CNN’s Campbell Brown & John Roberts with Chris Horner, Stephen McIntyre, Michael Oppenheimer.
Part 1
Part 2 below:
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
CNN’s Campbell Brown & John Roberts with Chris Horner, Stephen McIntyre, Michael Oppenheimer.
Part 1
Part 2 below:
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The biggest half-truth was that there are 3 other institutions that came to the same conclusion based on the real data. All 4 institutions keyed off the same mangled data.
McIntryre was uneasy, but look at the compressed stream of half-truths emitted that he had to choose which lie to confront.
I am impressed with Horner’s ability to transcend the minefiled laid down by AGW.
The warming advocates message in the room lasts about as long as it takes to step outside, if that.
Campbell Brown was terrifly confused about this huge conspiracy necessary.
It’s not a massive conspiracy, Campbell, it’s all about a ‘cornering of the market’ in terms of what gets the official seal of approval, and who has been excluded from the process.
The only ‘settled’ in ‘the science is settled’ is that the process was seized and walled off at key origin points. There was no need for massive conspiracy, just make sure that dissenting opinion is both silenced and banished from publication
.
It truly is the Scam of the Century.
Witness the Carnival of Carnivores at Copenhagen.
I had to rewind the second clip and hear it again – look what sleight of mouth the news pesenter uses:
“Even if you take the emails out of the equasion, the scientific evidence still stands.”
eh…
So if you take away the evidence that the data was fudged, the science will stand up. They try to make a tautology sound like a valid argument by pure oral delivery. And they seem tho think we’re dumb. This is apalling, talk about media compliance.
Jesus, give McIntyre a break. He is a statistician, not a magician!
Mailman
I don’t know if you saw it, but….
http://cbullitt.wordpress.com/2009/12/08/the-first-of-many-cei-to-file-against-epa-endangerment-finding/
Easy on Steve and his on TV persona. He does this as a hobby. He is retired and has admited his wife wishes he would spend less time on it.
If one wants to complain, do the stats, get the notoriety, have climate scientists hate your guts and spew venom on your name so you get invited to appear on CNN. And do it for free too.
He has done a great job to which we are indebted.
I think the only thing that will convince the warm-mongers and their followers is a massive ice age! this is utter insanity! no one wants to hope for that!
otoh, CNN doesn’t have the ratings that FNC has and FNC is actually talking about it. Doing a pretty poor job but at least better than CNN.
Could Campbell Brown was rude (derogatory and sarcastic) but we’ve all seen worse (the scientists themselves in the emails).
Oppenheimer was just a jerk.
Alright. Answered my own question. JMA (Japan Meteorological Agency) global average surface temperature anomalies since 1890 may be found at http://ds.data.jma.go.jp/tcc/tcc/products/gwp/temp/ann_wld.html
I found the link on DotEarth where Andrew Revkin says JMA is in agreement with the other data, although a look at his graph and the one at the link don’t resemble each other to me. Although there obviously is warming in all the graphs, the Japanese appear to show a more conservative view of it and don’t hesitate to show the recent decline. However, the Japanese appear not to have tried to reconstruct temperatures earlier than the instrumental record.
TheGoodLocust th (11:57:16) :
There wasn’t enough time to address all of it.
McIntyre and Horner said all they needed to.
Why?
The AGW line sounded like rhetoric, it smelled like rhetoric, and it tasted like rhetorical SPAM.
And that is exactly why Public Opinion is dropping like a rock against AGW.
It stinks of condescending attitude. It’s just as infuriating to listen to for us as it is for Mainstream America.
We are not alone anymore.
Oh, yeah. Revkin’s DotEarth piece referencing JMA is http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/30/more-on-the-climate-files-and-climate-trends/
You are referring to the surface stations survey run by the author of this blog at http://www.surfacestations.org/
Yes the surface stations are a scientific mess and have major data integrity problems which only adds to the garbage in garbage out problem with anything that depends on surface station weather/temperature data.
Larry
Michael Oppenheimer is nothing more then a smug prick!!! Just watching him talk makes my blood boil. He did nothing but perpetuate the same MMGW lies!!!
Steve stayed on topic and got his information across.. and made a very good point at the end… IMO it was “I just want the facts..”
John Roberts had the nerve to say that the guy that stepped down was physically ill… Oh please..
Oppenheimer just had to get into comparing AGW to the fight over whether tobacco causes cancer, he just couldn’t sit w/o at least 1 Ad Hominen attack.
What a nut? Get off Foreign Oil. What is he talking about?
“…the EPA declared there is scientific evidence that global warming from green-house gas emissions does pose a threat to American’s health…”
“…the connection between greenhouse gases, like CO2, carbon dioxide, and global warming, is as solid as the link between smoking and lung cancer…”
As a matter of my usual curiosity, where is the EPA scientific evidence that Carbon Dioxide is posing a threat to American’s health?
Where is that solid link between Carbon Dioxide, including man-made CO2, and global warming?
Could it be that scientific facts are being kept from the tax-payer who has footed the bill for IPCC’s garbage in, garbage out “science?”
Michael Oppenheimer’s mouthing is not worthy of comment.
This short debate is shows some excellent examples of why the nuanced skeptical story is so often distorted or goes unheard – it can be dull compared to the extremes such as “Disaster is Imminent” or “The Big Lie”, and I’m not calling Steve dull.
Steve seems to me to attempt to be an “honest broker”, to use a Pielke-ism, but that means that he spends his 30 seconds answering the question rather than rebutting or challenging the rampant exaggeration from Oppenheimer – this consistently puts him on the defensive to a savvy, media trained opponent.
Chris Horner’s views are extreme and can be viewed as conspiracy-minded. He didn’t articulate why there doesn’t have to be a grand conspiracy when there are only a few sources of global temperature indices and for millennium temperature trends. At the same time he was clear and more importantly engaging which I think is essential since fact isn’t going to be presented in this TV format.
Let’s face the facts, the warmists are organized and armed in presenting their arguments. Sad to say but to compete in TV media, we’ve got to use the medium effectively and package out points for public consumption – hopefully without distorting them completely out of the zone of comfort.
Some simple memes that might find traction:
– Climate gate is important because the data fudging hides cyclical, historical warm periods that threaten the claimed CO2/global warming link.
– Climategate is important because it shows that all 3 sources of historical temperature trends may be “fudged”.
– There isn’t a global conspiracy, the members of the hockey-team have fooled the vast majority of reputable scientists as well as the public and well meaning politicians.
What a chance missed. Very poor performance from our side. Oppenheimer is full of it but he came off with a seemingly better argument. He could have (should have) been called on all his points, but the other two were duds. We owe more to McIntyre than we can calculate, but he did not present well. Too bad, but one cannot be everything and he is obviously not the spokesperson type.
Just saw this
“In Denmark , the venue of the conference, a faction fight broke out on Dec. 4, when the Chairman of the Parliament, Thor Pedersen, a member of the ruling Liberal Party, challenged the validity of man-made climate change, reminding the country’s leading daily, Berlingske Tidende, that it was only a “theory” and not “knowledge.” His statements were backed by other members of his party.”
source.
http://news.eirna.com/212082/climategate-the-copenhagen-horror-show-suffers-severe-blows
Thanks Steve and Chris Horner for attempting to set the record straight. No one would have much luck with Campbell Brown, however; she was rabidly for Obama during the nomination and election cycle and would make certain that the warmist slogans got repeated — of course, by a “university professor” — we all can bow down now.
I enjoyed the pleasure of being “face-to-face” with Steve McIntyre. You are one of my heroes because your efforts over the years truly have been of heroic proportions. Thanks to you scientists and citizens are as far along as we are in understanding how the climate models work and about input data and the code — we now know the methods the pseudo-scientists used to hide all declines and that they infest the American homogenized data right along with that of CRU.
No one has to disagree that there has been global warming from the 1650s to today; from 1850 to today; from 1978 to 1998. There has been a Medieval Warm Period, a warming from the Little Ice Age, and warming along with positive PDO and AMO, but there has not been a hockey stick globe-on-CO2-fire.
With gratitude.
Steve McIntyre and Chris Horner:
Excellent job of handing Oppenheimer the rope to smugly hang himself in the public mind. He did just that.
Plato Says (11:09:40) :
See the link right below the “Donate” button on the right-hand side of this page. It’s the SurfaceStations.org project.
Go easy on Steve. Please remember he’s had virtually no practice at being interviewed on TV or radio while his AGW opponents have had all of the air time for the last decade. Steve will get sharper once he’s got a few interviews under his belt.
This was CNN, not so much of McIntyre who had small spots to answer to quite specific questions. I actually liked McIntyre’s calm appeareance. He could do nothing to clips that CNN added and to answer to the argument of 2500 scientists.
PR is so much about what it looks like. Talk about red hot lies is not the thing to do now. Linzen, Spencer and Pielke would have been better selections instead of that.
I was not impressed. The warmist jerk repeated his talking points without much rebuttal. Come on guys! We know the meme is that it is only this group everyone else agrees, and that to say AGW is not proven is to say everyone is in on the conspiracy. There are good reponses to these lets be prepared next time.
Please forgive me for a naïve, hypothetical, absurd off-topic question. If, when all is said and done, the US of A and the rest of the world end up as part of the British Commonwealth, what would we need the UN for? Would it not just close down and take the IPCC with it, end of discussion?