UPDATE: Bumped, video of this interview is now available below.
I got late word tonight that Dr. Roger Pielke Senior, of the University of Colorado, will be a guest on the FoxBusiness News Channel Friday morning at 10AM EST (7AM PST).
He’ll be interviewed about current issues in climate science. Here’s channel numbers for cable and satellite services:
Cable Providers
Comcast (Digital) Channel 130
Comcast (Digital) Channel 958
Satellite Providers
DISH Channel 206
DIRECTV Channel 359
Sky Angel Channel 319
For cable TV locations in the USA see this interactive finder:
http://www.foxbusiness.com/channel_finder.html
============================================
here is the video of the interview:
Good Luck Roger, give them hell, but politely.
I wonder if he is going to announce the impliment of the UN’s new “Green World Order”.
Ya think?
i just see the story now, its 7:30 pst and i am off to work
maybe therell be a link later?
I just watched Dr. Pielke Sr.’s interview on FBN and overall I think he was very knowledgeable, professional, and articulate. However, having said that, I also felt that his responses were so agonizingly diplomatic that he failed to communicate anything of real substance or importance during the interview.
Stuart Varney (the interviewer) is a well known AGW skeptic and he gave Pielke Sr. every opportunity to focus on Tom Karl’s complicity in the Climategate and IPCC scandals. Yet all we heard from Pielke was that the climate change debate has multiple sides; that cap and trade is the wrong policy approach; and that Tom Karl might in fact be biased on this issue. Well, DUH! It’s probably reasonable to assume that these Earth shattering revelations were already well known to anyone with half a semi-functioning brain.
But seriously, It was extremely frustrating to watch someone as brilliant as Dr. Pielke completely avoid any substantial criticism of Tom Karl and the Hockey Team when he knows (perhaps better than anyone) how deceptive and corrupt these people are. This is especially puzzling in light of the numerous back-stabbing attacks and libelous remarks that were made against both Pielke Sr. and his son in the leaked CRU emails.
In conclusion, I respect the Pielkes’ views and enjoy reading their blogs, but too much is at stake in the AGW debate to waste valuable media exposure on their overly-bland, non-confrontational, fence-sitting ruminations. Until the Pielkes’ realize that there is no “third way” in the AGW debate, skeptics will be better served if people like Lord Monckton and Marc Morano do the interviews.
February 26, 2010
Obama Backing the Wrong Climate Scientists?
FoxBusiness News Channel
FNC webiste this AM link:
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/02/26/climate-data-compromised-by-heat-sources/
Congrats, Anthony!
It’s a good start. Rational, sober (in the displaying even-temperament, not flying off the handle way), not taking easy personal shots. Well said doctor, and hopefully more visible interviews will be forthcoming.
I wouldn’t bet a snowball on the “forthcoming” part of it though. And we’ve got lots of them.
I think that the time contraint prevented him elaborating Daniel H.
Well on a related subject, a 48 mile long ice block has fallen off some Antarctic glacier, and that is going to remove all the oxygen from the oceans and kill all the little fishies.
Funny thing is that nobody even mentioned the 60 mile long ice block that crashed into the glacier and broke the little piece off.
Nobody gets all upset, when all the ice blocks up in the arctic break up and melt; so why should we be concerned about the southern ones doing the same thing.
So slow down your breathing and CO2 exhalation or we will run out of oxygen because of these errant ice blocks.
Well I noticed a few days ago we had 14 million square km of arctic ice blocks and now we are down to only 13, 980,000 , so that is a loss of 20,000 sq km of ice blocks, which is about 140 km square, so it is bigger than both those Antarctic ones; and that in the arctic has already melted according to JAXA.
George, i was surprised to hear in German radio today the story of the Luxembourg-sized piece of ice, together with the remark: “Scientists rule out that this is related to climate change.” Maybe they know they don’t have to exaggerate here as Germany is already a Kyoto victim.
George E Smith,
Do you really think the Arctic is melting at minus 30C?
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php
Dr Pielke is very polite and nuanced, yet he is very clear in three important points.
Firstly, scientists are becoming increasingly aware that the climate is more complex than the world has been led to believe, and that secondly, policy makers are still behind the curve (aren’t they always?) and are trying to deal with simple black and white issues.
And this leads to his third and perhaps most important point. Policy initiatives must be directed towards protecting our resources (ie adaptation), and away from trying to control climate by tweaking a trace gas at the margins.
If only policy makers would get it. But they are so thick, thick, thick from thick town that they never will.
Finally, we get to see what the mysterious Pielke, Sr. looks like in the 21st century.
Very, very well done, Dr. Pielke!
A whole 3 and half minutes.
Great job. He said Karl had a very narrow view. He said legislation will not reach the intended goal of reducing CO2.
I think that Dr. Pielke gave a very politically astute interview. Any politician and any student of the vocabulary used by politicians will recognise a perfectly delivered slap-down of the appointment of Karl’s appointment. It was given in a measured, calm and rational manner making it even more devastating.
Well said, Dr. Pielke. The opponents of CAGW need spokesman like you, the very antithesis of the hysterical pro-AGW propagandists.
Well, at least Roger didn’t go off on poor Stuart like Ed Begly did.
Off subject (sorry)
Can anyone tell me (I’m not a Scientist) Whether there is, such a thing, as a ‘Theory of Global Warming’…. That meets the scientific definition of ‘Theory’. Like the ‘Theory of Gravity’ for instance? I often hear the term Global Warming Theory…..But I don’t understand, whether there is even a ‘Theory’, as such.
In my eyes, Dr. Pielke did the right thing: requesting open scientific dialogue and questioning whether we should really put all our resources on CO2 reduction. That’s a position compatible with Lomborg and the biggest threat ATM for the UNIPCC’s mission. Very good. Let Morano, Bastardi and D’Aleo do the more outspoken critic at AGW. But what will sink Cap&Trade and the UNIPCC’s mission are the Pielkes, von Storchs and Lomborgs. And of course, as long as we have Dr. Pachauri, he will also help a lot.
What a poor interviewer.
BTW, is Pielke really supposed to be pronounced as pal-key?
Well, here is a UN Scientist saying it a bit more to your face;
http://www.tech-know.eu/uploads/IPCC_carcass.pdf
This quote comes from the WSJ article that roasts Mickey Mann today.
The extremists want to both predict and set policy.
“Mr. Marburger, the former Bush science adviser, said he frequently heard policy makers express frustration at the lack of certainty in many areas of science, including climate. “‘Why can’t we get better numbers?’ Everybody asks that,” he said. “But science rarely gives you the right answer. Science tells you what the situation is, but it doesn’t tell you what to do.”
Science tells us what happened. It is limited in explaining all the causes behind what happened.
Like Pielke Sr says, We can’t expect policies to do what they promise.
I think what is said was that the climate changes; And the best way to deal with it is to adapt to the changing climate. Most likely a vastly more economical solution than trying to change the climate through taxation.