State of the Union climate spin doctors stand ready to take your call

People send me stuff. In this case somebody sent me something that I hadn’t gotten through the ‘approved’ channels. Thanks to “Son Of Soylent Green” for this tip via email.

Looks like Obama is getting ready to ramp up the climate rhetoric with the help of spin doctors who apparently are already “in the know” about what will be in the SOTU speech.

See this email which somehow never made it to me through regular channels:

Click to enlarge.

So, will we see these two alarmists touted in the MSM as experts in SOTU climate policy analysis tomorrow? Probably.

I had to laugh though at the outfit that is pushing this, something called:

About these ads

43 thoughts on “State of the Union climate spin doctors stand ready to take your call

  1. it says experts can comment on the Presidents plans.

    I look forward to comments from – oh who am i kidding, not going to happen.

  2. I hope everyone gets to see Dr. Michael Oppenheimer live on television. He has the deepest voice that I have heard, over many years, and he is quite happy to use its power to scold anyone who does not agree with him. He is the father of “the supercomputer climate model offensive” and he began it on television in the late Seventies when the models were recognized as pie in the sky. He has occupied a low profile for decades, maybe because he scolded a tad excessively, but he is most definitely part of the CAGW inner circle.

  3. I noticed the email mentions “Global Warming” and not climate change. Maybe the experts will explain there hasn’t been any significant warming for 16 years and therefore no need for whatever it is Obama proposes to address it?

  4. The White House is offering an “enhanced” version available only at
    WhiteHouse.Gov – State of the Union 2013
    During the Speech (http://www.whitehouse.gov/SOTU)

    Watch an enhanced version of the President’s speech with charts, graphs and data only on WhiteHouse.gov. Use the hashtag #SOTU

    After the Speech

    Stay tuned for a live panel with White House policy experts after the speech, and submit questions on twitter with #WHChat.

    Connect all week

    Administration officials will take your questions on the State of the Union all week. Check back for details on how you can engage.

    Join the Conversation

    Connect with the White House on:
    Twitter
    Facebook
    Google+
    Pinterest

    With a special link to: Get Updates from the WhiteHouse and Share Your Story.

    Will they take and seriously publicly address the hard data from real skeptical scientists and engineers?

  5. One wonders how they will spin 16 years of zero warming while CO2 continued to increase. One wonders how they will spin every failed prediction. One wonders how they will spin the scandals, the coverups and the lies? One wonders how they will spin the global sea ice levels that are actually above “normal” after all the unprecedented melting…

    On the other hand, the target audience re-elected president zero. They obviously can’t remember what happened yesterday, much less the past four years. So the bar is not very high… Sad that.

  6. I recognize one name. Monika Sharma is a well know Marxist propagandist. She’s not wrong, shes evil. Her job has always been to short-circuit the cognitive capacity of our children.

    “Conversation” in a Marxist context is the primary vehicle through which indoctrination happens.

  7. The state of the union sucks. And Obama has no solution (4 years and running now). I suspect if the memo is legit, that he will use AGW as a boogeyman to enforce austerity upon the nation. Gas prices will be just the start, but out of control prices are coming. We have had 4 years of inflationary spending, and only accounting tricks have kept the rate low.

  8. Has anyone thought to send Sen. Rubio some climate science talking points for his rebuttal? Prob’ly not. Would’ve been nice.

  9. They are very sophisticated. I would be very concerned that a balanced message is not being marketed very well.

  10. Robert M says:
    February 12, 2013 at 1:06 pm
    One wonders how they will spin 16 years of zero warming while CO2 continued to increase.

    ===========================================================
    … as SkepticalScience.com does it with this piece of gobbledegook:

    “…temperatures may not have changed for the last 16 years but the underlying trend is warming. ”

    ’nuff said.

  11. A person’s vote is a token appeasement that democracy supposedly still exists.

    The last person to find out what is in the SOTUS will be Obama, companies like Climate Nexus write the agenda, Obama is just the orator. Why not just have a newsreader as President?

  12. Considering no one (with the exception of a few “evil” Republicans) is willing to challenge his Highness and his cabinet, even when an Ambassador is killed, I don’t see anyone challenging him on the AGW issue. The predictable response is “Look. All of the “experts” have looked at this and the consensus is blah blah blah blah.”

  13. re: Michael Oppenheimer

    He is Baba Streisand’s favorite scientist, receiving major funding from her over many years when he spent much of his career at the radical “Environmental Defense Fund.” He was also joined at the hip with Michael Mann on some of the more dubious Climategate email correspondence (rallying scientists to denounce dissenters, etc.). He is the epitome of a politicized activist “scientist”…. as suggested by the following:

    Oppenheimer with Joe Romm, Michael Mann, and Gavin Schmidt, trying to salvage the Copenhagen fiasco

    Dec. 3, 2009

    PRESS CALL TOMORROW: Climate Science – Setting the Record Straight

    *Michael Mann*, A Leading Climate Scientist and Professor of Meteorology at Pennsylvania State University Whose Hacked Personal Emails Have Recently Become the Source of Media Attention Will Be Joined By NASA Climate Scientist *Dr. Gavin Schmidt*, Princeton’s *Dr. Michael Oppenheimer*, and CAP Senior Fellow *Dr. Joseph Romm* to Discuss the Overwhelming Scientific Understanding of the Danger Posed by Unmitigated Global Warming Pollution, and That the Stolen Emails Reveal Nothing That Changes Our Extensive Understanding of Climate Science, Tomorrow, *Friday December 4 at 11:00 AM EST.*

    Leaders from 190 nations are meeting in Copenhagen next week because they understand the science behind climate change is real, and that the evidence is growing stronger that each day we delay to address the problem increases the danger to our planet and our economy. Against this backdrop, opponents of action –who have been ignoring the unequivocal scientific evidence and misrepresenting the facts for decades– are now exaggerating and distorting a batch of stolen emails from prominent climate scientists in a further effort to block action. Opponents of cleaner energy have, since the 1970s, systematically attacked and politicized sound science in an attempt to widen the partisan divide and mislead the public. The global consensus on climate change science has been reached by through decades of work by thousands of independent scientists from different institutions in nations around the world. Now more than ever it is critical for Americans to understand that the scientific evidence that climate change poses a very real threat to our health, economy, and planet has never been clearer. Tomorrow Michael Mann, a leading climate scientist and author of part of the IPCC third assessment report, along with IPCC participant Dr. Michael Oppenheimer of Princeton, and Dr. Gavin Schmidt of NASA, will discuss the mounting scientific evidence since the IPCC’s 2007 assessment report, and why it is in fact more clear now than ever before that we must take action to solve the global climate crisis.

  14. My tweet to: #WHChat Simple question. If CO2 continues to rise but temperatures don’t (as in the last 16 yrs), can we assume that CO2 isn’t responsible?

  15. Obama will use AGW as a boogeyman to cover his rear since we are now experiencing the highest gas prices for a February ever.

  16. “Bob is a recovering surfer with a persistent rock-climbing habit, but mostly he reads and watches AYSO soccer games and Marx Brothers movies with his wife and two children”

    Well that’s good enough for me…where do I sign.

  17. Posted this in “Tips” already, but it seems apropos here, too.

    While they’re ramping up the “global warming will kill us all” routine, it seems they’re also….

    Well, read it:

    Administration’s New Climate Report: Next Ice Age ‘Has Now Been Delayed Indefinitely’

    http://cnsnews.com/news/article/administration-s-new-climate-report-next-ice-age-has-now-been-delayed-indefinitely

    “A federal advisory committee appointed by the Obama administration to produce a report on climate change says that if Earth’s climate were still “primarily controlled by natural factors”—rather than by man-made global warming—then the next ice age would occur within the next 1,500 years.

    “But now, because of humans, the committee says, the next ice age has been “delayed indefinitely.””

    I’m downloading the full draft (147.12MB) now, to see if CNS News got suckered by an Onion report. It just seems… hard to believe that the fedgov would actually release a report that sounds like it was inspired by Niven et al’s _Falling Angels_.

  18. David L says:
    February 12, 2013 at 3:22 pm

    Why did this guy have to get a second term?

    He got a second term to drive the final nails in the coffin of Progressivism, in which post-normal logic allows government spending to the critical point at which the economy collapses. Of course, when it does we’ll still be told it was Bush’s fault, but such an economic catastrophe will expose that as a blantant lie.

  19. Re: Federal Advisory Committee Draft Climate Assessment Report, that I posted about above.

    It’s 1146 pages, so I obviously have barely begun even skimming over it. Mostly it does look like “global warming is killing us all”, but the CNS-reported stuff is in there.

    http://ncadac.globalchange.gov/download/NCAJan11-2013-publicreviewdraft-fulldraft.pdf

    Page 1041:

    Second, climate scientists study both natural and human-induced changes in climate. Over the last century, scientists have continued to try to understand when and why the Earth slipped into and out of ice ages. Confirmation of what are called the Milankovitch cycles (cyclical changes in the Earth’s orbit that explain the onset and ending of ice ages) led a few scientists in the 1970s to suggest that the current warm interglacial period might be ending soon, plunging the Earth into a new ice age over the next few centuries. Scientists continue to study this issue today; the latest information suggests that, if the Earth’s climate were being controlled primarily by natural factors, the next glaciation would begin sometime in the next 1,500 years. However, humans have so altered the composition of the atmosphere that the next glaciation has now been delayed indefinitely.

  20. RockyRoad: The problem is that as we’ve found in the UK, Labour spent to the point of bust, and despite all attempts to lay the blame on Labour and get us out of the deficit/debt, the Conservative/Liberal Democrat coalition is now suffering blame by association, letting Labour off the hook. Part of this effect though is due to very short term memories on the part of the electorate, re-enforced by the MSM.

  21. My Story submitted to the White House

    Because of IPCC reports, I cowrote a 330 page review on ways to mitigate anthropogenic global warming with solar energy.
    Since then we find that:
    1) ALL IPCC projections were systematically HOTTER than the subsequent global temperature trends;
    2) There has been NO statistically significant warming for the last 17 to 20 years from published temperature records; and
    3) ClimateGate exposed systemic corruption of the scientific method and the integrity of the political process.
    4) The International Energy Agency (2012) now acknowledges that global crude oil production has been declining since it peaked in 2005; and
    5) The IEA projects that the forseeable global growth in liquid fuels (0.6%/year) will only be 10% of historic world fuel growth (of 6.6%/year).

    What are you doing to:
    A) Establish a “Red Team” to “kick the tires” and establish the scientific facts on climate and identify realistic cost effective measure to adapt to the primary natural variations with adjustments for smaller anthropogenic influences?
    B) Free us from the petrochemical fuel monopoly and OPEC cartel enforced by EPA rules preventing adaptation to replacement fuels?
    C) Develop replacement fuels on a war time footing to save us from the catastrophic depression due to declining global fuel availability.

  22. These people claim that humans have delayed the next glaciation. They also claim that humans have caused global warming. We all know the latter is a false statement; we should really worry about their claim regarding the next glaciation, too.

    But then, what the hey–maybe we can get Mexico to annex the US and, since we’d all be Mexicans, we can freely move south across the border to avoid the ice.

  23. This is hilarious, not because it is really funny but because the alternative is fury. A failed pair of supposed scientist’s and a merry band of propagandists will try to convince us all of their wonderful intellect. Since the other supposed scientist is at Texas Tech I suppose I will bother her first. Titles and prizes and non-sense awarded by their adoring fans, none of which signifies any real intelligence. A bunch of sycophants with their idols. Nothing scientific about them.
    Question #1:
    Ma’am can you tell me have you plotted dT/dCO2?? NO steady state gain? Why not? I am certain these two lily flowers have no frikkin clue why.
    Question #2:
    Can you show me a first principles model of the mechanics of the system that leads you to believe CO2 is a catastrophic agent produced by man and not a plant fertilizer?
    Question #3:
    Can you show me a list of the evidence supporting your argument that is plausible?
    Of course the answers to all of these questions is “NO” because if these idiots had done any of the above, they wouldn’t be able to sit with their smug faces and support the non-sense that the tyrants promote(Barry Barrack insane Obama and all of the other globalist liberal/communist/fascist/socialist/sociopaths). And of course I am giving them credit for being incompetent rather than truly nefarious, although they could well be the latter. Either way, I don’t care- these people are ushering in the darkness and there is a thin veil between their goals and the reality we live in today.

    Funny, while I was at JSC we had to actually produce HW & SW that works on orbit, based on real science and engineering. These jerks are a disgrace to the scientific community.

  24. Neo says: February 12, 2013 at 3:42 pm

    Obama will use AGW as a boogeyman to cover his rear since we are now experiencing the highest gas prices for a February ever.”

    As if he actually gives a d@mn. You think he cares about the economy? He cares only about social engineering. He spends like there’s no tomorrow and when he needs more money…raise taxes…but only on the wealthy. Everyone thinks they are not wealthy so their taxes won’t go up. Some other guy is wealthy so his taxes will go up but who cares? Their surprise is that Big 0’s definition is anyone with a job is wealthy.

    These next four years can’t pass fast enough.

  25. So, to save the children from global warming the President plan is to bury them under a mountain of debt?

    It has been my experience that a lot more people lose their homes and their futures to bankers than ever lost them to warm weather.

    If global warming is bad, then why do people move to Florida, Texas, Arizona and California? Aren’t those just about the hottest places in the US? Shouldn’t people be moving north in huge numbers to get away from the heat?

    There is almost no one in Alaska. Why isn’t this experiencing a population boom? Isn’t Juneau the new San Diego? Everyone hanging out at the beach, taking in the rays. The name starts with June, so it must be warm. June-you-know. Juneau.

  26. This has the appearance and structure of a well orchestrated propaganda machine, complete with their ‘experts’ from the Ministry of Climate Propaganda rehearsed and ready to take your call! They will likely have their supporting story, email addresses, and blog urls already queued for the next issue of the kids Weekly Reader.

    No doubt, the recent east coast snow storm and tropical storm Sandy will be the Presidents ‘climactic’ touchstones during his Sorry State Of the Union address. We musn’t talk about the failed Obama economic policies… or the Trillion$ that were wasted on them. Keep the masses focused on any ‘crisis’ but the quagmired economy. That ‘crisis’ will be chimeric ‘solutions’ to the chimeric ‘problem’ of man made global warming, complete with new taxes to fund the ‘solutions’.
    MtK

  27. To sophocles;
    “…temperatures may not have changed for the last 16 years but the underlying trend is warming.”

    To demonstrate how silly his comment is, simply swap the subject: “House prices haven’t increased in 16 years, but you can expect a positive return on your investment”

  28. Cosmic Ray says:
    February 12, 2013 at 2:36 pm

    I see climatenexus.org is a sponsored project of rockefeller philanthropy advisors.
    —-

    OMG Cosmic Ray, ClimateNexus is sponsored by Big Oil! I thought that Big Oil only sponsored those vicious skeptic denier freaks!

Comments are closed.