Viewers won’t remember but one thing about this interview: that a UEA scientist called a skeptic an “assh*le” on live television. It reveals just how rattled they are there at UEA/CRU.
NOTE: Updated to the full length version which was put online about 5 hours after this story was first posted – better video quality in addition to the full context of the interview – readers may wish to watch a second time. Thanks to WUWT commenter “adamskirving” – Anthony
Professor Andrew Watson (whose emails are in the Climategate emails) also adds a nice touch when he rolls his eyes, see if you can spot it.
Marc Morano explains:
A professor who is accusing global warming skeptics of engaging in “tabloid-style character assassination” of scientists, called an American climate skeptic “an assh*le” on the December 4, 2009 live broadcast of BBC’s Newsnight program.
“What an assh*le!” declared Professor Watson at the end of the contentious debate with Climate Depot’s executive editor Marc Morano. A clearly agitated Watson had earlier shouted to Morano “will you shut up.”
Video of BBC “Asshole” clip is here. (short) and here (full length – best quality)
Full one-on-one BBC debate segment between Prof. Watson and Climate Depot’s Morano is here in two parts.
The remark was broadcast live on BBC and prompted an on-air apology to viewers from the BBC later in the program for the offensive language.
Watson (Email: a.watson@uea.ac.uk) is a professor at the School of Environmental Sciences at the University of East Anglia, which was the source of the disclosed files. Watson’s emails appear in the hacked Climategate files.
During the live debate, Morano challenged Professor Watson for being in “denial” over the importance of Climategate and noted that “you have to feel sorry for Professor Watson.”
“[Watson’s] colleague, [Professor] Mike Hulme at the University of East Anglia is saying this is authoritarian science, he is suggesting the [UN] IPCC should be disbanded based on what Climategate reveals,” Morano said.
“[UK environmentalist] George Monbiot is saying many of his friend in the environmental and the climate fear promoting business — as Professor Watson is part of — are in denial. You have to feel sorry for Professor Watson in many ways here,” Morano explained.
A clearly agitated Watson called Morano his “psychic colleague” and blurted out “Will you shut up just a second!?”
Morano summed up his views on what ClimateGate reveals during the debate. “It exposes the manufactured consensus. Your fellow colleagues are saying this,” Morano said to Watson.
Morano also noted that President “Obama is probably attending [the UN Conference] because they are circling the wagons because of the magnitude of this scandal.” (See: ‘Welcome to the delayers’: Obama’s ‘half-hearted climate efforts’ welcomed by skeptics – Nov.17, 2009)
“You have UN scientists turning on UN scientists. This is the upper echelon of the UN and it has been exposed as the best science that politics and activism can manufacture. Prof. Watson’s whole argument is ‘trust me, take my word for it,’” Morano added.
Professor Phil Jones, Watson’s colleague, has temporally stepped down pending an investigation into the Climategate scandal, which many observers say exposes data manipulation, suppression of peer-review process, blacklisting, data destruction, willful violation of Freedom of Information Act requests. [Editor’s Note: Climate Depot’s Morano, who BBC described as “one of America’s leading climate change skeptics,” is also cited in the released Climategate files. On July 23, 2009, AP reporter Seth Borenstein asked the Climategate scientist about a “a paper in JGR (Journal of Geophysical Research) today that Marc Morano is hyping wildly.” Penn State Professor Michael Mann (who is now under investigation) apparently wrote back to Borenstein: “The aptly named Marc ‘Morano’ has fallen for it!”]
Professor Andrew Watson of the University of East Anglia, the University at the center of the Climategate controversy, has come to the defense of his colleagues this week and is claiming that the whole email and data release is much ado about nothing.
But other scientists disagree. One of Watson’s colleagues at the University of East Anglia, Professor Mike Hulme, declared Climategate reveals climate science had become ‘too partisan, too centralized.” Hulme, a climate scientist who was listed as “the 10th most cited author in the world in the field of climate change, does not mince words on the magnitude of the scandal.
Hulme has even suggested that the UN IPCC has run its course. ”
“It is possible that climate science has become too partisan, too centralized. The tribalism that some of the leaked emails display is something more usually associated with social organization within primitive cultures,” Hulme wrote on November 27, 2009.
“It is also possible that the institutional innovation that has been the [UN] I.P.C.C. has run its course. “The I.P.C.C. itself, through its structural tendency to politicize climate change science, has perhaps helped to foster a more authoritarian and exclusive form of knowledge production,” Hulme explained.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
lichanos (05:25:48) :
Who sets the standards? My only concern is allowing people to finish what they are saying and respond to whatever they feel is necessary.
Al Gore now has his very own version of “Downfall”
[we don’t run the Hitler parody video here – think “deniers” – A]
Morano might have been a bit loud but that’s down to the studio audio and not necessarily him.
I saw a lot of time given to Watson but before Morano got into his stride he was interrupted.
Listening to the soundtrack I heard just as many noises off from Watson as from Morano.
The interviewer clearly gave more time to Watson and helped to truncate Morano’s points.
Generally I feel bad about this and feel that Morano’s new world enthusiasm was impolitely dealt with by a very pompous and in this case rather offensive and arrogant attitude from both Watson and the presenter.
The key thing is that all the character assassination and name calling came from the warmist side and I am afraid that is how it always has been.
Apologies to Mr. Morano from one Englishman.
Klute (08:13:04) :
“Et tu? Head of UN IPCC Pachauri Now throwing global warming under the bus?! There is a ‘larger problem’ than climate fears?! – Nov. 23, 2009 – Urges ‘time and space to look at the larger problem of unsustainable development, of which climate change is at best a symptom’
NOW we get to what it’s all about.A PRETEXT to advance Lefty lunatic economic policy.I’m not going to be taxed for Wealth Redistribution! Clean out all these fecking Lefty ’scientists’ and their BBC fellow conspirators!”
This is an “OPEN DOOR” Klute,
Read UN Chapter 21.
CO2 mitigation only plays the role of accelerator for Chapter 21 implementation.
The problem with Chapter 21 is that most countries already have signed it.
That’s why Lord Mockton wants the UN to go up in smoke and the cheats behind bars.
Well Dr. Christy from UAH has given a indepth interview.
“”In general, you see this attempt to hide information, particularly about the climate of the last 50 years. Some measurements showing no warming were deliberately hidden,” Christy said from his office at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, where he is director of UAH’s Earth System Science Center.”
http://blog.al.com/breaking/2009/12/state_climatologist_john_chris.html
That type of statement from Christy sure looks like he thinks the dirt is going to stick to Jones and et al.
Here is another Climate Scientist making a Anti Alarmist Stand and taking a swipe at wikpedia too.
“I published my first climate-related paper in 1974 (Chylek and Coakley, Aerosol and Climate, Science 183, 75-77). I was privileged to supervise Ph. D. theses of some exceptional scientists – people like J. Kiehl, V.Ramaswamy and J. Li among others. I have published well over 100 peer-reviewed papers, and I am a Fellow of the American Geophysical Union, the Optical Society of America, and Los Alamos National Laboratory. Within the last few years I was also honored to be included in Wikipedia’s blacklist of “climate skeptics”.
http://www.thegwpf.org/opinion-pros-a-cons/218-petr-chylek-open-letter-to-the-climate-research-community.html
lichanos (05:25:48) :
It seems like you should understand why.
In regards to:
boballab (08:27:47)
I just did a quick look up of what he has been working on at Los Alamos and not aas just a grunt but as a “team leader”
“ISR-2 develops and applies remote sensing instrumentation, analysis, modeling, and machine learning to problems of national security and related sciences. ISR-2 applications include nonproliferation, detection of nuclear explosions, lightning science, climatology, broad-area mapping of land use, and environmental monitoring. We pursue new ideas in fundamental science and advanced technologies related to our mission and collaborate with a broad range of government, academic, and commercial programs.”
This guy isn’t a lightweight in the world of Science that is for sure or he wouldn’t be were he is working on classified research.
http://www.lanl.gov/orgs/isr/isr2/
tj (19:27:26) :
The science is really immaterial as the general public does not have the background to judge it. Instead they will judge the demeanor of the debaters
I agree with you. Scientists have said breathing and drinking water both cause cancer–that’s nuts, everyone knows it. The average person doesn’t heed much of science because of things like that.
But the personality of the people who push manmade global warming is something people can understand. Dan Weiss, Ed Begly Jr., Andrew Watson, they have given a bad image to global warming. Ben Santer saying he wants to beat up another scientist is giving global warming a bad image.
I wish to see more of this ilk on tv. They are doing the work of exposing what manmade global warming really is.
I ♥ ClimateGate.
P Wilson (19:30:12) :
How many times was Morano interrupted by the rude interviewer as opposed to Watson? How many times did Morano tell Watson to shut up? How many times did Morano tell Watson to stop shouting, talking? Who’s doing the character assassinations?
The bias of the BBC could be seen in the debate. I think they live in a bubble and don’t even know how obvious their bias is.
If this wave of ClimateGate continues soon global warming will just become a caricature of itself.
Dave Wendt (20:01:01) :
…psychology of eye witness testimony….“the eye sees what the mind wants it to see.”
I see ClimateGate showing the true colors of global warming and taking down AGW. I think that is really happening.
JDN (20:38:45) :
Is that agressive enough for you, or, would you prefer a brawl on-air? 🙂
Ben Santer may accommodate that.
Patrick Davis (23:39:41) :
When people start to lose an argument, verbally at least, they usually resort to verbal abuse.
————————–
Insecure feelings cause rash words too.
joshua corning (23:39:50) :
you think people are paying much attention to Briffa these days?
Senator Inhofe was interviewed on BBC Radio 4 lunchtime news today.
He came across very well, quite calm and well-mannered.
Though he wasn’t ‘up against’ anyone except the BBC interviewer.
He was saying that anything Obama might agree to in Cpnhgn wouldnt get thru congress.
Carsten Arnholm, Norway (02:57:28) :
It really does not matter whether the people writing this code were “smart” or not. What matters is that the result is of very poor quality.
The code produced the results they wanted. Predetermined results in, predetermined results out.
Steve McIntyre received a nice mention and quote in this Climategate article. This is the second Sunday in a row where this reporter wrote an even to skeptical piece. This was the lead commentary on the front page of a regional newspaper between NYC and Philly. It is getting more and more mainstream press.
http://www.mcall.com/news/all-climateqt1.7106493dec06,0,6171722.story
Also, here is an Op-Ed from the same paper. This issue is getting warmer even if it’s getting colder outside.
http://www.mcall.com/news/opinion/letters/all-kleinschmidt1127.7100655dec06,0,6517985.story
These e-mails are just shocking…
From: “Kevin Trenberth”
To: mann@psu.edu
Subject: Re: FYI
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2007 08:24:12 -0600 (MDT)
Reply-to: trenbert@ucar.edu
Cc: “Phil Jones” , “Ben Santer”
“Hi Phil
I am sure you know that this is not about the science. It is an attack to
undermine the science in some way. In that regard I don’t think you can
ignore it all, as Mike suggests as one option, but the response should try
to somehow label these guys and lazy and incompetent and unable to do the
huge amount of work it takes to construct such a database. Indeed
technology and data handling capabilities have evolved and not everything
was saved. So my feeble suggestion is to indeed cast aspersions on their
motives and throw in some counter rhetoric. Labeling them as lazy with
nothng better to do seems like a good thing to do.”
Now who is actually too lazy and incompetent and unable to do th huge amount of work it takes to construct such a large database?
Clive, I am sorry I wasn’t clear. I meant that this is the first TV clip I’ve seen of a debate between a climate scientist and a skeptic. I know there’s been print coverage in Canada but very little on TV. I don’t watch the CBC but I did see the Rex Murphy clip…on the net.
In defense of my fellow Americans, the public does have a some background in science but they have been purposefully misinformed by the media and purposefully mislead by those they believed they could trust. (In many areas, not just this one.) It isn’t that most could not follow the basic science if they were working with honest information, rather it is that they have been inundated this past decade with super-sized propaganda.
Any warming can be traced to the urban heat island effect. Cities have been getting warmer but rural sites have not. At GISS check rural sites that are over 100 km from urban sites (and with continuous readings back before 1920) and you will be hard pressed to find sites that show any warming. Look up on YouTube “Global Warming Urban Heat Effect” to see a little video that says a lot.
So Simple A Sixth Grader Can Understand It!
Complaining of Character Assassination, then looking smug and saying “what an asshole” 30 seconds later? HAHA. Regardless of anything else going on within the debate, that was a poignant moment 😉
“It exposes the manufactured consensus!”
Made me want to put some war paint on. He did well.
I have long suspected, at least in the field of climatology, that “peer review” was synonymous with “peer pressure”. The display of neener neener potty language by the warmist only reaffirms my original opinion.
photon without a Higgs (08:55:18) :
Dan Weiss, Ed Begly Jr., Andrew Watson; AGW have any more representatives they’d like to put on tv? These first three worked out great!!
They’re getting to the fat of their batting order–Al Gore is on deck.