process isn’t working” it becomes an issue of conflict of interest. I’m not ashamed to do so, nor do I care for your opinion that I should be. In fact you have inspired me to take my complaint to the next level. I urge others to do so as well. – Anthony”

    The Hatch Act does not prohibit employees from speaking out on issues or engaging in demonstrations on issues. The Hatch act involves activities related to partisan politics.

    http://www.osc.gov/ha_fed.htm#regulations

    I haven’t found any activities that Hansen has engaged in that violate the Hatch act.

  366. savethesharks says:

    Uncivil Servant wrote: “What also struck me is the sacrosanct nature of peer-review as my own academic experiences have shown me time and again that the emphasis is clearly on “peer”, not on “review”.”

    “Then I came across this astonishing book, which I invite all of you to read because it is truly enlightening (and no, this is not a hidden advertisement of any sort), Disciplined Minds by Jeff Schmidt.”

    I am buying that book this week! Thanks for the recommendation.

    Chris
    Norfolk, VA

  367. Niels A Nielsen says:

    In an interview James Hansen made with the Danish newspaer Politiken he says: “Vi kan blive nødt til at finde andre metoder end demokratiet. For vi har valgt regeringer, der siger, de vil løse problemet, men de gør det ikke. Forsøget på at gøre det gennem en demokratisk proces har slået fejl.”

    Translated: “We could be forced to find other means than democracy. We have chosen governments who promise to solve the problem but fail to do it. Attempts to use the democratic process have failed”

    http://mobil.pol.dk/indexarticle.pml;jsessionid=aqqe27qYAfZc?articleid=667743

  368. savethesharks says:

    Eric (09:42:18) wrote: “I haven’t found any activities that Hansen has engaged in that violate the Hatch act.”

    Hatch act aside……how about then….firing this government employee for just being WAY out of line?

    Or perhaps malfeasance [overseeing deliberately falsified data]….and even insanity.

    There are so many reasons to fire this former scientist turned megalomaniac taxpayer-funded social activist at this point, that the Hatch Act is irrelevant.

    Never before has such an important position in the world’s leading science organization, been so egregiously abused.

    Fire him.

    Better yet….OUST him.

    Long live the Republic! [lol]

    Chris
    Norfolk, VA, U.S.A. [such as it is]

  369. Eric says:

    savethesharks (10:34:46) :
    wrote,

    “Eric (09:42:18) wrote: “I haven’t found any activities that Hansen has engaged in that violate the Hatch act.”

    Hatch act aside……how about then….firing this government employee for just being WAY out of line?

    Or perhaps malfeasance [overseeing deliberately falsified data]….and even insanity.

    There are so many reasons to fire this former scientist turned megalomaniac taxpayer-funded social activist at this point, that the Hatch Act is irrelevant.

    Never before has such an important position in the world’s leading science organization, been so egregiously abused.

    Fire him.

    Better yet….OUST him.

    Long live the Republic! [lol]

    Chris
    Norfolk, VA, U.S.A. [such as it is]”

    I haven’t seen a definitive proof that Hansen is wrong about the science behind the theory of AGW. There is a difference of opinon among scientists about the expected temperature rise due to doubling of CO2, but a consensus that AGW is real. There are a number of polls among climate scientists that show that an overwhelming majority of Climate Scientists believe that AGW is a real effect.
    Pielke and Bray, and Harris Associates show 84% believe this, and a poll of scientists who published a paper in the last year by Roger Pielke Sr., shows 97% of scientists believe AGW is real.

    If NASA attempted to fire Hansen for wrong science, it would be hard to sustain such an action, because most climate scientists believe AGW is real, whatever your opinion or any one elses of the correctness may be. He has a right as a citizen to advocate whatever policy he wants to speak for. This is not prohibited by the Hatch act.

  370. rightmom says:

    Eric, I’m not sure what polls you are looking at, but real scientists are jumping the AGW ship every day. The globe has not had significant warming in 10 years. It is now in a cooling cycle. Yes, our temperatures actually CYCLE.
    The Gore extremists make big bucks on the AGW myth. That is their real reason for pushing their AGW agenda.
    $$$$$$$$$$$$$$ talks.

  371. Just Want Truth... says:

    hotrod (07:53:41) :

    Not quite what I thought it would be.

  372. Just Want Truth... says:

    “Eric (11:26:30) : I haven’t seen a definitive proof that Hansen is wrong about the science behind the theory of AGW.”

    What exactly is Hansen’s ‘science’ of global warming? Is it that trains carrying coal are ‘death trains’ (“The trains carrying coal to power plants are death trains. Coal-fired power plants are factories of death.” ~James Hansen)? Is it that we must take drastic steps immediately or damage will be irreversible (“The climate is nearing tipping points.”, “Our planet is in peril.” ~James Hansen)? Is it extinctions (“As species are exterminated by shifting climate zones” ~James Hansen)? He attributes ALL rise of co2 since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution to man (“The pre-industrial carbon dioxide amount was 280 parts per million (ppm). Humans, by burning coal, oil and gas, have increased this to 385 ppm;” ~James Hansen) but all scientists do not. Does his ‘science’ include using Nazi Holocaust vocabulary?

    All of this is part of the ‘consensus’ you are referencing?

    AGW includes the Urban Heat Island effect. Also, there are scientists who say manmade co2 does have an effect on climate but it is irrelevant. That irrelevant effect would be anthropogenic. AGW covers a broad range of meaning.

    You need to be specific when you talk about consensus. Please do not leave the impression that ALL scientists agree with James Hansen.

    reference for the Hansen quotes :

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/feb/15/james-hansen-power-plants-coal

    His ‘science’ is in this article. Please consider for yourself if he is accurate and voices what the ‘consensus’ thinks.

    One last question : is James Hansen a climatologist, or meteorologist?

  373. Just Want Truth: “One last question : is James Hansen a climatologist, or meteorologist?”
    He is a revolutionary!. If the US Congress doesn’ t approve Cap and Trade he will make a ‘coup d’etat” :)

  374. derise says:

    It is very difficult to prove a violation of the Hatch act, and most complaints come from within the organization. Only the egregious examples result in administraitive action.
    More troubling are possible violations of the Code of Ethics if he did recieve money from agencies outside of the government (other than from an approved teaching position). Should to be proven that he recieved money, even an honorarium from and external agency, while in a position equivilant to GS-15 or greater, he would be subject to criminal sanctions.
    To date, considering his actions in the press and with civil disobediance, I have seen little ethical behavior displayed.
    As for Climatoligist or meterologist, his degrees are BA Physics/Math, MS Astronomy, PhD Physics all from the University of Iowa.

  375. Just Want Truth... says:

    DR (17:48:44) :

    I’m not sure what your point is. Are you misunderstanding me?

  376. Just Want Truth... says:

    Brendan H (02:47:31) :

    James Hansen endorsed John Kerry for president. That hurts your argument.

  377. Just Want Truth... says:

    derise (16:18:47) :

    I knew about his education. But I asked this question for those who constantly talk about field of study. They somehow think you must be a climatologist in order to know what your talking about in climate. They do this to discredit people like Timothy Ball. This only shows they don’t know what they are doing.

    They also find reasons to discard Richard Lindzen though he is an atmospheric physicist and holds the Alfred P. Sloan Chair of Meteorology at M.I.T. He may be the most brilliant mind in the area of climate in the world. But that somehow means nothing to them. They have double standards.

    So I ask if they know if James Hansen is a climatologist or not. He is not. So by their standards he is disqualified to talk about climate.

    I try to hold them accountable to their double standard.

  378. Josh says:

    Our tax dollars are supporting this activist? He needs to be removed from NASA immediately.

  379. savethesharks says:

    Eric wrote “Hansen has a right as a citizen to advocate whatever policy he wants to speak for. This is not prohibited by the Hatch act.”

    When there are plenty of other reasons to fire the [man]…oversight of deliberately falsified data, willful misrepresentation, malfeasance, woeful incompetence, megalomania, and insanity….the Hatch Act is irrelevant.

    I think you are not distinguishing here between what he should be fired for (all of the above) and should be TRIED for (violation of the Hatch Act).

    I am just saying fire him, not try him.

    On second thought….lol

    CHRIS
    Norfolk, VA

  380. SteveSadlov says:

    RE: the Champery snow article. At this point, save for breaking one or another arcane canton law, one may well be able to ski into Champery instead of downloading on the Telepherique. One may be able to actually ski down the edge of the road from the base of the chairlift that is about a mile or so up the road from the village, the one that runs along the West side of the creek. Not bad for a town thats under 3000 ft elevation and is technically in a rain / snow shadow.

  381. anna v says:

    Adolfo Giurfa (13:55:38) :

    Just Want Truth: “One last question : is James Hansen a climatologist, or meteorologist?”
    Adolpho : He is a revolutionary!. If the US Congress doesn’ t approve Cap and Trade he will make a ‘coup d’etat” :)

    Ah, be fair. Hansen is on record that he does not want Cap and Trade. It is too slow in its effects. He wants direct taxation.

    Soon he will need restraints. He believes he has the truth and will save us whether we want to be saved or not.

  382. Ross says:

    Phil. (07:38:23) :

    Including the US Bill of Rights, see English Bill of Rights, 1689.

    To the best of my knowledge, though, Britain does not have a “First Amendment” [i.e., the first of ten of our Bill of Rights] as referred to by Mr. Dias and about which my comments were made.

    Actually it does, see for example “Human Rights Act 1998″.

    Thanks for the heads up on the English Bill of Rights; I stand corrected. On recollection of history classes many years ago, this piece of information was lurking there somewhere in my memory.

    I have only just now finished briefly reading through the “Human Rights Act 1998″ you referenced. So far I cannot agree/disagree definitively there is a First Amendment that is analogous to the US First Amendment in meaning and intent.

  383. Brendan H says:

    Just Want Truth: “James Hansen endorsed John Kerry for president. That hurts your argument.”

    Which argument, and why does Hansen’s endorsement of Kerry harm it?

  384. evanmjones says:

    Here’s a link. I was slightly mistaken: Obama didn’t do the decoupling, himself — congress did it for him!

    But carbon caps are out of the budget bill.

    http://www.examiner.com/x-2928-Environmental-News-Examiner~y2009m3d25-House-and-Senate-Omit-Obamas-Carbon-Trading-Market-from-Budget

  385. Mr Lynn says:

    evanmjones (02:07:19) :
    Here’s a link. I was slightly mistaken: Obama didn’t do the decoupling, himself — congress did it for him!

    But carbon caps are out of the budget bill.

    http://www.examiner.com/x-2928-Environmental-News-Examiner~y2009m3d25-House-and-Senate-Omit-Obamas-Carbon-Trading-Market-from-Budget

    However, this is but a temporary reprieve. The anti-CO2 steamroller will proceed down the legislative pike, as the Examiner article indicates:

    “I think some may argue that the political economy of getting climate change done this year may actually be better outside of the budget resolution than inside of it,” said Peter Orszag, director of the Office of Management and Budget, in a press briefing this morning.

    The budget can function without cap & trade, and the proposal can then be taken up in individual legislation.

    “With regard to climate change, there’s already legislation that is being considered on the House side. The Senate is also active. The fact that it’s not treated in the budget resolution the same way that we proposed in no way means that the House and Senate can’t take the legislation up,” Orszag said.

    With Democrat majorities and ‘moderate’ Republicans (including John McCain) on board, the only obstacle to draconian ‘carbon’ taxes and/or cap-and-trade (another form of taxation) will be the reluctance of Congressmen from fossil-fuel producing states to go along, and a strong public challenge to climate Alarmism by Realist scientists.

    Next month Carol Browner at the EPA is going to promulgate rules to ‘regulate’ CO2 as a ‘pollutant’. The only thing that can stop her is legislation, or legal action by affected parties (that will be you and me, when they come after our trucks and backyard grills).

    We need someone prominent, whom the media cannot ignore, who is willing to stand up and declaim, “CO2 is NOT a problem! STOP the madness!”

    Who will that be?

    /Mr Lynn

  386. evanmjones says:

    However, this is but a temporary reprieve. The anti-CO2 steamroller will proceed down the legislative pike, as the Examiner article indicates:

    Could be. But if it’s in the budget bill it means it doesn’t get debated. Different procedure. If it comes up in the normal way of things it has to stand or fall on its own.

    The EPA angle is worrying, though.

  387. Aron says:

    Next month Carol Browner at the EPA is going to promulgate rules to ‘regulate’ CO2 as a ‘pollutant’. The only thing that can stop her is legislation, or legal action by affected parties (that will be you and me, when they come after our trucks and backyard grills).

    You can always organise some Direct Action on her. As a socialist she surely can’t object to working people taking action on someone abusing a powerful position :p

  388. Doug says:

    “Dorf on Global Warming. I can see it!”

    I would suggest “Duarf.” As in “fraud” spelled backasswards.

  389. noname says:

    What has Hansen done relative to laws? He is a senior scientist, head of a Nasa lab, and the most visible person at Nasa. In this position he did:
    1) Publicly supported John Kerry–violation of Hatch act. Sorry, but we don’t want members of the administration making partisan pronouncements.
    2) took Soros money for legal help, and this is a violation of Hatch Act because the Soros organization is a lobby group (related to MoveOn.org). The help they provided has a dollar value.
    3) Is calling for dictatorship/overthrow of democracy: this is called sedition.
    4) Is calling for oil company execs to be tried for crimes against humanity.
    5) As a high government official, is publicly and repeatedly contacting heads of state and telling them what to do. Big no-no.
    6) He is aiding vandals (not peaceful protestors) in England.

  390. Aron says:

    A British anthropologist has been suspended from work after organising G20 protests and saying that bankers should be hung from lamp posts.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7967096.stm

  391. wmanny says:

    I doubt anyone is reading this thread any more, but it did occur to me that this Hansen-Hatch stuff is a overblown. I can’t stand the guy, but I have to say that if he were to come out in public and state, “You know, I think I’ve overstated my position, and this cap-and-trade idea seems dangerous and elitist”, nobody here would be complaining. It’s what he’s saying that is disagreeable, I believe, not how he’s saying it. Sorry if I’m repeating anyone.

  392. Michael VB says:

    It all started with the IPCC.

    The IPCC instigated this fear-based mass-alarmism. That some governments aren’t falling for it entirely actually shows “democracy” may actually be working to keep some hot heads in check. It is sad though that even NASA and the White House have jumped on the scientific-credibility-undermining demagoguery bandwagon. in regards to changing climates.

    “Rational and balanced” government policy ideally attempts to build upon what reputable scientists allegedly agree about. If the scientific community comes to a strong consensus and makes recommendations, it looks really bad when politicians ignore these recommendations. If a political body (like the U.N.), however, assembles a group of scientists to manufacture the impression of a strong consensus in order to further their personal beliefs and preferred policy changes… then, I think, we might end up in dangerous waters. Through concerted press releases and stirring up emotions, it’s easy to turn the manufactured scientific consensus into widespread manufactured public consent for certain policy changes. THE primary organization that is making recommendations, and which is being regarded as authoritive is the U.N.’s ‘Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’ (IPCC).

    In their own words: http://www.ipcc.ch/about/index.htm “The IPCC was established to provide the decision-makers and others interested in climate change with an objective source of information about climate change. The IPCC does not conduct any research nor does it monitor climate related data or parameters. Its role is to assess on a comprehensive, objective, open and transparent basis the latest scientific, technical and socio-economic literature produced worldwide relevant to the understanding of the risk of human-induced climate change, its observed and projected impacts and options for adaptation and mitigation.”

    So, to summarize: among other purposes, one of the main reasons for the IPCC’s existence is “to provide the decision-makers with information relevant to human-induced climate change and options for mitigation.”

    The KEY PHRASE of the the Working Group I (The Physical Science Basis) of the last (2007) IPCC report, AR4 (Assessment Round #4), is that the IPCC declares a > 90% confidence (in the media often translated as ‘certainty’) that most of the observed warming over the past half-century is caused by human activities. In short:
    According to the IPCC it is >90% likely that >50% of warming is due to human activity.

    Then they proceed to attribute the antropogenic aspect to be primarily due to greenhouse gas emissions, in particular CO2 (carbon dioxide), but also NH4 (Methane) and NO3 (Nitrous Dioxide). And then from there on forward come the predictions and the policy recommendations. The seriousness of all the IPCC recommendations is build upon the authority manufactured by the “90% likely”, which is politically near-unquestionable.

    The “over 50%” comes from tinkering with computer models, in which this value did a great job of corresponding with the warming of the second half of the 20th century. (Note: The computer model used considers climate variations caused by cosmic ray flux, and other possibly major parameters, as negligible, completely ignoring many recent scientific findings.). My question was: how did they arrive at the 90%? First thing I found out is that the “90% likely” or “90% certainly” are expressions of confidence. Second I found is that this expression of confidence what not arrived at through tests, calculations or statistics, but simply expressed “the expert judgment of the authors”. In other words, it reflects the subjective opinion of the authors about their own work. Since most people, expert or not, tend to be fairly confident when they publish something, this isn’t saying much, unless of course we’re dealing with a very large group of experts. So, then I wondered how many people we were talking about here…

    There were 619 contributing authors for the IPCC AR4 WG1, of which 152 lead authors. It’s the lead authors that determine the confidence level. While 152 people isn’t exactly overwhelming, or particularly difficult to come to consensus with (particularly given the fact that the IPCC is by-invitation-only and the greatest expert critics of the IPCC findings aren’t invited), the picture is actually worse…

    The” >90% likely >50% of warming is antropogenic” is arrived at over 3 chapters:
    In Chapter 7, “Couplings Between Changes in the Climate System and Biogeochemistry”, the link between greenhouse gasses and temperature is established. In Chapter 8, “Climate Models and Their Evaluation”, the used climate model is covered and Chapter 9, “Understanding and Attributing Climate Change”, deals with attribution.

    C7: Coordinating Lead Authors + Lead Authors: 18
    C8: Coordinating Lead Authors + Lead Authors: 13
    C9: Coordinating Lead Authors + Lead Authors: 9
    C7+8+9 = 40 people

    So, when the IPCC’s “thousands of scientists from all over the world” declared “in unison” their “consensus” that humans are “the main cause of the warming” of the climate over the last 50 years, it actually boils down to thousands of scientists and politicians having FAITH in the subjective confidence of less than 4 dozen “experts”. That’s all it means.

    All the rest is demagoguery.

Comments are closed.