I was stunned by Dr. James Hansen’s response in this article in the Virgina Informer
Excerpt:
“For this fall,” the organizer wrote in his e-mail to Mr. Hansen, “we are hoping to host a debate on global climate change and its implications. Patrick Michaels has agreed to come, and my organization would like you to come and debate Dr. Michaels in Williamsburg. The date is very flexible, and we can tailor the day of the debate completely to your schedule. We will be able to pay for your travel expenses and offer you an honorarium for your time. Please let me know if you would be interested.”
Mr. Hansen’s response was, simply, “not interested.”
His reply — devoid of any salutation, punctuation, capitalization or signature — came an hour after Mr. Katz sent his original e-mail.
I suppose for Dr. Hansen, debating and defending your work is “futile“?
In my opinion, demonstrating arrogance in correspondence and ignoring reasonable debate doesn’t do much to bolster confidence in the man’s work.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
It is obvious then that Mr Hansen knows that he is discredited and in no position to add to the debate….. Sometimes it is good to allow people to save face and bow out gracefully…. ; )
The Debate will continue without him.
It seems like I remember Gavin Schmidt engaging in a climate debate and getting trounced. I’m sure that James (Captain Ahab) Hansen is well aware of the problems that Michaels could give him. Suddenly a very wide audience, possibly including many legislators, would be aware of no decadal warming, halted ocean warming, halted sea level rise, record levels of Antarctic sea ice, recovering Arctic Sea Ice, poor correlation between GCMs and real temperature records, etc. He knows that he cannot answer those questions other than with a lot of embarrassed hand waving. It could only be a losing experience for the captain. Better to continue with his hundreds of interviews about how the government is trying to shut him up.
Dr. Hansen’s patterns of behavior seem rather above average on the narcissism scale. I suspect to even entertain the thought that there would be anything at all worth debating would be seen as a “failure” in his view. I believe he is afraid. But that’s okay, it isn’t going to come undone by anything he does or doesn’t do. It will come undone on its own because it will become increasingly obvious that the climate simply isn’t warming they way he has been saying it would, if at all.
At that point, nobody is really going to care what Dr. Hansen chooses to say or not to say. He will simply fade into obscurity. What disappoints me most is that I have always had great respect for science and actors like him raise my cynicism level considerably.
Gore has the same problem as Hansen. Refuses to debate us criminal deniers.
I compared Dr. Hansen’s 1988 testimony before the US Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources to his 20th anniversary comments, particularly the part about (and I quote vertabim) “Now, as then, I can assert that these conclusions have a certainty exceeding 99%,” then added the GISS data over the same period. For those of you who have done like wise, can anyone tell me what’s going on with this man? Has he abandoned all reasonable sense of science?
For those who have not made the comparison, he predicted a temperature anomaly of a bit more than 1°C higher than the 1951-1980 mean by 2008 (Scenario A, i.e. continued emissions at the 1988 rate). However the GISS data is showing essentially little or no anomaly in 2008, yet he says in his 2008 statement that (and I quote verbatim again) “Warming so far, about two degrees Fahrenheit over land.”
What am I missing? How can the director of NASA’s GISS say something so contrary to his own underlying data set?
Guess he doesn’t want to happen to him what happened in Spain where Chris Horner was to debate one of the lead IPCC authors. It seems she hadn’t a clue as to what the PDO is:
http://planetgore.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MWE0NTNlMmI4Mjg0OGRlMmI5MjAxMDM0ZjRkOTdhYjE=
Oh the sweetness of an imaginary headline:
Gore, Hansen Refuse To Debate AGW – Fear Shame Of Loss
Re “What am I missing? How can the director of NASA’s GISS say something so contrary to his own underlying data set?”
You forgot to add “… and get away with it?”.
Is there actually anything that bolsters confidence in Hansen’s work?
Sounds like Hansen’s hedge was the ‘over land’ qualifier. That is how he is getting away with it.
Exclude the ocean cooling and mis-lead everyone.
I’d be happy to provide $10K in prize money for a 1 hr. network television debate, equal time, only unadjusted machine taken data may be used, call / text in voting, winner take all – Dr. Hansen v. Watt’s Up
Debate Topics
A. The Quality of Dr. Hansen’s Temperature Network vs. UAH data?
B. Global Warming from 1998 to 2008?
C. Explaination and Root cause of the great 2008 cooling event?
D. Predict a Global Temperature record for the next 20 years by year – so we can do this again in 2018 –
REPLY: Here’s Dr. Hansen’s contact info –
Dr. James E. Hansen
Columbia University
750 Armstrong Hall
2880 Broadway
New York, NY 10025 USA
Phone: (212) 678-5500
If you can get him to agree then you have a starting point. Please share whatever letter you might send him.
I think Mr Hansen’s apparent terseness is entirely understandable…
Can you imagine the pressure he’s under, what with changing the temperature record, attempting to justify changing the temperature record, inventing impossibly convoluted codes as a smokescreen for what us unscientific types call “cooking the books”, all the time looking nervously over his shoulder at the steadily cooling climate and wondering what new and more fantastical equations can he invent to somehow fend off the impending collapse of his ivory tower.
Frankly, it’s a wonder the poor chap’s got the time to reply at all!
I bet he needs a cup of tea and a lie down.
‘Over land’ currently is the only place Dr. Hansen can guarantee global warming with his global warming data & personal income adjuster algorithm > watch out if he ever starts proposing ocean-going temp stations cause they will be way to close to the docks, in shallow water, hooked to the back of freighters, over-represented in the tropics and spitting out data optimized for Dr. Hansen’s income.
JH$(t) = AGW(t)*Tadjust(JH)
Hansen did the only possible option open to him.
First thing first: Hansen can be either one of two things: either he’s stupid or he’s intellectually dishonest/politically corrupt.
To get where he is at, he could not have been stupid, thus, he is politically corrupt and dishonest. For him, the ends justify the means, including bad science, disregarding evidence. The end might be financial or political glamour, but it does not matter…
In that context, the answer he gave is the only one his guru persona could possibly give. He knows that he will get professionally killed if he goes out in public.
For any guru to survive scrutiny and reach his political goals in such a situation, he has to bluff to the very end.
It is imperative for him that he keeps fooling his blind followers and maintain the trust that his corrupt puppetmasters have vested in him. The consequences he faces if he fails either of them would be devastating to him.
The blind followers will keep their faith in him simply because he will claim moral high ground, providing the worshiping crowd with the confirmation bias it craves.
The blind followers provide the plebian moral sanction that the puppetmasters need to justify their plans. What are these? I have no idea, but money is involved in it, as it the the motor of all wars. And probably much ideology too, for it never hurts.
“not interested”
Surely Mr Katz’s response to this should have been:
“My apologies, the invitation was sent to you by mistake. I had intended to invite Jim Henson, the creator of the Muppets, not James Hansen, the creator of Global Warming. It is very easy to get the two of you mixed up, although I suspect that Jim Henson’s input (despite being dead) would be of more value (and hole more truth).”
Hansen is sounding more and more unpleasant as time goes by. Does anyone have a link to that recent picture from this site showing his outstretched claw reaching for the planet Earth (looking much like the evil Emperor from Return of the Jedi?). The picture is not appearing on this computer at the moment.
Perhaps Hansen is so muzzled by the government and NASA, that those were the only two words allowed to sneak through NASA’s draconian email monitoring software?
Or perhaps he wrote a lengthy eloquent response, but his temperature-record algorithm ‘corrected’ it?
To be honest, it is not surprising that Dr. Hansen would decline. He is far more influential and well known then Dr. Michaels so it would only diminish Dr. Hansen to engage in this debate.
A debate between the two would be a public relations coup for Dr. Michaels regardless of the outcome while providing zero upside for Dr. Hansen. Remember, this is a man who will likely have the ear of the next President, be he Democrat or Republican.
Some context here.
Hansen and others thought CO2 driven global warming was a slamdunk. Therefore, questionable practices in relation to past data didn’t matter, because future data would prove them right.
Their problem is future data didn’t prove them right and they are circling the waggons to defend their position in the hope data from here on in does prove them right.
Hansen equates the debating forum to a test-stand. Put a defective product on a test-stand, and it’ll fail. Same is true for his crackpot predictions. He knows it.
I do hope Hansen’s cowardly response will be circulated to the other sceptic blogs.
Apparently, debate is avoided by those who do not like having their science questioned, or do not wish to have their beliefs undermined. Joe Romm over at ClimateProgress accepted a technical comment I made on a recent thread, posted it, then a few hours later returned it to awaiting-moderation limbo. The next day he deleted it.
I wasn’t rude. I wasn’t spouting skeptic dogma. I simply noted a few of his misunderstandings, errors, and omissions and backed it up with graphs. More here.
http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2008/07/climate-progress-posts-my-comment.html
Do as Hansen says. Not as he does.
They all won’t debate, because they all know that they are wrong.
They would rather save their pride than save the planet.
With that sort of attitude, when Hansen asks for funding/assistance from any organisation in the future he will be surprised to find their reply to be “not interested”
Well, they did have to pick Patrick Michaels, didn’t they. Not the best choice. Not sure I’d have agreed to that either.
REPLY: That still doesn’t mean you can drop basic courtesy.
Give Dr. Hansen a second chance to prove himself !
With slightly rearranged lyrics from the famous Radiohead band, Hansen thoughts could be :
I’ll take a quiet life
A handshake of carbon dioxide
With no alarms and no surprises
No alarms and no surprises
No alarms and no
Surprises please…
All the best from France
Emmanuel
Every effort to effort should be made by readers of this blog to pass this information on to their elected officials. Hansen is nothing more than a coward who has no problem going to Washington to participate in a forum where his lies will not face scrutiny. I have had enough of this snake oil salesman. It is time he is exposed and discarded.