You may recall that Finnish TV interviewed Steve McIntyre last month. They did a superb job with that. Now they have a new 3 part YouTube series out on Climategate, with English subtitles. It is well worth the watching.
A part that particularly struck me was: “They reveal an aggressive atmosphere, where the scientists consider dissenting colleagues as their enemies…”
Maybe just maybe, one of our other TV networks besides Fox will have the journalistic integrity to do a similar report. One can only hope one will, except for 60 Minutes, a program now in decay.
Part1
Parts 2 and 3 are below
Part 2
Part 3
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I saw this on climateaudit. It’s very well done. My only beef with it is that it is not damning enough. They should have interviewed a couple of lawyers at the end calling for all sorts of lawsuits and investigations and the like. Indeed, why hasn’t anybody filed a lawsuit on that hockey stick clown, Michael Mann? If I had the money, I would have.
Hansen was on David Letterman last night, trashing carbon trading as Greenwashing. Does that count?
curiouser and curiouser
Pachauri: TERI-Europe – the enigma (Part 1)
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2009/12/pachauri-teri-europe-enigma-part-1.html
some of the characters in above:
London Borough of Merton
Ward: Hillside
Nicholas Vivian James Robins – Greens Party
http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:fCKnMxozWSkJ:www.merton.gov.uk/elections-may2002.pdf+Nicholas+Vivian+James+Robins&hl=en&sig=AHIEtbT1KmH91CZx8owVn7STiaEAUoQeeg
John T. Houghton
Sir John Theodore Houghton FRS CBE is a Welsh scientist who was the co-chair of the Nobel Peace Prize winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) scientific assessment working group. He was the lead editor of first three IPCC reports. He was professor in atmospheric physics at the University of Oxford, former Chief Executive at the Met Office and founder of the Hadley Centre.
He is the chairman of the John Ray Initiative, an organisation “connecting Environment, Science and Christianity”,[1] where he has compared the stewardship of the Earth, to the stewardship of the Garden of Eden by Adam and Eve.[2] He is a founder member of the International Society for Science and Religion. He is also the current president of the Victoria Institute.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_T._Houghton
Sir Crispin Tickell
Sir Crispin was President of the Royal Geographical Society from 1990 to 1993 and Warden of Green College, Oxford between 1990 and 1997, where he appointed George Monbiot and Norman Myers as Visiting Fellows…
He is currently director of the Policy Foresight Programme[3] of the James Martin 21st Century School[4] at the University of Oxford (formerly the Green College Centre for Environmental Policy and Understanding) and Chairman Emeritus of the Climate Institute, in Washington DC. He has many interests, including climate change, population issues, conservation of biodiversity and the early history of the Earth.
****His worldwide status as an authority on climate change is all the more surprising because he has no formal academic training in this area and has formed his opinion by self-teaching.
Tickell helped to write Margaret Thatcher’s speech on global climate change[5]. He chaired John Major’s Government Panel on Sustainable Development (1994-2000), and was a member of two government task forces under the Labour Party: one on Urban Regeneration, chaired by Sir Richard Rogers, now Lord Rogers (1998-99), and one on Potentially Hazardous Near-Earth Objects (2000).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crispin_Tickell
Maybe just maybe, one of our other TV networks besides Fox will have the journalistic integrity to do a similar report.
Climategate has been quite an eye opener regarding “journalistic integrity”. What should, under normal circumstances, have been a real scoop for any serious journalist gets relegated to “network cables used in hack may have been made in China”.
I am fairly sure that if I had not got my own copy then I would still have no clue what was in FOI2009.zip
“journalistic integrity” – dictionary please.
Very nice presentation and I hope it gains some traction.
If anyone is interested there is an English transcript, here:
http://ohjelmat.yle.fi/mot/viime_viikon_mot/transcript_english
Well done. Yes, could have been more damning. So many of the true scientists are very cerebral soft spoken people…. it isn’t their nature to lambast someone else for junk science. But it needs to be done here. The fraud is just spectacular.
There will be no traction to this, already the dems are pleading w Pres 0 that enough is enough for fear of losing upcoming elections. Anyone who still relies on MSM is in the dark ages.
Hopefully these excellent reports will have versions made with subtitles in other languages, for viewing by readers in non-English speaking nations. The Finnish reports are impressive.
3×2 (19:18:11) :
Why do you think so many news mainstream organizations are hiding the truth about climategate and the fraud of AGW? Are they part of a global conspiracy or is it just a money issue for them? Is mainstream media controlled by some powerful, hidden and sinister outfit that is trying to take over the world? Or have they already taken over? They are rather blatant in their dishonesty. Why are they still in control? I don’t get it.
I was quite impressed by the qualified Finnish scientists who were willing to discuss the real implications of the emails (as opposed to whitewashing the fraudsters) on camera. Is science more open in the nordic countries?
But then considering the slavish AGW mentality of the Nordic politicians on display at Copenhagen, maybe not.
3×2:
“journalistic integrity” – means toeing the line of the controlling party and using that party’s press releases as news. Also, agreeing to print whatever the controlling party wishes as long as access to said party is retained. (Certain stations have admitted to this.)
“Biased journalism” means providing equal time to the other side.
Thank you, Steve McIntyre, for having the courage to speak out forcefully on climategate.
Climategate is only the visible tip of a very dirty iceberg of deceit in science.
If the spotlight of public scrutiny melts the iceberg, data manipulation and deceit will likely be revealed in other studies that are supervised by DOE, NASA, etc. and financed with tax funds.
With kind regards,
Oliver K. Manuel
Former NASA PI for Apollo
Mapou (19:50:00) :
“Why do you think so many news mainstream organizations are hiding the truth about climategate and the fraud of AGW? ”
MSM must maintain the image that it is an authority on all it reports. They also know that crisis draws viewers and tranquility does not. Perhaps they have also found that a fearful populace tends to spend more on trivial diversion than does a tranquil one. Correspondents care far more about putting on a dramatic production than they do about presenting seemingly mundane science.
To perform a 180 turn after years of spouting dogma would completely undermine their image of authority. They are as deluded by their own egos as are the radical “scientists” who have been recently exposed.
It’s no conspiracy, its groupthink.
You are right about 60 Minutes. It has not been worth watching in years. Maybe as long ago as when Dan Rather was on it. but then out of the blue they do a good report like the one on California being held hostage to nutjob environmentalists and a 3 inch fish. Of course Fox reported on it months ago.
Mapou (19:50:00) :
“Why are they still in control? I don’t get it.”
Perhaps they are less in control than their productions imply.
Their cultural dynamics model probably did not project the escaped CRU files.
One thing is certain from this video — this scandal did not “blow over.” As an EE major who sees many things in terms of their impulse response, I can clearly see that this story has the kind of legs that it takes to get into the history books.
Even if the “investigations” are total whitewashes, the scandal will leave a large, permanent mark on climate science and how it is perceived publicly. Even if the alarmists are perfectly right and the climate “tips” and temperature “runs away” to some problematic high value, Climategate will still be an object lesson in how not to manage science news when you are right.
In the much more likely scenario where global warming turns out not to be an imminent crisis, Climategate will be a study in the psychology of ego, narcissism and denial among scientists who could not control their biases.
I think they touched on most of the key points and conveyed the sinister flavor of the scandal quite well.
So, how long do we have to wait for a believer to dismiss this report as corporate propaganda generated by Finland’s “Big Reindeer” industry?
tom t (20:21:23) :
You are right about 60 Minutes. It has not been worth watching in years.
Oh come on now. It is well worth putting on at the end to catch A Few Minutes With Andy Rooney. He is insightful and funny, and always the best part of the show. He is so good, you don’t even need the rest of the hour!
Anthony,
I understand that both the Nature Publishing Group and Scientific American now belong to a private German publishing conglomerate, Verlagsgruppe Georg von Holtzbrinck, through its ownership of the Macmillan publishing house. It seems that this interconnected ownership has a large say in what gets published in the popular science literature and their editorial boards have been vociferous in their defense of Jones, et al and CRU. It would seem some light should be shown on their group to increase the expectation of open and honest discourse. Below is an email I have posted to the company through their contact page:
Hello,
I am interested in your corporate response to the ongoing issues regarding certain of your publications, namely Nature and Scientific American. It seems that your editors have been caught up in the unseemly and unprofessional behavior brought to light by the unofficially released email and other records from the climate research facility at the University of East Anglia in Britain. Rather than promote open and honest scientific discourse, they have been at the forefront of defending and rationalizing the demonstrably inappropriate behavior of many in the climate research community. Please respond by describing how this sort of activity is allowed by your journalistic ethics policies.
Thank you,
Joel Black
REPLY: [ No need to post this twice. -mod ]
To me the telling item was when France decided not to enforce their carbon tax, scheduled for Jan 1, ’10. Since that domino has fallen, the rest in the EU will collapse also, and where does that leave carbon trading? In the toilet, I’d speculate. Once $billions are lost, FRAUD will be the war cry for an army of trial lawyers.
Folks, this thing is just beginning. And it won’t stop until Al Gore is humiliated beyond belief. It would serve him right, along with all the other criminals that have been involved.
60 Minutes has been “in decay” for at least two decades.
Interesting that the 30’s were warmer than now in Russia and Finland just like in the USA.
Watching made the frustrations and indignation over ClimateGate come afresh like when I first learned about it in November.
After ClimateGate broke I saw Bernard Goldberg say that some young journalists should investigate global warming. I’m going to send an email to him and suggest he be the journalist to do it.
kadaka (18:38:28) :
Hansen was on David Letterman last night, trashing carbon trading as Greenwashing. Does that count?
I unfortunately watched that interview. Every question was a softball, every answer calculated. The agenda was obvious. Dave was OBVIOUSLY worried about his son’s future and about ruining the earth, as he stated it NUMEROUS times. Of course, Hansen was given the opportunity to say that Climategate was nothing, and does not affect the science behind global warming. He was also very proud of his arrest while protesting a WVa coal mine. Nothing else expected from someone that stopped being a scientist long ago and is nothing but a leftist advocate for the green movement.