Even the very liberal UK Guardian picked up on this. What next Jim, the Constitution? NASA, please fire this man. (h/t to Barbara)
Photograph: Gareth Fuller/PA
From the UK Guardian:
Protest and direct action could be the only way to tackle soaring carbon emissions, a leading climate scientist has said.
James Hansen, a climate modeller with Nasa, told the Guardian today that corporate lobbying has undermined democratic attempts to curb carbon pollution. “The democratic process doesn’t quite seem to be working,” he said.
Speaking on the eve of joining a protest against the headquarters of power firm E.ON in Coventry, Hansen said: “The first action that people should take is to use the democratic process. What is frustrating people, me included, is that democratic action affects elections but what we get then from political leaders is greenwash.
“The democratic process is supposed to be one person one vote, but it turns out that money is talking louder than the votes. So, I’m not surprised that people are getting frustrated. I think that peaceful demonstration is not out of order, because we’re running out of time.”
Hansen said he was taking part in the Coventry demonstration tomorrow because he wants a worldwide moratorium on new coal power stations. E.ON wants to build such a station at Kingsnorth in Kent, an application that energy and the climate change minister Ed Miliband recently delayed. “I think that peaceful actions that attempt to draw society’s attention to the issue are not inappropriate,” Hansen said.
He added that a scientific meeting in Copenhagen last week had made clear the “urgency of the science and the inaction taken by governments”.
Read the entire story in the UK Guardian
Stan (09:16:08) :
O/T – something has been bothering me for a while. The sun doesn’t have many spots and we know that this corresponds to poor wheat harvests (though not necessarily causes them). As I understand it, both the PDO and NAO have turned negative – how does that correlate to food production? Particularly in the US, Canada and
I farm. but the best answer to your question who knows. Some of the corn crop in the northern United states is still unharvested because of a late spring and wet fall. We could have a great discussion as to whether that is climate or weather. We will all know more by this fall about your question but don’ make any bets in the futures market on the price of corn,soybeans or wheat. These crops are grown in so many parts of the world even if the world cooled some yields would still meet our needs.
Aron (12:01:05) :
“B Kerr, something is odd about the second video on that BBC article. It’s dark, it’s night and it should be -40C ”
He looks as warm as toast.
Do not think he had problems getting into that PARKA.
No gloves on when he demonstrates ice pack movement at 00:57 into the video.
Think I’d have gloves on.
Re the Hatch Act:
“To better understand the Hatch Act in effect today, an understanding of its history is helpful. The Act was first enacted in 1939 out of concerns about the harmful effects of political activities by government workers. The 1939 Act affected only federal employees. A year later the Act was amended in two ways important to this case. First, coverage was extended to state and local employees. That extension was an exercise of Congress’s spending power, as the law was limited to state and local employment “in connection with any activity which is financed in whole or in part by laws or grants made by the United States or any federal agency.” 5 U.S.C. 118k(a) (1958). Second, the 1940 amendments brought District of Columbia employees within the Act’s coverage as federal employees.
In 1942 the Act was amended again, this time introducing a teacher exception, applicable to teachers in any state, locality, or the District of Columbia. . . . In 1966, the Act was recodified and bifurcated into the two separate chapters of Title 5 where the provisions appear today: (applying to state and local employees) and (applying to federal employees). The recodification did not materially change the law, at least as it pertains to the teacher exception, which was maintained in both new sections. In part, 7324(c) at that time read: “Subsection (a) of this subsection does not apply to an individual employed by an educational or research institution, establishment, agency, or system which is supported in whole or in part by the District of Columbia.” 5 U.S.C. 7324(c) (1970).
Starting in the mid-seventies, several attempts were made to relax the Act’s prohibitions generally. Those attempts culminated in amendments that were enacted in 1993, which, most significantly, retracted the Act’s prohibition against “tak[ing] an active part in political management or in political campaigns.” Compare id. 7324(a)(2) with 5 U.S.C. 7323(a) (2000). The 1993 amendments also removed the DC teacher exception that had been codified at 7324(c). The rationale for its removal, as pointed out by Briggs and not contested by the government, is unexplained in the legislative history. ”
source: Briggs v Merit Systems Protection Board (Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, 2003)
The test used by the US Supreme Court is from Pickering v. Board of Education, 391 U.S. 563 (1968), where “the [Supreme] Court set forth a balancing test between two competing factors: “The problem in any case is to arrive at a balance between the interests of the teacher, as a citizen, in commenting upon matters of public concern and the interest of the State, as an employer, in promoting the efficiency of the public services it performs through its employees.” ”
Some additional U.S. Supreme Court cases concerning free speech by federal employees on matters of public concern may be found here:
Rankin v. McPherson, 483 U.S. 378 (1987);
Connick v. Myers 461 U.S. 138 (1983);
UNITED STATES v. NATIONAL TREASURY EMPLOYEES UNION, 513 U.S. 454 (1995);
Perry v. Sindermann, 408 U.S. 593 (1972)
“Bill McClure (12:36:55) : I say let him get all the attention he is doing a great job of destroying the AGW agenda.”
As long a ‘NASA’ is attached to his name AGW is not being harmed. It is only being helped.
NASA MUST KNOW THIS FULL WELL
Another Canadian ex-government type piping in. No ‘Hatch Act’ up here in the frozen wasteland, but we do have rules regarding misuse of position and government property. Hansen wrote to Australia on (reportedly) NASA letterhead and that becomes theft of government property if used for private purposes, whatever country. Yup, misuse of a single sheet of paper is “theft under $5000”. I’m old enough to remember the bilingual slogan “Misuse is abuse/Mauvaise usage, c’est gaspillage”. I agree that firing Hansen would be counterproductive, but he could well qualify for demotion or a substantial fine. Then there is the issue of his performance and the accuracy of his predictions. Altogether, it appears to be a sad end to a scientific career that veered off the rails and into advocacy.
how can we expect to receive any unbiased research or data from a person with such extremist views ?
Money certainly is getting more votes. Without money this whole AGW extremist push wouldn’t exist and we would be having reasonable discussion of true warming amounts and effects rather than the obviously exaggerated rubbish spouted by Hansen.
Smokey,
Hansen is free to speak at a political meeting as the head of Nasa/GISS. It is a space research institute. He does not have anything to do with power generation. We are free to ignore or oppose him.
Politicking is good, that is what this thread is. Hansen is not a spokesman for NASA
If you think he is breaking the law then make a complaint. Don’t you think he checked his activities with NASA lawyers? Don’t you think he can afford a trip to UK?
Is the US government condoning vicious attacks? Lighten up; ridicule is more effective and more fun.
Ross
Britain is not like a crowded theatre. We are not about to stampede anywhere. We are a mature, but flawed, democracy.
Karl Marx, a German social scientist, researched and unsuccessfully advocted his extreme views in London in the 19th century.
More prattle from one of our so-called ‘politicians’ about Climate Change. Imagine, we have to put up with this sort of rubbish on a daily basis in our newspapers here in the UK. Please would the USA keep its home-grown agitators at home?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/mar/24/wind-farms-opposition-ed-miliband
“A different William (07:28:55) : “the democratic process doesn’t seem to be working” just means “you plebians aren’t agreeing with me” ”
I was thinking something exaxctly along the same lines.
He wants our minds to be as small as his.
Aron (12:43:08) :
Smokey et al,
He also takes his hands out of his pockets close to the end of the video and reveals that he is wearing fingerless gloves. WTF? Is he made of fire, did he eat lots of Ready Brek, does he defy reality, did he only come out of the tent for a second or was that shot elsewhere?
Maybe it is just after burning the 5L fuel, resulting in a CO2 cloud causing very strong positive feedback…. ?
🙂
Regarding the polar trekkers:
-40c with wind chill is pretty much meaningless. It could just as well be -10c with a lot of wind, or -38c with hardly any. Wind chill is not part of temperature, it is a subjective measure. If you’re in a tent with the wind blocked, and it’s only -10C, your little heater is going to keep you above visible-breath temperature.
Regarding Hansen:
I still say he should be fired, simply for the black mark is has given and is giving to NASA. My own personal opinion of NASA has dropped considerably since I’ve been watching this man’s antics, mostly just because I know that where an organization suffers one, they will suffer many. How many more are there like him there? Maybe they didn’t need to fix the o-ring problem because of global warming (ie. no more cold nights before launch day). Maybe insulation is falling off the external tank because of global warming (although, that one is closer to the truth).
Phil. (12:17:30) :
The key element of the defense presented by the accused vandals was that their criminal conduct was justified by the impending doom of AGW. Mr. Hansen testified, knowingly in support of the notion that his “scientific” conclusions override the rights of anyone who disagrees with him to free from criminal mischief, or worse. You seem to think that is a defensible position. I, and I think most people capable of reason, do not.
The Guardian may be one-sided in its opinions, but at last there is a partial break in the MSM. Last Sunday the Tampa Tribune had a major article by Bjorn Lomborg on the front page of its section called “Views”. The title was, “COAL IS STILL KING OF THE HILL”. He does not dispute the AGW views on CO2, but points out that renewable energy amounts to only about 0.5% of the world’s energy demand, and that wind power is phenomenally more expensive than coal-based. The last paragraph reads as follows: “Coal contributes strongly to global warming, but no amount of political theater can alter the inescapable fact that it also provides benefits that we cannot yet replicate with renewable energy. Braving arrest with Hollywood stars is a diversion. Declaring victory over global warming will take a lot more pragmatism and a lot more work.” Lomborg is stated to be the director of the Copenhagen Consensus Center, and author of “The Skeptical Environmentalist.” I sent an email to the paper applauding their publishing the article, but adding that 800 scientists at the recent meeting in New York disputed the idea that CO2 causes significant global warming, and that water vapor is the main greenhouse gas, not CO2.
Funny and ironic a man who owes all of his fame, influence, and most of his personal wealth to scaremongering; complaining about money influencing the issue. It sure does, if not for the scare stories and the government funding that requires more scarry stories to keep the money flowing this entire AGW story would have been filed in the historical humor sections long ago.
Here we do see him showing his true colors, a fascist, who puts his political agenda not only ahead of science but ahead of the lives of people everywhere.
I voted no – one of only 40 so far. Freedom of speech is more important than whether or not Dr Hansen is doing right or wrong by protesting. If he is denied his right to protest, then so are all government employees and so am I were I one.
Now – had Anthony added the option “should he be fired for incompetent handling of and manipulation of public data” I might have reconsidered.
Roger Clague, James Hansen is abusing his position at NASA and notoriety as an expert on climate science to promulgate what can only be deemed as political actions.
Whatever abuse he receives in this case is well-deserved, and as such, not ad hominem in nature. The highly political side to this debate can not simply be ignored, and to suggest otherwise is simply being disingenuous on your part.
It is perfectly legitimate to call for him to be sacked. He has abused his position for far too long now, and we pay his salary. His objectivity as a scientist is questionable at best, and IMHO, in addition to him being fired there should be an investigation of possible malfeasance on his part.
This is from the Office of Special Counsel Handout on the Hatch Act.
May not use their official authority or influence to interfere with an election
• May not solicit, accept or receive political contributions unless both individuals are members of the same federal labor organization or employee organization and the one solicited is not a subordinate employee
• May not knowingly solicit or discourage the political activity of any person who has business before the agency
• May not engage in political activity while on duty
• May not engage in political activity in any government office
“The democratic process is supposed to be one person one vote, but it turns out that money is talking louder than the votes. So, I’m not surprised that people are getting frustrated. I think that peaceful demonstration is not out of order, because we’re running out of time.”
I’m going to have to search for the report that mentioned this, but I recall recently reading (maybe on WUWT) that there were 4 green lobbyist for every congressperson on the hill.
And btw?…I agree. The process ISN’T working, otherwise, the global warming issue would be dead and buried.
JimB
Here’s how it goes down in the USA, Luis. Hansen works for me; I don’t work for him. I pay his salary; he doesn’t pay mine. He is a public servant, I am the public. Get it? Hansen servant, me master.
Nobody has a right to a government job. Every government employee ought to be subject to firing in a heartbeat if the public wearies of them.
Hansen advocates lawbreaking (civil disobedience) while pocketing my money, paid to him in compliance with the law. So which is it? Rule of law or anarchy? If he despairs of the law, he can try to change it, but by breaking the law he sunders his protection under it.
We tolerate dissent here better than any country in the history of the world. But that doesn’t mean dissenters get to slop at the public trough. To my knowledge nobody else in the public employ is engaging in civil disobedience in foreign countries. Hansen is special that way, and he should be canned forthwith because of it.
As I’m reading comments I can see some are thinking James Hansen is acting upon some brilliant plan that will end in him being fired and then viewed as a martyr.
Winters have been too cold and long all across the world, both in the Northern and Southern Hemispheres. There has been record cold, some of it severe record cold, happening the last two years. Half of the population are already questioning global warming, some are even making jokes about it. The other half must be having feelings of uncertainty too.
James Hansen getting let go from NASA would not be viewed as martyrdom.
If the earth was warming, if there was reports of record heat, some of it severe record heat, then if NASA had let Hansen go for his global warming views–that would be martyrdom–THAT ISN”T GOING TO HAPPEN.
I have seen no proof that Hansen is correct, it’s just propaganda based on an opinion.
Why are people not enraged that the US is still in Iraq? I am sick of double standards.
Hansen and Obama are frauds in my opinion
Now, there’s some freedom of speech for you.
Some people here seem unfamiliar with the Hatch Act. It was enacted because politicians at all levels were ordering civil servants under their jurisdiction to act as campaign workers (among other problems). On the Hatch Act from Wikipedia:
The original Act forbids intimidation or bribery of voters and restricted political campaign activities by federal employees. It prohibits using any public funds designated for relief or public works for electoral purposes. It also forbids officials paid with federal funds from using promises of jobs, promotion, financial assistance, contracts, or any other benefit to coerce campaign contributions or political support.
The most restrictive measure was brought about by Republicans in the Senate. It dictates that persons below the policymaking level in the executive branch of the federal government must not only refrain from political practices that would be illegal for any citizen but must abstain from “any active part” in political campaigns.
michel (08:41:37) wrote:
“A year or so ago a group of American teenage virgins, or at least alleged virgins, took it into their heads to fly over to the UK to promote more chastity and sexual restraint here.
“Some of us looked at what has become a rather familiar spectacle over the years, and wondered why they did not stay at home, promote chastity there, and when they had done that successfully, come over again and tell us about it.
“Some of us wondered idly why people living in the US thought they had anything to teach the UK about chastity. Chastity seemed to be in singularly short supply there,”
They should have flown where they were needed: Mt. Redoubt!
Roger Sowell (12:48:26) :
Thank you Roger for the post! It’s good to see some applications of it.
Could you translate it into english for those who got lost while reading it, just something simple :
Is James Hansen violating the Hatch Act or not?