Dan Weiss from the Center for American Progress seems to have more than a little trouble with this interview. I wonder why they didn’t ask Joe Romm to be on?
Left to right: Michaels and Weiss
Here’s the video description as posted on YouTube:
Hackers broke into thousands of emails and documents from the Climate Research Unit at East Anglia University last week and uncovered the global warming conspiracy.
Stuart Varney interviews scientist Pat Michaels, with the CATO institute, who was the target of physical threat from Climate Scientist Ben [Santer]. He also DESTROYS Dan Weiss, from the Center for American Progress.
Calls for an independent inquiry into what is being dubbed “Climategate” are growing as the foundation for man-made global warming implodes following the release of emails which prove researchers colluded to manipulate data in order to “hide the decline” in global temperatures.
In an interview with The Washington Times on Monday, Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) announced he would probe whether the U.N.s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) cooked the science to make this thing look as if the science was settled, when all the time of course we knew it was not.
Here’s the video:
Kudos to Pat Michaels for clarifying, and I paraphrase: “that it is not about whether global warming exist or not but how serious it is and how people like me (Michaels) and his friends are treated for saying that it might not be the end of the world.”
There is a groupthink amoung journalist that people like Pat don’t believe the world has warmed at all and infared radiation retention is a Hoax. There are univeristy students who are being taught by their professors that people like Michaels think the world is 6000 years old.
If they ever read anything by Christy, Michaels, Lindzen etc. they would be forced to realize that aligning with the overzealous alarmist who see the world as a good (academia/government/liberals) and evil (business/capitalist/republicans) was out of line and exposed their own bias.
Watching Dan Weiss in this video, only one person with similar discourse came to my mind: the jailed creationist, Kent Hovind!
Icarus (04:35:49) :
I see you used lots of bolds to try to get everyone to look. I guess that’s all you trolls have now. You feel yourselves sinking with no way of stopping.
Fox has Dan Weiss on fairly often . He’s a predictable stooge for the CAP , although he’s more of an idiot than useful . Hence his appeal to the likes of Cavuto and Varney – he’s more shreddable than Ollie North’s papers .
I enjoy shouting matches as much as the next guy, but I prefer the ‘deniers’ position to go more Jiu Jitsu than Kung Fu. I always appreciate the skeptic that is cool, calm and collective. Let them attack, and then trap them in their own words. Red-faced, belligerent, psuedo-confidence is a sign of weakness.
Every day Jones is allowed to stay in power is great for the skeptic position. Every article that comes out about climate change causing prostitution is an opportunity. Every time Kofi Annan gives us a body count, or Gore publishes a book is an opening. Use their own words against them.
Take the blows, and then go for the choke-hold or tap out 🙂
Kate (02:37:41) :
Massive CRU Data Fraud Can’t Derail the Global Warming Gravy Train
I’m not so sure Kate.
If the scientists in the emails end up in front of a Senate hearing and are asked to answer questions under oath the general public that already has doubts about global warming will have even firmer doubts if not complete conversion to being convinced it isn’t real.
These emails will only get heavier and heavier for the global warming ilk like Dan Weiss.
Bob_L (06:31:39):
Icarus :
“The cause of this increasing insensitivity of wood density to temperature changes is not known,……..”
You miss the entire point. The problem isn’t that wood has been a temp. proxy for 950 years only to change suddenly in the last 50, the problem is that wood has never been a proxy.
So you’re arguing that there is no correlation *at all* between temperature and tree growth? That, all other things being equal, varying temperature will have no effect at all on tree growth? I think biologists would disagree with you.
Of course there are factors *other* than temperature which also have an influence, but if you’re looking at tree-ring density data from hundreds of sites all over North America and Eurasia and you find statistically significant trends in the data then it seems to me that temperature is actually quite a good candidate as the cause of those trends (especially if, as the study says, there is a strong correlation of tree-ring density with temperature for times before 1960 when temperature measurements were available).
Surely this is how science is supposed to work – you publish your results, others get a chance to challenge, confirm or refute your conclusions, more papers are published, the understanding improves over time. I don’t see any problem with this.
Bob_L (06:31:39) :
People like Icarus are still trying to defend the Mann Hockey Stick even though “Mike’s Nature trick” is revealed in these emails and even though Mann’s methods of trying to rid the temperature record of the Medieval Warm Period is in the emails.
I suppose that if Michael Mann is called before the Senate and all his emails are read on C-Span, and he has to answer under oath that he did these things Icarus will still be here afterwards talking about tree ring proxies being robust and reliable.
DJ Meredith (07:27:29) :
I think Icarus isn’t aware that even the scientists in the emails were ready to throw Briffa under the bus.
Icarus (10:16:02) :
Guess you haven’t read those e-mails.
DJ Meredith (07:27:29) :
I was disappointed that Varney didn’t just hit Weiss straight up with the fact that the email’s authors have themselves acknowledged the authenticity.
Right. I was looking for that too.
fish eye lens?
I don’t think it’s a fish eye lens. It’s his glasses that give that appearance.
Where did he get those glasses? It’s his taste I guess.
You gotta love David Weiss and the rest of the pathetic responses thus far from the AWGF thugs. They are priceless. Their past success at mangling the scientific method and their organized, systematic marginalizing of critics is now over. They have been exposed for the despicable and ruthless dunderheads they are.
AGW can no longer be discussed without adding an F for Fraud.
While lame stream USA media continues to ignore this scandal, I believe they will have to at least try to whitewash it like the NYT did in a manner so grotesque and transparent as to be unbelievable.
This is not going away thanks to folks who give a damn about science like Anthony.
“That, all other things being equal, varying temperature will have no effect at all on tree growth? I think biologists would disagree with you.”
And how do you know that all other things have been equal? Rainfall, for example?
“especially if, as the study says, there is a strong correlation of tree-ring density with temperature for times before 1960 when temperature measurements were available).”
You’ve not looked at the Briffa code, have you? The “corrections” aren’t only after 1960. There are alo adjustments applied for four five-year periods starting in 1929.
In fact, adjustments are applied for something over 1/3rd of the entire time series.
“Surely this is how science is supposed to work – you publish your results, others get a chance to challenge, confirm or refute your conclusions,”
how’s that possible, when the author refuses to publish either code or data?
“Where did he get those glasses? It’s his taste I guess.”
He should’ve gone to “specsavers” Gene.
Icaraus:
“So you’re arguing that there is no correlation *at all* between temperature and tree growth? ”
Hide the decline! Do you even know what that means, Icarus.
Vincent (11:07:25) :
“Where did he get those glasses? It’s his taste I guess.”
He should’ve gone to “specsavers” Gene.,/i>
Those must be his racquetball glasses.
David Walton (10:38:15) :
While lame stream USA media continues to ignore this scandal,
They are telling us Brad is getting back together with Jennifer. And Kate is leaving Tom—and taking the baby with her!
So they are telling us all the important things. 😉
Gene Nemetz (10:05:04) :
Hi Gene. Thanks for your insight. My post was to illustrate the fact that our leaders are most definitely living in some sort of Parallel Universe where nothing can make them alter the course of their action, not even the knowledge that everything they now stand for on so-called “global warming” is based on the biggest scientific fraud in history. Our leaders are going to Copenhagen no matter what, and they are going to present us with the poisoned fruit of a corrupt tree and expect us to swallow it.
What really encourages me is that Michaels says there is a lot of material and documents and that we’re going to be hearing about it for a year.
:
Weiss and his fellow travellers will be cranking up the volume and try to out-shout any and all critics. It’s pathetic, really.
Wow, Pat Michaels was great but Dan Weiss was a joke. That was quite an interview.
Dan Weiss from the Center for American Progress …..That’s a Soros funded outfit — 2006, the Center for American Progress was given a three-year, $3000000 grant by George Soros’ Open Society Institute to be used for…
His performance was hilarious. He reminded of Chris Farley doing his “living in a van down by the river” shtick
Nigel Alcazar (08:47:57) :
“The bbc has believed in two things for the last 10 or so years 1.Tony Blair and the labour party are great and Global warming.Their first belief is now a bust so they have to hang on to the second.”
So “aunty’s” got its tilt caught in a wronger? Tough.
The hour is now High Midnight …
… and the wheels are coming off the pumpkin.
John M (10:31:45) :
Icarus (10:16:02) :
“…others get a chance to challenge…”
Guess you haven’t read those e-mails.
You’re right, I haven’t. However, I do know that Anthony’s claim about researchers colluding to “manipulate data in order to ‘hide the decline’ in global temperatures” is simply false, as the ‘decline’ referred to is a decline in wood density, not a decline in temperature at all (and I think there was an implied link to the recent ‘global cooling’ meme too, whereas the original email was over a decade ago).