Bizarre plot twists aren’t limited to recent climate science.
I’m sitting in my study and Law and Order came on on NBC 10PM PDT. They have a fictional crime episode regarding a climate scientist where stolen emails are mentioned in the first ten minutes, “climate deniers” are named, and it looks like they are interviewing a fictional GISS scientist in NYC.
Cap and Trade shenanigans with the word “scam” are mentioned too.
Here’s a preview video from NBC and a new link to the whole episode:
http://www.nbc.com/Law_and_Order/video/preview-brazil/1211024/
The preview doesn’t show the Climategate portion, apparently it starts out with a skeptic being poisoned at a conference breakfast.
It looks like the plot now turns toward some sort of custody battle. One of the fictional scientists looks like he was modeled after Gavin or maybe Romm.
Here’s a line:
“We’re scientists, we deal with disagreements with emotional detachment and reason”.
==========================================
UPDATE: Commenter “Ando” provides this link to the whole episode, which follows after a short into commercial: http://www.wisevid.com/gate-way?v=3Abf99A85wzc
You may have to click on the “let me watch” button since it has a rating.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Where’s Fred Thompson when you need him?
Didn’t look like it had much to do with global warming.
Anyway, what’s an intelligent person doing watching NBC?
REPLY: Heh, accidental really. It was on after I gave up on channel surfing after “The Big Bang Theory” which I never miss. -A
Well this is proof that AGW is real? It’s in colour *AND* on TV….gotta be true!
My wife’s favourite cop show and my favorite blog topic! Sweetness!
Talking about the Cap and Trade shenanigans, I’m pretty certain it’s not all over yet. It still has the makings of bringing the whole financial system to its knees more so than any other economic crisis we’ve had, including the great depression. In some ways it would be good – to teach everyone a lesson. Of course, it will hurt but then that’s life. Perhaps then we can finally go onto more useful enterprises, after we have purged all the crap, and in some cases corrupt politicians.
I’ve yet to watch “Big Band Theory”. I hear it’s pretty darn good.
Law & Order: SUV?
If you start with Big Bang – best go back to the beginning with series 1 or you’ll have missed *too* much 🙂
“We’re scientists, we deal with disagreements with emotional detachment and reason”.
So Law & Order is some kind of comedy, then?
Ahh – excellent taste – “The Big Bang Theory”. A nice break to web surfing. I normally keep it on CBS – CSI/NCIS/Mentalist, though I’ve been known to sneak over to Fox for Bones, but a bit of humor’s a good break. Then there’s always the mute button if the web surfing gets more interesting than the boob tube, which is usually the case.
I wonder how long before someone witty reading this blog suggests some possible script excerpts… /hint
“Castle” is way better than “Law and Order”; you shoulda kept surfing.
I was thinking:
Law & Order: CRU
REPLY: Heh, accidental really. It was on after I gave up on channel surfing after “The Big Bang Theory” which I never miss. -A
Ah, Kaley Cuoco… And the comedys pretty good too!
Anthony,
NBC recognizing Climategate, even in a fiction piece? Surprising.
You have shown us a wonderfully well developed sense of delightful humor in the past.Is this a premature April Fool thingy? : )
John
These people give morons a bad reputation. Believe me. The Warmists will be brilliant. The skeptic will be a fool. Anyone want some beachfront in Canada?
“The Big Bang Theory” which I never miss. -A
You probably already know, but the lead character is based on Lubos Motl.
dum-dum
I gave up watching L&O a while ago. When I first saw it I thought it was the best show I’d ever seen. it seemed grounded in the reality of it’s subject, unlike the cross-sectional shows that tell too many stories at once and do justice to none of them. But I’ve grew tired of the rigid format of the show. The original L&O is still a good show, but I got tired of it’s rigid format where you can guess what will happen next based on the minute hand of the clock. At the top of the hour, some people are having a conversation when they suddenly find a body. Then we jump to the crime scene investigation where the detectives get the low-down and the lead detective, at about 5 after makes a wisecrack. Then comes the opening credits. The detectives try to find out as much as they can over the next ten minutes but don’t have any real leads. The lieutenant tells them they’re full of it and sends them to check out some particular thing with uncovers an apparent motive for the murder. This comes at about 15 after. They grill the guy at the station house and maybe put him through a lineup with a defense attorney yapping at their heals. Then they find out the guy didn’t do it and it turns out this story is about something else entirely. They find out what it is, and at 25 after they tell it to the assistant DA who tells them they are full of it. But they convince her that they aren’t full of it and she tells them to arrest the guy. Then comes everybody’s favorite scene at half past, the “How dare you arrest me! Can’t you see I’m doing something important?” scene. Then we come to everybody’s other favorite scene, the arraignment where the other defense attorney tells the judge the prosecution’s full of it and the judge tells the defense attorney that he’s full of it. Then, at 25 of, the district attorney tells the executive district attorney and the assistant district attorney that they’re full of it. The defense attorney concurs, and presents the executive assistant DA with a motion to suppress whatever evidence they have for some ridiculous reason except that the judge thinks it’s a wonderful reason, and at 15 of we’re back where we started. Now the executive assistant and the assistant DA hatch a plan to bend the rules to get the guy convicted anyway. The only suspense is whether it works. And if it doesn’t, there’s usually some extralegal retribution at the end. It’s been a great show and it may go on forever but it is possible to get a little tired of it.
The parent company of NBC is GE, producer of wind turbines and power management systems.
GE is one of the biggest profiteers of the climate change scare.
From Wiki on Lubos Motl.
He also frequently criticizes what he considers to be alarmism about global warming, and some of the statistical models used by some climate researchers on grounds such as incorrect prior probability distributions.
Get BBT every week in UK but 2 series old, have to download it to get the current series, loved the Drunk Sheldon showing his Uranus.
And here is an example of Lubos Motl blog, plenty of food for thought. A point by point decimation of John Cooks 102 points supporting AGW.
http://motls.blogspot.com/2010/03/john-cook-skeptical-science.html#more
Hi folks,
Slightly off topic but I have just read that in the UK the PCC (press complaints commision) has just censured a blog by Rod Liddle(Radio 4, Today editor) for claiming the overwhelming majority of violent crime in London is carried out by young Afro Carribean men. http://uk.news.yahoo.com/21/20100330/tuk-first-blog-faces-censure-by-pcc-6323e80.html
Could the same thing be applied to climate change blogs that continue to claim that AGW is supported by an overwhelming majority of scientists.
Peter of Sydney (22:56:10) :
Sorry Peter; but the derivatives already created and launched over the last decade have destroyed the financial system. The system is just sort of running on the momentum of trust and confidence built up by previous generations’ proper management of the dollar.
Imagine an elk after it has taken a shot in the chest, shattering its aorta. It’s already dead, it just doesn’t know it yet. On adrenaline alone it can run for over a mile when events finally catch up with it.
Cap and trade would be a derivatives trader’s dream. Something that doesn’t even exist can have a value assigned to it and all that paper can be traded with no risk whatsoever of the final counter party having to deliver something tangible. It’s value is determined by some arbitrary numbers assigned to it by a programmer/user/computer.
A lot like climate models.
I better quit because this is starting to depress me…
Peter of Sydney (22:56:10) : In some ways it would be good – to teach everyone a lesson.
I don’t think people as a whole learn lessons. Maybe one generation might learn a lesson. And they could probably scare their kids enough for the lesson to stick for them, too. But after that, all that first generation’s lessons will be forgotten, and the next generation will have to learn them for themselves all over again.