Recently we saw how an environmental activist managed to convince a BBC writer that the story he wrote had to be changed to reflect what the activist perceived to be the “correct” view.
Now we find that Dr. James Hansen, director of GISS, has done the same, and on NASA stationery no less. Read the entire letter here courtesy of the “Friends of the Earth” website.
Because Hansen wrote on NASA stationery, it becomes a public document, which we can view here. For that reason, I’ve posted a backup copy here, just in case the original disappears or changes. See hansen_letter.
Writing to Houghton Mifflin Company, Hansen asks for changes in the textbook to reflect what he considers to be the truth and consensus:
Apparently, there is no room for debate in the classroom on these issues. Apparently also there is no uncertainty. Hansen also makes a mention of “so called activist scientists”. I think he proved the point about activist scientists quite well with this letter.
What is most curious, is that in letters Hansen has written in the past, such as to the Prime Minister of Australia, he uses his home address in Kintersville on plain paper, and in his reply to a coal company executive on Columbia University stationery, but puts his NASA title on it. This makes me wonder how he chooses which stationery to write what letter on, and how to sign it.
Maybe it is just a byproduct of all that censorship by the Bush administration:
Source: Roger Pielke Jr. Prometheus
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
(The above from my Ocean “postcard”.)
And here is the D’Aleo combo correlation:
http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/01/25/warming-trend-pdo-and-solar-correlate-better-than-co2/
Evan,
Looking at that PDO, I’d say you’re right!
We’re in for a little cool weather indeed.
And just when you thought it was safe to go back in the water, we have MORE NITWITTERY.
And could this guy gain employment anywhere outside of government making statements like this:
To paraphrase a line from a famous poem: I didn’t think that I would ever see a human being more stupid than a tree, but I think I just have.
Your comments are not well taken. The question is not whether there is room for debate, but whether this text accurately presents the state of that debate. It does not. The text is one-sided and dismissive of the majority view.
It would be peculiar to have a detailed discussion of science in a government textbook, and in fact that is not what the text presents. Your argument that Hansen is attempting to stifle a scientific debate is off the mark because that is not the debate the text engages.
We’re in for a little cool weather indeed.
“He said there’s a storm coming in.”
“I know …”
Saaard says:
“I first got interested in the whole AGW farce when Hansen et al claimed that the ‘debate was over’ – anyone who knows scientific method knows that this statement is unscientific to its very core”.
Exactly the same for me, except the statement was from Tim Flannery (who went on to advocate climate engineering, so we could control the atmospere and dial up any climate we want). You don’t need to know much about “climate science” to know that this cannot possibly be true. So why not put up your best theory and enjoy the victory over your critics, as is normally the case in scientific circles? Obviously because you don’t think you’ll win.
Paul:
While the form of your prose is sound, its import is both tendentious and mendacious.
Hansen dismisses those of his critics that are politically insensitive, e.g., Steve McIntyre on the Y2K flub, with a wave of the hand, as “Jesters”.
Yet, when politically vulnerable he is quick to raise a controversy and bring pressure to bear. When the head of NASA at a bureau conference suggested that the science re: AGW was uncertain, Hansen immediately went to press with “I nearly fell out of my chair!”. His superior was promptly and suitably chastened.
Where Hansen feels politically at risk, he levels the charge of censorship, ludicrous in light of the chart on evidence.
Men fear most that evil which lives in their own heart.
Well, here’s what I wrote to the NASA Inspector General. Hope something good comes of it. I won’t hold my breath, though…
“Recently, Dr. James Hansen, PhD, wrote a letter to the Houghton Mifflin Company, in an attempt to pressure them to change wording in a textbook. While I appreciate Dr. Hansen’s right to express his opinion as a private citizen, I am concerned by his use of official NASA stationery in this effort. First, it implies that it is official NASA policy that Anthropogenic Global Warming is occurring, and the fact is beyond debate. Is that truly the position of NASA? Second, I am troubled by a PUBLIC official using his capacity as a representative of the government to pressure a PRIVATE company to change its product to suit his view as a government representative. I personally find that very troubling.
Please advise me if I am wrong on either of these thoughts. I have written a letter to my congressman asking him to investigate the propriety of Dr. Hansen’s letter, and look forward to a response from him and NASA regarding this important issue.
Here is a link to Dr. Hansen’s letter.
http://www.foe.org/textbook/Hansen_Letter.pdf
Thank you for your time.”
We should thank FOE for making the message’s content editable. I have *slightly* modified the original 8-)) before clicking on “Send My Message!”
For good measure, I have also sent the same message to Houghton Mifflin myself… ( http:##www.hmco.com#contact#contactform.html )
Everything Hansen said is true. Don’t blame him if you don’t understand the science, the man knows what he’s talking about and is fighting the worst humanitarian crisis ever. We should be glad that at least he is willing to take the limelight while oil companies spend millions to keep it off this subject.
We are catapulting into disaster and God Bless Dr. Hansen for being the voice of truth. I dare any of you to try and debate his science, because he is the best climatologist in the country. And if you dare mention Dr. Lindzen of MIT, I’ll tell you that he couldn’t even stand up in a debate against a high school math teacher. His only power lies in being at MIT and willing to take dirty money.
Laugh it up, but we ARE in code red.
I see a direct correlation between Jim Hansen in New Stories and CO2. I think Jim Hansen is causing the CO2.
Are you people [snip] kidding me?
Global warming skepticism is pseudo-science. The planet is definitely warming. The effects of greenhouse gases are well-known and very easy to understand. Human actions are directly and indirectly pumping unprecedented amounts of greenhouse gases into our atmosphere.
Put 2 and 2 together people, stop being morons.
Skepticism is healthy, but it can also be rooted in absolute ignorance. For instance- creationist skepticism of evolution, geocentrist skepticism of heliocentrism.
But seeing so many sheep tout global warming skepticism as revolutionary dissent has proven to me that even to this day, the government and/or corporate entities can very effectively manipulate the public into such logical flops. The coal companies LOVE global warming skepticism, the Bush administration LOVES it too. Just be careful not to LOVE big brother without even realizing it.
REPLY: Warning, no f-words allowed here, it is neither relevant nor neccessary. Rants are allowed, but need to be on topic, Please don’t do it again.
Lest anyone think Hansen is some sort of aberration I can assure you that he is not. I teach part time in a community college here in California and I’ve seen the same attitude first-hand from some of the faculty. It’s believe what I say and do what I say or else. No dissent permitted.
Special interest groups pressuring publishers to rewrite texts, are nothing new. Unfortunately, both history and science are heavily edited.