I’ve been wrestling with this topic for hours now as to how to best present it in this forum. I finally decided to simply just write it as I see it.
It has been an ugly day for law and common sense in the world. Vandalism in the name of ecological causes is now “ok” thanks in part to Dr. James Hansen, of NASA GISS coming to the defense of eco-vandals. See the second story below. Now, encouraged by this “victory” that gives a sanction to eco-vandalism in the UK, how many more shall we see? And if one of these people is injured and kills themselves or others in the process of the next stunt? What then? Who is responsible?
Certainly I want a cleaner world, and better energy resources with focus on the future. But, sanctioning vandalism for these causes is not the way to get there. What do I want from NASA as a taxpayer? Science, solutions, and inspiring ideas turned into reality. I don’t want political activism in the name of science.
After thinking awhile about this, I’ve come to the following conclusions:
1- A NASA scientist siding with vandalism as a “lawful excuse” is an inappropriate abuse of the position. It was a question of law, not of science.
2- Dr. Hansen cannot separate himself from the agency as private citizen in this case, because he was brought in as an “expert witness”. Even if he paid his own way and took personal time, his presence was based on taxpayer funded research.
3- It appears Dr. Hansen has violated the code of ethics posted on the NASA Office of General Council webpage.
From the Goddard Institute for Space Studies web page: GISS is a component laboratory of Goddard Space Flight Center‘s Earth Sciences Division, which is part of GSFC’s Sciences and Exploration Directorate. Thus Hansen falls under these ethics rules.
Specifically, Dr. Hansen’s defense of vandalism in the name of a cause he believes in fails under the NASA Misuse of position rule. If he received compensation of any kind, such as airfare, rooms, board etc. to appear as a NASA expert, he would also be breaking other NASA conduct rules.
4- As keeper of data, specifically the GISTEMP dataset, he has now brought the impartiality of that data into question due to his activism in areas unrelated to scientific research.
Certainly Dr. Hansen has a body of work that is impressive, there is no disputing that. But it is time for Dr. Jim Hansen to go. Thanks to him, GISS as a dataset is no longer impartial. We have potential bias from the gatekeeper of the data that can’t be separated from the data. If he can come to the defense of lawbreakers in the name of his global warming cause, then it is an even easier jump to allow that same bias to creep into scientific data he is responsible for and his conclusions drawn from that data.
If you feel the same way, your recourse is to write to
Michael D. Griffin
Administrator
c/o NASA Public Communications Office
NASA Headquarters
Suite 5K39
Washington, DC 20546-0001
(202) 358-0001 (Office)
(202) 358-3469 (Fax)
Or use the online submission form
————————————
From the Greenpeace website:
Breaking news: Kingsnorth Six found not guilty!
Five of the ‘Kingsnorth Six’ at the top of the 200m chimney
From The Independent, UK
Cleared: Jury decides that threat of global warming justifies breaking the law
also
Nasa scientist appears in court to fan the flames of coal power station row
By Michael McCarthy, Environment Editor
Thursday, 4 September 2008
The Nasa scientist who first drew attention to global warming 20 years ago appeared in a British court yesterday as a key witness in support of climate change activists charged with damaging a power station.
Professor James Hansen gave evidence at Maidstone Crown Court in the case of six Greenpeace members who scaled a 630ft chimney at the Kingsnorth plant in Hoo, Kent, last October in protest against plans to build new coal-fired units there.
The activists planned to paint the slogan “Gordon Bin It” on the chimney, but only got as far as the Prime Minister’s christian name before they obeyed a High Court injunction ordering them down. They were charged with causing £35,000 of damage – the sum it cost the plant’s owner, E.ON, to scrub off the word “Gordon”.
Greenpeace argues that under the Criminal Damage Act 1971, its activists had a “lawful excuse” to cause the damage because they were seeking to prevent even greater damage being caused to property – such as flooding from rising sea levels and damage to species caused by climate change.
Yesterday, Prof Hansen, who has spoken out against the Bush administration’s stance on global warming, said Britain had a responsibility to take a lead on limiting climate change because it was responsible – owing to its long industrial past – for much of the CO2 already in the atmosphere. Phasing out coal-burning power stations was crucial in tackling global warming, he told the court.
“Somebody needs to stand up and take a leadership role,” Prof Hansen said. “It is an opportunity for the Prime Minister. If we are to avoid disintegration of the ice sheets, minimise species extiction and halt or reverse… climate change there is just time to accomplish it, but it requires an immediate moratorium on new coal-fired power plants that do not capture or sequester CO2.”
Prof Hansen joined the Kingsnorth debate in December when he wrote to Gordon Brown and urged him to drop plans for coal-fired plants that do not capture CO2 emissions. E.ON wants to build two new coal-fired units at the ageing plant. The Government is considering whether to approve the planning application.
Before travelling to Kent, Prof Hansen met the David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, who is thought to be unhappy about the plan for Kingsnorth, which is being promoted by John Hutton, the Business Secretary. Mr Brown will have the final say later this year.
Reminds me of the movie “Hot Fuzz.” Great movie where the village council of Sanford, Gloucestershire took it upon themselves to clean up their neighborhood for “the greater good” – including property destruction and murder when necessary.
Words fail me this guy takes the cake, he should have been fired long ago.
I agree, but the key phrase is “long ago”. It’s too late to do it now.
Besides, this is the kind of “help” the AGW movement would be better off without. As the owls always say, when your enemy is making a fool of himself, get the heck out of the way and let him get on with it.
It seems pretty clear that GISSTEMP is consistently higher in its temperature reconstruction than HadCRUT, UAH or RSS. It is clearly an outlier.
There are liars, damnliars, and outliers.
On the same day in the UK we hear that a mother was fined £700 for putting her dustbin bags out a day early. Mad!
My building gets fined 800 clams if anyone fails to separate garbage. This is a pain in the patoot, takes up space, attracts bugs, and wastes a godawful amount of fresh water.
As I understand it, none of it is actually recycled–too expensive–it just goes to landfill.
But it puffs up the city coffers and “teaches us how to act”.
Not madness. Method.
Evan, you just slay me.
This time I can grab credit for the one-liner.
(BTW, I always wondered, why are FDR’s clever remarks are known as “quips” while Ronald Reagan’s are commonly referred to as “one-liners”?)
Sincerely,
Paul Hodes
Member of Congress
Oy.
BTW, sorry I bracketed that 700 quid and made it 70. Make it 765.12. I’ll go back and restore.
I submitted my 2 cents to the Nasa site… hopefully this will result in something more than a ‘stern talking to’…
Let them freeze in the dark.
It’s a pretty moral quandry, isn’t it?
If the way of demonstrating that violence or vandalism is wrong is to perform the acts on those that advocate the acts, we can’t morally do it. However, the logic only works if both sides have the same morals.
If one group believes they have the right or imperative to cause damage or inflict real or financial pain on another group, they do so. Those that believe otherwise, when not backed by laws/governments, can only stand and watch.
Sad times.
Not guitly.
Truth hurt much?
I say FIRE HANSEN NOW! If Griffin refuses to do it, then Bush should fire him and find somebody who will fire Hansen. Enough is enough. Hansen now enlists his biased services in a cause, in total violation of NASA ethics. None of his work is now reliable – if it ever was.
What’s the retirement age at NASA? James Hansen is now 67. How much longer can he stay on anyway?
“Would you feel as sanguine about judicial discretion were someone to bulldoze your house or the things you use for your livelihood for the ‘greater good’ and get away with it?”
A better question might be: how would NASA feel if these twits vandalized the Shuttle? I mean, it does crank out a goodly amount of GHG’s, and it is (very) arguably less necessary than a power plant. Fair is fair. Perhaps it should be pointed out to them. Does NASA have any supporting installations in the UK (tracking stations, etc.)? If so, does NASA agree that they should be vandalized to prevent the damage to the planet? Does Hansen? And please note that I am not inciting anyone to commit a crime. No, the geniuses in the UK, along with Hansen, have established the precedent that by encouraging people to disable any NASA assets in the UK that are directly or indirectly involved in Shuttle operations, I would be acting completely within the law. No doubt Hansen would come and testify on my behalf. I’m sure NASA would understand.
My comment has been submitted to NASA, as follows:
I am gravely disappointed at the involvement of Dr. Hansen in a case in which he seems to have testified in favor of eco-vandalism. The story to which I am referring to is here: http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/nasa-scientist-appears-in-court-to-fan-the-flames-of-coal-power-station-row-918057.html
I am simply a lay person who has an interest in taking a look at the data on a monthly basis and taking a look at global trends. I won’t get into a debate about the merits of Dr. Hansen’s viewpoints on global warming. That is not the point.
The point is that he has crossed a line that I find unfathomable. Of course, in reality, he long crossed the line from scientific analysis to political activism. We all know that Dr. Hansen has a great conflict of interest.
As the presider over arguably the most-watched data set that presents global monthly temperatures, it would seem to me that NASA would wish to do everything in its power to present pure scientific analysis, with no perception of bias – at least inasmuch as it goes towards political activism or personal gain of the individual gatekeeper of that data. This is simply not the case. The GISS data – rightly or wrongly – is viewed with a very skeptical eye. We all know that there are adjustments to the data. These adjustments can be debated regarding the soundness of the theory behind them. But because of the adjustments, there is legitimate debate. It has been shown that the adjustments, over time, have increased the trend line from the raw data. This bias in the adjustment may be appropriate, or it may not be. But it sure looks fishy and undermines the credibility of the unbiased nature of such an adjustment with Dr. Hansen at the helm.
When someone such as Hansen is as public, and quite honestly, obnoxious as he is with regard to his own opinion on not just the conclusion of what the data shows, but why it shows that, then it puts NASA in a position of looking like a political tool rather than a scientific asset.
This line was crossed long ago in testimony to Congress and in the press. It has reached a new level with a testimony in defense of ecovandalism. He is paid with my tax dollars, which seals my unfavorable opinion of all this.
I am loathe to call for someone to be fired or reassigned for expressing personal opinions, in most cases. It is not an easy thing to request, because it affects another person’s livelihood to siggest such a thing. But a preson also needs to be held accountable for their actions. Dr. Hansen has continually diminished the reputation of NASA and the public’s perception of NASA’a unbiased scientific analysis. It is time to act.
Thank you for your time.
Thanks for bringing this to our attention, Anthony.
Joe
“There are liars, damnliars, and outliers.”
Now that is good.
I regard Hansen with a jaundiced eye, but the article for which you supply a link does not say much about his testimony. He could have spoken as an expert witness without explicitly endorsing vandalism. Still, his involvement is troubling…
You might try contacting JUDICIAL WATCH. They successsfully
sued the Clintons over the health plan . The Clintons tried to
prevent the release of the Health Plan working group documents . I believe that Jim Hansen has been guilty of violating the Hatch Act by receiving money from Kerry’s foundation -$250000 ; being a political adivsor and activist to
Al Gore ,and using his position to campaign for Al Gore and
John Kerry . He also accepted $720,000 from one of George
Soros foundation . Received money for talks relating to his work .
JUDICIAL WATCH
Promoting Integrity, Transparency and Accountability in Government, Politics and the LawContact Us
Judicial Watch is headquartered in our nation’s capital, Washington, D.C., and we would like to hear from you. Tell us how we are doing, report corruption or contact us to get more information. We are accessible by:
Phone: Call us toll free at 1-888-JW-Ethic (1-888-593-8442)
Fax: 202-646-5199
Mail: Please write to us at:
Judicial Watch, Inc.
501 School St. SW, Suite 500
Washington, DC 20024
E-mail:
info@judicialwatch.org
open records – openrecords@judicialwatch.org
Media inquiries – media@judicialwatch.org
Membership or Donation inquiries – fundraising@judicialwatch.org
To apply for an internship – internships@judicialwatch.org
For help with Freedom of Information and other Open Records Requests – openrecords@judicialwatch.org
Areas Of Interest
Political Corruption
Illegal Immigration
Open Records
Eamples::
Judicial Watch Investigates Side-Effects of HPV Vaccine
Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America
Judicial Watch, Inc. v. Food and Drug Administration
State Department Declared Niger Uranium Sale to Iraq “Unlikely” in March 2002
Judicial Watch Uncovers New Documents Detailing Mexican Government Incursions
more
Illegal Immigrants Run Oregon Senator’s Business
Scandal At Govt. Oil Collection Agency
Pelosi Blows Off Calls To Oust Rangel
Judge Admits Longtime Affair With Prosecutor
Police, ICE Point Blame For Freeing Violent Illegal Immigrants
Corruption Trial To Feature Dozens Of Politicians
Another Abramoff Lobby Scandal Indictment
Illegal Immigrant Arrested 16 Times Murders Three
Governor Sued For Immigration Order
Rep. Rangel Conceals Thousands In Rental Income
(c) 2007 Judicial Watch | user login
Diatribical Idiot,
You said, “I am loathe to call for someone to be fired or reassigned for expressing personal opinions, in most cases. It is not an easy thing to request, because it affects another person’s livelihood to suggest such a thing.”
Don’t worry about Dr. Hansens livelihood, Soros has that covered just fine. Also just consider the millions he will make on his “tell all” book royalties. The greens will buy lots and lots of books from this ecomartyr.
He will undoubtedly make more money outside of government service.
Mike Bryant
How serious is UK court?
Al Gore’s alarmism is not ok… but vandalism is ok…
Oh please, do not fire Hansen. Making him martyr would hurt much more, than anything else: Science has already lost… haven’t anyone noticed?
This guy is a nutcase. It would be a great service and give me confidence in the government if they let him go.
Watt are the odds?
The precedent that’s been set by this jury is appalling. Vandalism is okay if it’s in the name of preventing global warming? Does this mean I can steal my neighbor’s gas-guzzling SUV? Maybe I should just kill my neighbor and prevent him from creating an even greater carbon footprint…
Apparently, all ethics are suspended to prevent greater harm to the environment…
Dr. Hansen is a [snip]. It’s incredible how far people will go because of their intellectual arrogance.
What I’m sure those Greenpeace people don’t understand is that power stations like the one they damaged enable scientists to do work on finding safer ways of creating energy. They certainly can’t do their research in the dark!
And another thing. If all of these “awful, terrible, planet raping” power plants were shut down, we’d start burning wood to stay warm. And it’s not probable that everybody would survive the winters. So in order to save the earth and mankind by cutting our dependence on oil, coal, and gas, we would start chopping down the forests and freezing to death. Pretty ironic.
However, hardcore environmentalism may actually be a very serious mental disorder so I won’t say anything to offend them. I’m just that sensitive.
Reply: Let’s avoid ad hominem attacks. Thanks. – Anne
Mike Bryant: I knew that when I wrote it. Still, whatever you think of Hansen, I always do try and remember that this is another human being we’re talking about.
But, egad. I re-read the part you quoted, and the short part after that and I am embarrassed that I didn’t catch my typos before I sent it. That Diatribe makes me look like an Idiot…
Anthony Watts,
You make disgraceful and unsupportable assertions in this post. Hansen did not ‘side with vandalism’. He made no statement whatsoever regarding any judgment on the case. He testified as an expert witness and commented only upon his understanding of climate change, its attribution and its anticipated consequences. You may disagree with his judgment, by all means, but your assertion that he “defend[ed] vandalism in the name of a cause” is entirely without basis and is defamatory. Your demand that he should be fired for speaking the truth as he understands it to be is tantamount to witch-hunting, forwarded as it is by unsupportable allegations on your part regarding what he said. I suggest that you should read a transcript of the trial before you assert what you presume he said. Is that basic decency too much trouble to be taken when you have a ’cause’ of your own to pursue?
Frankly, shame on you.
REPLY: Flying across the Atlantic at the request of the defense pretty clearly says that he “sides” with them. He simply could have said no, and remained impartial. He made a choice. The choice was to help the Greenpeace defense team. That is called taking a side.
Personally, I was really happy to hear that the Greenpeace campaigners were released. And it feels like about time for NASA and other U.S. agencies to start publically supporting and recognizing the valid fears behind global warming. Obviously, there is a need for science to remain outside of politics – which I can see as a dilemma in this case – but with the politicizing of global warming by the clear divide between the GOP and the Dems, how else can it be handled?
The verdict (and especially the reasoning for it) does set a dangerous precedent. But, it’s certainly not the first time.
Here’s a worse example: A few years ago (perhaps 5 to 15 ??), a jury in Washington state acquited protestors who had blocked a train carrying nuclear warheads to the submarine base at Bangor. The reason? Because “they believed in what they were doing“. Can you imagine? How many actions could have that justification? Remember when French agents blew up a Greenpeace ship in New Zealand? I’m sure they believed in what they did… (It was ironic for Greenpeace, an organization that believes that the end justifies the means, to be hoisted on their own petard by an illegal act committed against them. Too bad that, unexpectedly, someone was in the ship and killed.)
Richard S Courtney (04:39:56):
Richard, that was a masterful letter – excellent, indeed!
simon talbot,
By simply traveling to the UK to testify, Hansen was implicitly supporting the protesters. Whether he stated they were justified or not, his action and subsequent testimony was a resounding endorsement of their actions. There is no other interpretation.