That headline is NOT a typo, that’s what they say:
If there was even any doubt about Hansen changing from scientist to advocate, that doubt is now shattered.
Meanwhile, amazingly, James Hansen has agreed to a debate. Hansen is going to debate with Don Blankenship of Massey coal company.
This just in, from NASA climate scientist James Hansen, in response to Massey Energy President Don Blankenship’s challenge to debate global warming, the coal industry and the West Virginia economy. I received this note from Dr. Hansen, who asked that I forward the information on to Blankenship.
This is going to become ground zero for the issue. Word has it the people of WV are becoming quite energized.
Hansen has a new commentary on Yale’s Environment 360 blog called “A Plea to President Obama: End Mountaintop Removal.”
Stay tuned. This is going to escalate most likely.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
This is a bit off topic but the analogy to Hansen and Climate is unmistakable. Imagine a concensus model in use for 25 years that is suddenly discovered to be wrong!
ScienceDaily (June 22, 2009) — The largest animals ever to have walked the face of the earth may not have been as big as previously thought, reveals a paper published June 21 in the Zoological Society of London’s Journal of Zoology.
Scientists have discovered that the original statistical model used to calculate dinosaur mass is flawed, suggesting dinosaurs have been oversized.
Widely cited estimates for the mass of Apatosaurus louisae, one of the largest of the dinosaurs, may be double that of its actual mass (38 tonnes vs. 18 tonnes).
“Paleontologists have for 25 years used a published statistical model to estimate body weight of giant dinosaurs and other extraordinarily large animals in extinct lineages. By re-examining data in the original reference sample, we show that the statistical model is seriously flawed and that the giant dinosaurs probably were only about half as heavy as is generally believed” says Gary Packard from Colorado State University.
The new predictions have implications for numerous theories about the biology of dinosaurs, ranging from their energy metabolism to their food requirements and to their modes of locomotion.
There is little to be gained from this debate. One man will be portrayed as wanting to destroy mountains and the other as having dedicated his life to saving mankind. Unless Blankenship is full of surprises, he’s going to be trounced and further demonized at the same time.
But maybe, just maybe, people will be asking why a world renowned climate scientist is debating an accountant instead of another scientist. I.e., why go after easy pickings instead of debating a real challenger?
He’s an astronomer.
Which makes it even worse. He should know about the changes in the outer planets.
He should also know that for every time a factor with inherent uncertainties is inserted into his model in a simplified form, the uncertainty of the outcome is compounded.
Model output should read 0 C change += 8 C for all it’s worth.
rosalind (10:20:17) :
Can’t I be against mountain top removal, a hideous insult to the environment, and also be a climate skeptic?
Yes.
Part of my grandparent’s farm was ripped up by one of the sons (my uncle) operating a dragline for the company that owned the mineral rights. These issues are old and complex. A good read is “Night Comes to the Cumberlands: A Biography of a Depressed Area” by Caudill, now available on Amazon. You will not solve this issue here, now, or in the immediate future.
Let’s not get sidetracked. Any mining whether for coal, copper, iron ore, or uranium, or wind farms, or hydro dams, or highways, or drilling in pristine natural areas and so on are issues unto themselves and all can be objected to. They are also issues that relate to national security, for how can we be secure if we are dependent on our enemies for our basic necessities?
But the main issue at the moment is our government’s assumption that CO2 is a problem and the driver of draconian policies that won’t solve the problem they claim it is. They want control of the economy and the culture so they can take the wealth and manipulate society in the manner they find attractive.
I have suggested before, I think Hansen hates coal because of something in his past – maybe he lived by RR tracks carrying coal trains. I don’t know what this current protest is about but it is not about climate science.
Adam (18:36:09) : Today was the hottest day ever for parts of Florida.
“Floridatrend: It’s Hot But Don’t Blame Global Warming”
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/02/10/floridatrend-its-hot-but-dont-blame-global-warming/
John F. Hultquist (20:19:40) :
I have suggested before, I think Hansen hates coal because of something in his past – maybe he lived by RR tracks carrying coal trains.
Or maybe that’s what he found in his stocking every Christmas.
Douglas DC (19:11:21) : i and my wife are of Appalachian coal miner stock.
This talk of coal mining and NASA puts me in mind of the movie “October Sky”, a true story (for the most part) set in Coalwood, West Virginia.
“You may not like Hansen, his political views, or even his scientific views, but I think it shows quite a lot of arrogance to disparage his credentials!”
Hansen disparages his own credentials, by:
1. Attempting to use those credentials to promote political stunts, with a particular fondness for “civil disobedience” (harassment, trespassing, etc.).
2. Choosing to debate an accountant instead of a peer. How many times has he refused to engage in public debate with other scientists? Now he steps up to have a “science” debate with a coal company exec.?
Hansen needs no help from anyone here dragging his reputation in the mud. I don’t think he cares anyways, now that he apparently has an adoring army of youth climate activists.
Me, I’m not impressed to the same degree as are you. From the linked article:
\\
CITY/CLIMATE SITE OLD RECORD AND DATE NEW RECORD SET JUNE 22 2009
———————————————————————
MIAMI INTL AP 94 1998 AND 1992 98 NEW DAILY RECORD
FT LAUDERDALE/
HOLLYWOOD INTL 96 1956 100 NEW DAILY RECORD
98 JUNE 21 2009 100 NEW MONTHLY RECORD
100 AUG 4 1944 100 /TIED/ ALL TIME RECORD
PALM BEACH INTL 95 2004 AND 1992 96 NEW DAILY RECORD
TEMPERATURE RECORDS EXTEND BACK TO 1895 AT MIAMI, TO 1912 AT FORT
LAUDERDALE, AND TO 1888 FOR THE WEST PALM BEACH AREA.
NOTE…THE FORT LAUDERDALE RECORD OF 100 DEGREES ON AUGUST 4 1944 IS
SOMEWHAT DUBIOUS BECAUSE OF INSTRUMENT EXPOSURE AND BECAUSE ALMOST
NO OTHER SOUTH FLORIDA REPORTING STATION REACHED 100 DEGREES ON THAT
DATE. HOWEVER, THERE IS NO DOUBT THAT MANY SOUTH FLORIDA LOCATIONS
REACHED 100 DEGREES ON JULY 21 1942, EVEN THOUGH THE RECORD FOR FORT
LAUDERDALE FOR THAT MONTH IS INCOMPLETE.
THE FORT LAUDERDALE HOLLYWOOD INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT TEMPERATURE
ACTUALLY TOUCHED 101 DEGREES FOR A FEW SECONDS JUST AFTER 4 PM EDT
BUT DID NOT HOLD IT LONG ENOUGH TO BE CONSIDERED THE MAXIMUM
TEMPERATURE FOR THE DAY.
THE DATE OF JULY 21 1942 IS LIKELY THE PREVIOUS HOTTEST DAY EVER FOR
MAINLAND SOUTH FLORIDA, AS MANY LOCATIONS REACHED OR EXCEEDED 100
DEGREES. THE FOLLOWING IS A LIST OF REPORTED MAXIMUM TEMPERATURES
FOR MAINLAND SOUTH FLORIDA ON THAT DATE…
JULY 21 1942 MAX TEMPS
FORT LAUDERDALE 100 EST
FORTY MILE BEND 99
HIALEAH 100
HOMESTEAD 100
HYPOLUXO 98
LOXAHATCHEE 101
MIAMI BEACH 98
MIAMI INTL AP 100
MOORE HAVEN 100
NAPLES 96
POMPANO BEACH 100
WEST PALM BEACH 101
$$
//
For one thing, Miami Intl. AP is in fact warmer, 100, on 7/21/42 than on the “new record” day, 98, of 6/22/09. WUWT?
Also, considering the possibility of increasing heat island effects over time at airports, perhaps the “true” Miami Intl. AP area temp. maximum has actually decreased rather significantly from 1942?
The Ft.Lauderdale record is not “new” or “hottest ever”. And the article notes that wind and pressure conditions on 6/22/09 were not usual, preventing the usual cooling.
Where is “West Palm Beach”, 101 in 1942, compared to Palm Beach Intl., 100 in 2009?
Airports, calibrations, words, and so on. I’ve forgotten exactly what that semi-retired Professor of Meterology quoted at WUWT a while back had to say about Florida temps, but it’s probably also relevant.
I have a feeling that this debate won’t be anything to do with climate or science but instead will be pure Enviro-Theatre, politics and propaganda.
This will be a media construct that will make Hanson look good and the fossil fuel industry look bad.
Adam from Kansas (19:43:53) :
See this excellent work done by the man featured in this WUWT thread :
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/02/10/floridatrend-its-hot-but-dont-blame-global-warming/
J. Peden (20:48:23) : I’ve forgotten exactly what that semi-retired Professor of Meterology quoted at WUWT a while back had to say about Florida temps, but it’s probably also relevant.
Morton D. Winsberg, Florida State University professor emeritus, ref :
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/02/10/floridatrend-its-hot-but-dont-blame-global-warming/
p.s. I don’t mean to be redundant posting it again. The man did excellent work!
Joel – I must agree with you, that Hansen’s credentials are quite impressive.
However, I work within a community that has more PhD’s per capita than anywhere else in the world. I have worked with a lot of PhD’s. And there is nothing worse than a PhD who is just simply wrong. They can create all manner of reasons for why they are right, and will not listen to any discussions on why they are wrong. There are very very few modest PhD’s.
Credentials can give a person credibility, but they can’t guarantee that the person is right, nor that they can write good code. I would prefer that Dr. Hansen return to the academic role of experimentation and writing scientific papers, rather than be a rabble-rouser. He would be of much more value to the scientific community if he would stay within his area of expertise, which is theorizing about climate.
“Joel Shore (19:55:24) :
Aron says:
Hansen is a computer programmer not a climatologist. He should make iPhone games instead of trying to be a Biblical style prophet with a keyboard and mouse.
It’s a curious feature of the internet that people with God-knows-what credentials can critique the credentials of someone like James Hansen. Here is Hansen’s CV: http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/cv_hansen_200702.pdf
Among the highlights: He is a PhD physicist who has studied radiative transfer in planetary atmospheres for over 35 years and global climate issues for almost that long. He is the recipient of numerous scientific awards and honors including being elected to the National Academy of Sciences, being a Fellow of the AGU, and winning a trifecta of awards from the major relevant professional societies: the American Geophysical Union, the American Physical Society, and the American Meteorological Society. (He won the AGU’s Revelle Medal which is awarded annually and “recognizes outstanding accomplishments or contributions toward the understanding of the Earth’s atmospheric processes, including its dynamics, chemistry, and radiation; and toward the role of the atmosphere, atmosphere-ocean coupling, or atmosphere-land coupling in determining the climate, biogeochemical cycles, or other key elements of the climate system”. He won the APS’s Leo Szilard Lectureship Award, given annually “to recognize outstanding accomplishments by physicists in promoting the use of physics for the benefit of society in such areas as the environment, arms control, and science policy .” And, he won the AMS’s Carl-Gustaf Rossby Research Medal which “is presented to individuals on the basis of outstanding contributions to the understanding of the structure or behavior of the atmosphere. It represents the highest honor that the Society can bestow upon an atmospheric scientist.”)
You may not like Hansen, his political views, or even his scientific views, but I think it shows quite a lot of arrogance to disparage his credentials!”
So what? His credentials have nothing to do with condoning criminal activities. Any other person, or group of people, acting in a similar way would be up before the judge and would receive convictions. Notice that didn’t happen to a bunch of criminals in England recently.
I don’t like American foreign policy, but I don’t condone anyone flying aircraft in to buildings and loading a rental truck with fertiliser and diesel fuel to make my point.
http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/cv_hansen_200702.pdf
rbateman (20:17:57) :
He’s an astronomer.
his cv is above
Actually some say astrophysicist. I say more like astrologer as in sorcery.
Actually some physics questions come to mind for a debate. It would be easy to debate him by using his own internal contradictions and his emotional arguments by which he violates some basic foundations of physics. All you have to do with people like him is get them wound up and then their wheels fall off. Algore won’t debate because he endangers himself.
For one thing, Miami Intl. AP is in fact warmer, 100, on 7/21/42 than on the “new record” day, 98, of 6/22/09. WUWT?
Elementary. Omit the fact that the record you just proclaimed is only for the last 50 years.. That way you can guarantee more new records. Nobody will ever know.
Nothing new in cherry picking the timeslice. Besides all that, when one part of the nation is shivering, it’s a good bet some other place is roasting. Only now, Florida isn’t roasting like it did in 1942.
Speaking of disparaging credentials…
Let’s look at what’s happening to Richard Lindzen. He is probably the most prestigious professor of meteorology, and atmospheric physicist in the world. Is he treated that way?
bio :
http://www-eaps.mit.edu/faculty/lindzen.htm
James Hansen should be anxious to debate Richard Lindzen and not a coal company executive with question marks in his past….. shouldn’t he? It would be different that way. He wouldn’t be shooting fish in a barrel if he faced Richard Lindzen.
Here is a mini debate between Richard Lindzen and Bill Nye :
I’m trying to submit my comments to the EPA on the greenhouse gas endangerment thing but when I go to http://www.regulations.gov I come to a search page rather than a submissions page. What’s with that? … This is important! The EPA needs to know what happened on the night of June 4, 1859!
Notice the sly shot at our credentials that arguably makes the comment totally hypocritical. The “astronomer” snark all started because of the attack’s on skeptics not being “climate scientists”-which is funny, as cs is an interdisciplinary field. I know of no other such field where input from various disciplines is greeted in such a way. Not even politics (where arguably one’s credentials are a liability rather than an asset).
Joel Shore, what about all the LIES told about my father over on DesmogBlog. I suppose that is ok. The CBC has continually LIED about my father and his being a shill for “big oil”. The LIES about his Climatology degree supposedly being honorary. Suck it up, buttercup. It is your camp that has engaged in the mudslinging for decades. Don’t whine when it happens to your guy. Co2 does not drive climate change and the world is NOT warming catastrophically. This Hansen debate is typical of the AGW side, for they will focus on the coal debate (a small but important aspect) to distract from the central issue of Co2 as a driver. Don King would be proud of Hansen’s choice of opponent.
Show me a coal mine of any flavor that doesn’t look like a disaster area, that’s part of the price of the largest source of energy for electricity production at the moment.
What Hansen and co are trying to do is tie one of the most unsavory aspects of electricity into their web of ecological myths, it’s a good idea as it will give many cult followers a physical crutch to support the burden of the rest of their mythology. The problem is I believe that if push comes to shove people will demand a livelihood and electricity over the rantings of a clown in a safari suit. Unless it’s cattle killin time.
Given the conclusions found in the Synthesis Report of the biggest climate conference of the year
http://www.pik-potsdam.de/news/press-releases/files/synthesis-report-web.pdf
I can understand why some people feel some urgency. The surface temperature and heat content of oceans is now even above the most pessimistic IPCC projections, and Greenland is melting rapidly. In total contradiction to what has been said here and there, the global temperature is just as predicted by the IPCC projections also. The graph on page 14 is a sort of a summary of the local projections.
Environmental Fear Factors still burning the midnight oil I see.
joel, where we may agree is,
that climate science is a rather primitive branch of science, with poor or non existent discussion, very poor data management and quality control, widespread poor statistical skills, a non functioning review process, massive political and activist influence and hence the perfect playground for 3rd class hockey players. Having this said, I would agree, that J. Hansen is a climate scientist.