According to the KUSI special report page, Dr. Hansen has issued the following statement.
NASA has issued the following statement in response to the KUSI Special Report. This statement is from Dr. James Hansen, Director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York City:
“NASA has not been involved in any manipulation of climate data used in the annual GISS global temperature analysis. The analysis utilizes three independent data sources provided by other agencies. Quality control checks are regularly performed on that data. The analysis methodology as well as updates to the analysis are publicly available on our website. The agency is confident of the quality of this data and stands by previous scientifically based conclusions regarding global temperatures.” (GISS temperature analysis website: http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/)
For more on Dr. Hansen, here is a Youtube clip of his recent appearance on the David Letterman show. Apparently Dr. Hansen does “joust with jesters” after all.
Dr. Hansen writes on his website:
…if we, in effect, destroy Creation, passing on to our children, grandchildren, and the unborn a situation out of their control, the contrarians who work to deny and confuse will not be the principal culprits. The contrarians will be remembered as court jesters. There is no point to joust with court jesters. They will always be present. They will continue to entertain even if the Titanic begins to take on water. Their role and consequence is only as a diversion from what is important.
Yet here he is, jousting with the biggest jester of them all.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
This may be the appropriate place to post this.
I was just watching, while working on my PC, Star Trek NG episode “The Drumhead” (1991) where Picard is put under pressure of a trial into spying by a zealous admiral who threatens him that she has brought down bigger people than him. At the end of the show Picard says to Worf:
“She, or someone like her, will always be with us – waiting for the right climate in which to flourish, spreading fear in the name of righteousness. Vigilance, Mister Worf – that is the price we have to continually pay. ”
Very fitting to us. Keep up the great work at WUWT!
Either they have or they haven’t. What are the facts. Are the opponents of AGW just making noise or do they have proof?
three independent data sources
Global Historical Climatology Network (Peterson and Vose, 1997 and 1998),
United States Historical Climatology Network (USHCN) data,
and SCAR (Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research)
Independent?
Nuts!
The “quality” of this data leaves so much to be desired it makes me wonder about the folks and methods doing his claimed “Quality control checks are regularly performed on that data”. If he isn’t aware or nervous about this in light of the siting issues UHI issues and rediculous fudge factors it is mighty hard to take him seriously.
He is right about then carbon trading, one of those broken clock twice a day things.
A bozo echo chamber… how novel!
Ah, Hansen. The ideal Climate Jester will display the ability to fudge the baseline data, cherry-pick the hottest stations and oversalt the cookie-dough mass. Place in pot of model-water, then bring to a raging boil while homogenizing.
If Julia Child saw you making cookies like that, she’d beat you to a pulp with her myriad kitchen utensils.
George Patton would say “Ha, ha, I read your emails. What a waste of fine data.
”
Tina Fey would say “And I can see Alaska from my house…in Miami Beach. Oh look, fresh frozen orange juice on the trees, just like Mom & Dad said about Mr. Spocks coming Ice Age. Bye-eee.”
Dr. Robert W. Corell on the most popular Scandinavian talk show tonight:
http://www1.nrk.no/nett-tv/klipp/598717 (starts after 45 minutes)
Is he really Obama’s climate science advisor? This is pure brainwashing!
“I don’t know anything about it but we’re doomed”. Is Letterman trying to drive down the price of beach front property so he can buy some next to Al Gore?
What he really meant was: “NASA has not not been involved in any manipulation of climate data used in the annual GISS global temperature analysis.” I imagine NASA’s QC checks are as good as New Scientists’ re:glacial melting. It only took it ten years for admit it was wrong.
“The agency is confident of the quality of this data”….not the point. Is the agency itself reliable? That is the point.
NASA has not been involved in any manipulation of climate data used in the annual GISS global temperature analysis. The analysis utilizes three independent data sources provided by other agencies.”
Plausable deniability- the logical analisis of this assertion would be that data is manipulated BEFORE it gets to NASA.
Think that book is filed under FICTION……
Gerard (14:11:43) :
I understand you must have been off the planet for last few months.
Perhaps you should take some time and get familiar with the term “Climategate” and all the fallout from same.
Just go back and watch the KUSI special for starters.
You will see those against AGW have the proof. More will be made available when the inevitable investigations, armed with FOIA requests or court subpoenas, retrieve the records GISS, NASA, and NOAA have been reluctant to share with those of us who have been footing the bill for this nonsense.
Grab some popcorn and enjoy the show.
Tim Clark (14:21:08) :
You said it right: Nuts!
Which makes him anything but trustworthy.
The absolute lack of response in regard to the content of the acquisitions made by Coleman, E.M Smith and Joseph D’Aleo tells me the they are on the right track.
The same goes for the Anthony’s surfacestation project
http://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.com/2010/01/15/professional-discourtesy-by-the-national-climate-data-center/
All result in a mountain of rock solid evidence that can’t be ignored.
( Is he really Obama’s climate science advisor? )
http://www.worldsciencefestival.com/robert-corell
It appears so and to top it off hes a AGW guy and he worked alot with the IPCC assessments that landed him one of those cereal box Nobel Peace Prizes they seem to hand out to anybody that walks by anymore .
“NASA has not been involved in any manipulation of climate data”
So what does NASA do with the data and if they do nothing, why do we need NASA involved in climate data?
Nasa have been known to manipulate images and go to radio silence or use code words in verbal comunications with astronauts.
Remember the inexplicable two minutes of silence shortly after Apollo 11’s lunar landing?
(But thats totally off topic and for another forum. I only refer it as an example that Nasa is not above obfuscation)
…if we, in effect, destroy Creation, passing on to our children, grandchildren, and the unborn a situation out of their control,…
And there you have it. In physics, nothing is created or destroyed. This single statement answers every question I have regarding what motivation is behind his appearance of being on a holy crusade to save the planet. Or he is simply dissembling.
Either way, this isn’t about science.
posted this at CA, but here are a few links to some protected files from the GISS server. the login was in the FOIA’d emails, and worked yesterday (the site has been taken down).
http://www.mediafire.com/?nwexrent2jy
http://www.mediafire.com/?2z0zdg4jj4m
mostly graphs, data and work logs – for example:
“Target CO2″ Paper
Proof received, awful quality, I checked fig caps & ref’s 08′10′06
Evelyn faxed, FedExed & e-mailed Jim’s new version 08′10′07
Figure 6+S13 for press release PDF Target/S13&DearPM 08′10′09 08′10′14
Schmunk uploaded on arXiv Main, Appendix 08′10′15 08′10′15
Larry/Evelyn paid $800 for publication by fax 08′10′21 08′10′21
2nd Proof, Jim sent e-mail and faxed re figure locations 08′10′27 08′10′27
Jim sent pre-press release and Q&A to reporters in list 08′10′27 08′10′27
3rd Proof, OK to Saima 08′10′29 08′10′29
Published on-line, with chopped up words. Jim sent e-mail. 08′10′31 08′10′31
“The analysis utilizes three independent data sources provided by other agencies. Quality control checks are regularly performed on that data.”
Maybe we should dig a little deeper and check the sensor
configurations for sea ice extent. We may be getting raw data
that has been improperly collected.
Only slghtly OT, just reported by WSJ:
According to the conservative think tank the National Center for Public Policy Research, Mann received $541,184 in economic stimulus funds last June to conduct climate change research.
How many jobs did this “create”?
Bunch of nitwits and I am being extremely kind.
Hansen is lying like a rug.
Jack Simmons: I have followed Climategate very closely and I have watched the Kusi program and I still do not see any politicians backing down or running for cover on this issue (although Tony Abbott was made leader of the opposition in Australia on this issue, but he is still hedging his bets and as far as I can gather he is still an AGW believer). As a scientist myself I I only deal in facts however it is still only fringe groups and not main stream groups that have taken up the cause. I still think we have a long way to go before the wheels fall off the AGW gravy train.
What to do with Hansen. He’s an embarrassment to himself and NASA.
There’s also a crisis at NBC late night television over the Tonight Show.
Wait … I have the perfect solution.
Zucker at NBC hires Hansen away from NASA as their new late night comedic talent. It keeps up NBC’s very proper Green image, solves the Leno/Conan dust up, and Hansen is free to speak his mind without any appearance of a conflict that exists now as a gov’t employee.
And then when the whole thing implodes, NBC Universal fires Zucker for driving NBC even further to the ratings cellar and fires Hansen as a no-talent joke, who then rides off to join Gore in his crusade [Hansen & Gore later split the AGW movement into a bitter civil war over purity of beliefs]. Leno takes over at 4th place Tonight Show, behind Letterman at CBS, ABC’s Nightline, and the high-flying Conan show – FOX Tonight.