Scientist proves conservatism and belief in climate change aren’t incompatible
MIT professor Kerry Emanuel is among a rare breed of conservative scientists who are sounding the alarm for climate change and criticizing Republicans’ ‘agenda of denial‘ and ‘anti-science stance.’
Not touching this one with a ten-foot pole — just wondering what the motivation is for yet another Emanuel article, which get more and more political. Enjoy the article written by Neela Banerjee, Washington Bureau, with character witness Michael Mann. Article Links to the LA Times.
Update more about hurricanes: The Team at RealClimate can’t score on an empty net and are being disingenuous about the “global tropical cyclone record lows”. Let me help them: their colleague Dr. Emanuel produced a 2005 Nature paper and used a metric called Power Dissipation, which is analogous to ACE. I use ACE — I could have used Power Dissipation. The data is publicly available, and I am simply updating Emanuel’s work. Also, this work is already published back in 2009 for the Northern Hemisphere, when the global ACE was tanking. See Maue (2009), but then again, why bother with that peer-reviewed literature.
Fact: 2010 produced the fewest Tropical Cyclones globally on record — and it has NOTHING to do with global warming. The Team only can look at the Atlantic — but did they talk about 2009 being one of the quietest seasons on record?
[also, a note to RealClimate: Larry Bell was absolutely correct about global tropical cyclone activity record lows. You owe him an apology.]
[Follow up note to Ryan: RC’s apology really doesn’t matter, since nobody is paying attention to them anymore anyway, see below – Anthony]
Source: http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/forbes.com
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I’m a conservative. How do you know? Didn’t I just tell you I was?
I’ve been called a conservative once (among many other things).
Does that count?
This idiot voted for Barack Obama?
Well, that proves he certainly doesn’t base his decisions on anything resembling evidence and logic – much less common sense.
The corrupt and incompetent history of Obama and the media’s refusal to vet him really opened my eyes – I no longer identify as a democrat.
Texas Tech atmospheric scientist Katharine Hayhoe is an evangelical Christian who travels widely talking to conservative audiences and wrote a book with her husband, a pastor and former climate change denier, explaining climate change to skeptics.
The pocketbooks must be opening to us now, just grit your teeth when you smile as all you see in the photos and say… I am now a warmist,
I love warm, no,I hate warm, no… now what DID that contract say I think?A person can’t be an “oxymoron”.
Even conservatives can be wrong if they believe in AGW.
It was the LA Times which published this load of tripe last year:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-climate-change-australia9-2009apr09,0,65585.story
Think they’ll bring their readers up-to-date?
http://img.ibtimes.com/www/data/images/full/2011/01/04/57732-a-flooding-sign-is-seen-partially-submerged-in-floodwaters-i.jpg
The LA Times has been a socialist rag, suitable mostly for lining the bottom of a parrot’s cage, for decades. When their marketers used to call to ask me to subscribe, I’d just tell them, “I don’t need the Times; I subscribe to Pravda and get everything a day earlier, including your editorials!”
Dear Moderator;
I tried to leave this in tips and notes but could not find the “leave a reply” section.
Under the category of does it cause cooling or warming? In climate science it is both check out this Scripps Institution of Oceanography on particulates now cause warming, not cooling.
http://ucsd.us1.list-manage.com/track/click?u=163b78ae1b0a65426bc594984&id=a2a56ffa6e&e=837f2222cb
Or this inconclusive scripps research article framed in alarmism. http://ucsd.us1.list-manage.com/track/click?u=163b78ae1b0a65426bc594984&id=1c1d5d8964&e=837f2222cb
(Scripps researchers see evidence that melting polar ice could alter climate by slowing ocean circulation…or speeding it up)
Christopher Hanley says: (January 6, 2011 at 11:04 pm) A person can’t be an “oxymoron”.
A “silly cow“? (Ausralian slang.)
… just wondering what the motivation is…
Ah… er… follow the money?
If people have not figured out yet that CAGW is Enron times a million on a global scale, then there truly may not be any hope. Conservative, liberal, Democrat, Republican… those categories are just a smokescreen. CAGW is a scam. It’s all about the money.
Hmmmmm. Well, ok, maybe he has a couple of conservative views…gay marriage and strong military….but the obvious conservative argument is the overarching planning and controlling of the US economy. Industrial planning is much more of a sore point, not to mention the picking of winners and losers (can you say”volt”?)
my general rule is that until these guys who say that they are paniced start lobbying for and embracing billions of US dollars for research, implentation of nukes, then I can’t take them very seriously
if they really want to be heroes and help the world, they need to educate the country on why the nuke fears are hollywood hype, brought to you by crazed eviros.
I saw this over at Lubos’s site. Why are all the “Smart AGW” people trotted out into the public so out-of-date on their knowledge base?
And speaking of – Real Climate really goofed on that attack on Larry Bell. As I highlight on my blog, not only did they not use the complete ACE data set, but I loved how they used only Northern Hemisphere data to show that global cyclone activity was higher…. Hmmm, haven’t we seen this pattern before? (hint: Mann 1998) And remember how they got on our cases about how 1934 is only the hottest year for the US, and NOT the globe! Apparently, only skilled climate scientists, with their robust calculations, can use northern hemisphere data to represent the entire world.
They also erred on the ARGO data, not even realizing us Jesters here at WUWT had the data that again proves Bell right.
I wouldn’t be surprised if the whole sloppy and arrogant RC post disappears by morning.
Sometimes my customers call me a cow, doesnt mean I give milk and moo though does it?
The BBC likes to label the current senior partner of the UK coalition ‘conservative/right wing’ when by any rational critical observation they are nothing like that description. The Nissan Leaf was awarded an international prize when in fact the old USSR Lada was more deserving of an award. Al Gore was awarded a Nobel prize for lying and deceiving the viewing public. The met office rewrite the past even when caught red handed. The UK government increases spending while claiming it is cutting it and the MSM peddles the lies, they promise we cannot afford a valid navy while spending far more on foreign aid to nations that do not need it.
Its a mad mad mad world, its Alice through the looking glass and getting worse with a madness infecting the upper echelons of the great and the good. The wrong things are being praised, the wrong fixes applied to non existent problems, people are rewarded for lying and the innocent are condemned and the guilty not only go free but are rewarded with generous abandon.
“MIT professor Kerry Emanuel is among a rare breed of conservative scientists who are sounding the alarm for climate change…’
Yes, and I’m sounding the alarm cuz I’m a Fire Engine!
Emanuel is exactly what Roger Pielke Jr. calls a stealth advocate: he’ll pretend to be anything including reasonable just so he can gain the credibility of being objective.
Unfortunately (or fortunately) there are a number of documented instances where Emanuel’s views are shown – including the MIT debate where he rails against the ‘coal conspiracy’ and so forth.
A hack in every sense of the word.
How can you say your level of global warming idiocy is something to do with how far left-right you are when David Cameron is a right wing toff who has fall hook line and sinker for the nonsense of global warming!
And to be honest, I think when Barack Obama drops the global warming rubbish as he is bound to do (he’s not exactly enthusiastic is he!), he’ll be the best president the US ever had … but then again, he’s not exactly left of centre!
The great thing about real science is that it isn’t based on people’s personal opinions. That’s why the global warming religion can’t be called a science and why it is so political.
And it’s about time the US got a decent health care system which cared for those who don’t have the economic means to look after their health … LIKE THOSE WHO ARE ILL AND CAN’T WORK! There’s an awful lot of similarity between the way the self-serving medical “profession” in the US has manipulated their own income stream to the detriment of the common person in the US and the way the global warming academics have done the same!
Sonic Frog’s comment impelled me to look at RC (I hate going there, it feels like walking through a very dubious neighbourhood that has a resident team of bullies) and the cobbled-together attack on Bell is still there, in all its malignant glory.
Cool.
So, he’s a ‘self proclaimed’ ‘rarity’. (Legend in his-own-mind, kinda thing – so much for humility.)
And, if he wants to become a ‘progressive’ or already ‘is’ one… I ask you – ‘who ON EARTH cares’ if he ‘comes out’ or not…?
I grew up ‘in and around’ Country Clubs all my young life. Swam on ‘swim teams’, dined at ‘Mixed Grills’…ad nausium (because most everyone there was a fake or a ‘copy’ of someone else. No one was ‘an original’ anything, or so it seemed.
Then, at the tender age of 32, I ‘found’ that I couldn’t grab an ice tea ‘poolside’ with my decidedly BLACK girlfriend but, those of her ‘ilk’ could serve at these clubs… So…that was my unceremonious END to the coattails of my parents. By the way – ALL OF THEM WERE ‘REPUBLICANS’.
I say that – to state quite EMPHATICALLY ‘this’:
MOST Republican ‘boys’ are TOTAL NOTHINGS.
I care not if they be Scientists or (gasp!) Politicians – for, they have simply ‘won the lottery’ birth wise and walked through places like Hillsdale College with low C’s and D’s (if that) and somehow matriculated to become ‘Daddy & Mommy’s Vice President’ with no real effort of their own. That makes for a VERY shallow fellow, indeed.
Now… a Republican MAN is very – very different. He’s savvy. He knows how to roll up his sleeves and WORK. He’s the guy (regardless of color) who knows WHO HE IS AND WHAT HE STANDS FOR… Why? Because he’s lived and fought and learned what ‘true Conservatism is’. ..Now HE, friends – is a totally different…please forgive me…but, I’m using it for effect ‘ANIMAL’.
I believe that ‘being’ ‘something’ means you’ve mastered it. In 2011, I don’t think superfluous labeling will ‘cut it’ any longer. We’re smarter than that. It’s the old ‘burn me once…’ concept. Who CARES if this guy likes wars? Do I CARE if he prefers one ‘sex’ or the ‘other’? Certainly not unless he’s putting the moves on me or a friend of mine. WE ARE ‘DONE’ WITH LABELS (hahaha…my dad’s name is ‘Ralph Lauren’ so…that’s a funny one…) WORLD-WIDE.
DO NOT TELL ME ‘WHO YOU ARE’ – – – ‘HAVE THE GUTS TO ‘SHOW ME WHO YOU ARE’!!! All the rest that don’t – are jus’ bottom feeders that need backbones. In fact, they turn into those ‘flat fishes’ with the eyes on one side…
I’m a SKEPTIC (on multitudinous levels) and I’m damned proud of being one. It beats the word ‘PATSY’ any day of the week! And…speakin’ of that word and the images it dredges up…does this guy’s last name bring any other thoughts to mind, hmmmm???
The last two Emanuels I’ve heard about were/are known to be abysmally corrupt, sad to have heard. One wants Chicago, and the other – just wants most of us ‘scientifically’ dead since the mid-70’s.
Doesn’t bode well for that ‘gene pool’. And, if it STILL means ‘God with us’ then, like any good and TRUE SKEPTIC in 2011, I’d have to ask, just for the sake of clarification, you understand… oh really? WHICH one…?
Cynthia Lauren
According to the LA Times article Emanuel states:
Surely if someone warns your house is about to catch fire “trust me”. Should we really be prepared to spend a large amount on fire insurance, an amount so large that it would cause great hardship and have a devastating impact on the living standards of our family, without direct evidence substantiating the supposed risk?
Perhaps relevant, a recent study carried out at University College London suggests that:
I wonder if Kerry Emanuel fits with this hypothesis? And what of the old adage if a man is not a socialist at 20 he has no heart, if he is not a conservative by 40 he has no brain.
I’m more of a centerist than a socialist, but If I had to choose, I’d choose the left side of the political spectrum. I find the idea that lefties can only be pro AGW and vice versa ridiculous. The AGW scam has gone way beyond political spectrum – money is to be made on all sides. Why should the conservatives and their lap dogs abandon Climate Change when it gives them so much revenue?
Cameron is and always will be a right-winger, but he also knows that by leaning more to the center he can get away passing laws that are very right wing. Things like more money or tax relief for married couples – Family values is at the core of conservative ideology. How about raising VAT, knowing that proportionally the worse off will be even more worse off. How about cutting housing benefit, so long living residents are driven off estates that have gone through gentrification. The list goes on, and he hasn’t even been a PM for a year. His spending cuts are in fact disguised pro-conservative social-economic engineering. The absolute hilarious thing is that the supposenly leftist “junior partner” is blindly going along with this monstrosity of a government. It’s as if Cameron has a picture of Clegg in a comprimising situation…
And finaly, Obama isn’t the best president USA has had, but some of his laws I fully agree with, ESPECIALLY the health care. He chose a bad time to implement it though. Democrats cried about Bush upping the deficit, but now they shut up when Obama keeps ramping it up. Strange that, eh? That’s party politics for you.
Ok, rant over.
I’m currently writing a book called ” As bad As Each Other: Comparing stupidity on boths sides of the fence” – Who made up these arbitrary divisions anyway? Why can’t we vote on every single issue via computer? We have the technology
Don’t forget this!
“Dr. Emanuel served on the deliberately biased Lord Oxburgh committee investigating Climategate”
http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/26979
[also, a note to RealClimate: Larry Bell was absolutely correct about global tropical cyclone activity record lows. You owe him an apology.]
[Follow up note to Ryan: RC’s apology really doesn’t matter, since nobody is paying attention to them anymore anyway, see below – Anthony]
_____________________________________________________________
Not exactly sure what page hits has to do with objective science.
I mean like why don’t you add YouTube, Twitter, Facebook, Wikipedia, and Conservapedia to your chart?
The Forbes article strongly implies the Atlantic hurricane season and never mentions “global tropical cyclone activity” per se.
Here’s a link to the Forbes article, which you left out of this post;
http://www.forbes.com/2010/12/23/media-climate-change-warming-opinions-contributors-larry-bell_print.html
“Record Low 2009 and 2010 (methinks GLOBAL TROPICAL would have been placed right aboot here) Cyclonic Activity Reported: Global Warming Theorists Perplexed”?
Cyclonic Activity? Tropical? Polar? Extratropical? Subtropical? Mesocyclone?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyclone
“Remember all the media brouhaha about global warming causing hurricanes that commenced following the devastating U.S. 2004 season?”
Hurricanes?
U.S. 2004 season?
What happened to the proported GLOBAL TROPICAL cyclone activity which isn’t mentioned in this sentence?
“Subsequent hurricane seasons returned to average patterns noted historically over the past 150 years, before exhibiting recent record lows with no 2010 U.S. landfalls.”
Hurricanes?
2010 U.S. landfalls?
I could have sworn that the Forbes article was aboot GLOBAL TROPICAL cyclone activity (oh, I forgot GLOBAL TROPICAL cyclone activity hasn’t been mentioned, yet, nor will it be for the entire article).
Not even sure why you mentioned the above two […] which have nothing to do with Kerry Emmanual’s op-ed unless you count the use of the word “hurricane” in the body of the op-ed piece and go off the deep end, like you’ve done here.
Finally, if this doesn’t get posted, as over half of my posts don’t get through either your “SPAM” filter, your mods, or you yourself, I’ve taken to cutting and pasting everything I do try to post here, just for my own piece of mind, and to thoroughly disprove your specious claims to the otherwise with respect to WUWT vs other climate science blogs proported censorship.
REPLY: Oh gosh, I’m quaking in my boots! Here’s the deal: you have 241 comments posted on WUWT, you are well represented. You are in the company of many of the half a million comments on WUWT. Yes, like every poster, some of your comments may end up in the SPAM filter due to keywords or excessive links. Some of those get deleted. This has happened to almost everyone here at one time or another. In your case though, since you have been so rude and caustic in the past, every one of your posts now automatically gets flagged for inspection. That’s right, Junior, you get special attention. It boils down to what I’ve written on the policy page.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/about-wuwt/policy/
Welcome to my home on the Internet. Everyone who visits here is welcome to post, but please treat your visit like you would a visit to a private home or office. Most people wouldn’t be rude, loud, or insulting in somebody’s home or office, I ask for the same level of civility and courtesy here.
So, the question is Junior, would you continue to invite somebody into your living room who insults you every day?
Sometimes, I’d toss that person out on their ear. My wife would probably beat me to that task. Yes, some posts of yours don’t meet the criteria for civility or content and thus get snipped. Other commenters have met the same fate. Some blogs don’t allow dissenting comments at all.
There is a light of hope for you though. Commenter Phil. ( a professor too timid to use his name) was placed into the inspection que. After a few months, he learned not to be so rude, and phrased things differently (though he’s still a bit caustic at times) and was put back into the general population, unfettered.
You can earn that honor too.
Do I care that you are upset? Not in the least. Will I get into a long drawn out pointless discussion with you about it (like your pixel fiasco) ? No. I’m not going to waste any further time with you on it, my position on moderation isn’t going to change. Will some of your comments in the future not make it? Possibly. It is up to you.
Behave, be nice, and you’ll always be part of the general discussion. Be rude, insulting, and condescending and you’ll continue with your status quo. There’s an old saying:
“You can catch more flies with honey than you can with vinegar”
– Anthony
I get first pick, and for my team I pick Dick Lindzen. Now it’s your turn.
=================