According to the KUSI special report page, Dr. Hansen has issued the following statement.
NASA has issued the following statement in response to the KUSI Special Report. This statement is from Dr. James Hansen, Director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York City:
“NASA has not been involved in any manipulation of climate data used in the annual GISS global temperature analysis. The analysis utilizes three independent data sources provided by other agencies. Quality control checks are regularly performed on that data. The analysis methodology as well as updates to the analysis are publicly available on our website. The agency is confident of the quality of this data and stands by previous scientifically based conclusions regarding global temperatures.” (GISS temperature analysis website: http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/)
For more on Dr. Hansen, here is a Youtube clip of his recent appearance on the David Letterman show. Apparently Dr. Hansen does “joust with jesters” after all.
Dr. Hansen writes on his website:
…if we, in effect, destroy Creation, passing on to our children, grandchildren, and the unborn a situation out of their control, the contrarians who work to deny and confuse will not be the principal culprits. The contrarians will be remembered as court jesters. There is no point to joust with court jesters. They will always be present. They will continue to entertain even if the Titanic begins to take on water. Their role and consequence is only as a diversion from what is important.
Yet here he is, jousting with the biggest jester of them all.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
someone suggested that the moon acts on the atmosphere just like the ocean tides causing it to be thicker in some areas and thinner in others. It’s constantly changing.
Does anyone have any reports on this effect??
Look for the comments by Richard Holle in this thread:
http://chiefio.wordpress.com/gistemp/
He gives his thoughts (extensive) and suggests more work needs to be done.
There is nothing more sickening than watching James Hansen and David Letterman preaching the gloom and doom of Co2.
Two adulterous men, seemingly approved by the masses they surround themselves with.
Sickening.
I know this is somewhat OT, but T Boone Pickens has reportedly cancelled half of his order with GE for wind turbines that were to be installed on his proposed monster windfarm in Texas. His windfarm will not now go ahead there, and his already-purchased turbines will be installed on a number of other sites, not all in the USA. Is he the first high-profile player to sniff the wind and smell the dead rat of CAGW?
@ur momisugly Zorro – Your piece on the Tiritea (not Turitea) windfarm interested me – I grew up and lived in that town for many years and on my last visit there a couple of years ago, I was apalled by the windfarm eyesore. However, I do know from personal experience that the windflow there is probably great for a wind farm’s output!
Also OT, but interesting that most of the Brit dailies are now beginning to tiptoe around CAGW and even the Moonbat has diverted into a film critique of Avatar. His critique of the film exposes his weird mindset (modern man=evil, primitive man=good) as an advanced form of the Green mental disorder.
Belated thanks, Anthony, for providing such a splendid forum for all those interested to check ideas and express them publicly.
Michael Smith and GISS Bolivian Data
Michael Smith claimed in the Coleman programme that GISS no longer used any Bolivian data in their global temperature ananlysis. The GISS list of the 1500+ stations used to complete its global temperature record still includes the Bolivian La Paz/Alto site in its station list.
Data for this station ends in 1990. Does this mean that GISS includes stations amongst its 1500+ acitve stations which actually no longer supply any data? Or, is GISS still using La Paz/Alto data but has not tabled the information on the website?
Can anyone help explain this situation.
If GISS is citing stations in its 1500+ list of used stations which are no longer supplying data this would mean that true number of stations used to complete its global temperature record is even less than Smith has argued.
One such unknown, CFCs, has recently been indicted. (See below.) The case the author makes is at least as persuasive as the case against CO2.
Whatever happened to “Arctic (non warming since 1958“? This according to data from the Danish meteorological institute?
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/05/13/arctic-non-warming-since-1958/
If you ask me Hansen pretty closely fits with Eisenhowers 2nd warning..
“…that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.”
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/02/21/ikes-second-warning-hint-it-is-not-the-military-industrial-complex/
In any other business people accused of this kind of wrongdoing would go to the courts and sue for libel. It would be interesting to see such a court case, all the data and all the methodology put into the public domain by order of a judge. I assume all those involved have the confidence in their work for this kind of scrutiny?
Hansen statement: “scientifically based conclusions”
Classic Side-Step: It depends on what the meaning of “is” is.
To Hansen – On what is the meaning of “based” based?
_______________
As I read through about 2/3’s of the above comments I came to wonder: “Who is Hansen’s boss?” This poor guy/gal has got to be sweating bullets everytime Hansen opens his mouth. Hansen is NOT defending NASA. He is using every tool in his little box of tricks to defend HANSEN, and he’s taking NASA down with him.
PS: For what its worth – Hansen is no longer a credible Scientist. He does not argue the hard facts, he appeals to the masses — he’s a political appointee if there ever was one.
PPS: Say a prayer for Hansen’s boss, I just know s/he is going to have a heart attack.
LAShaffer (14:59:52) : How many jobs did this “create”?
LAShaffer, if you go to Pubmed (NIH and WHO) and search their database for global warming or climate change or world temperature increase, you will get overwhelming lists of studies; with names, organizations and dates of jobs created by Hansen and Mann’s hockey stick.
Here’s just one record I found there.
Warming increases the risk of civil war in Africa.
Burke MB, Miguel E, Satyanath S, Dykema JA, Lobell DB.
Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Department of Economics, University of California Berkeley, Berkeley CA 94720.
Armed conflict within nations has had disastrous humanitarian consequences throughout much of the world. Here we undertake the first comprehensive examination of the potential impact of global climate change on armed conflict in sub-Saharan Africa. We find strong historical linkages between civil war and temperature in Africa, with warmer years leading to significant increases in the likelihood of war. When combined with climate model projections of future temperature trends, this historical response to temperature suggests a roughly 54% increase in armed conflict incidence by 2030, or an additional 393,000 battle deaths if future wars are as deadly as recent wars. Our results suggest an urgent need to reform African governments’ and foreign aid donors’ policies to deal with rising temperatures.
It would take me the rest of my life, but I’d like to know the amount of funding each university received for each study listed at Pubmed.
Not entirely off topic: How to Brainwash a Nation:
Rather than speaking in generalities Hansen should explain why station data graphs captured by the surfacestations project several years ago are now different at GISS. And why is the graph of world temps different than it was in the past so that older dates have become colder and more recent ones are warmer? Why is it that after McIntyre discovered a hiccup in NASA’s data that 1934 became hotter than 1998, but now 1998 is hotter than 1934 again? And why have so many stations been dropped in recent years? How are stations selected for deletion? How is the average temperature recomputed after a station is dropped?
Dr. Hansen and Michael Mann are stage-four cancers that have metasticized throughout the national science, health, energy, intelligence, executive, and legislative branches and organizations of the free world. Nothing less.
Parents, examine your child’s science textbook. Examine the library collection at your school – the environment section.
Don (18:37:19) :
Can you be a scientist and still be a dunce?
You can win an Ig Nobel prize.
http://improbable.com/ig/
For example, the 2009 Ig Nobel PEACE PRIZE went to:
Stephan Bolliger, Steffen Ross, Lars Oesterhelweg, Michael Thali and Beat Kneubuehl of the University of Bern, Switzerland, for determining — by experiment — whether it is better to be smashed over the head with a full bottle of beer or with an empty bottle.
Of course the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize went to President Obama for, what again? I can’t decide which is funnier.
Mike Ramsey
Mike D. (23:11:26) :
Cheap Shot #3 Like the Martian lander, Hansen is augering in. “Metric? We used feet!”
Do you know how hard it is to hit Mars from the earth? Give them some credit. 🙂
Mike Ramsey
Martin Judge (03:41:28) :
Martin
Are you from the UK
Do you live in the midlands
Did you used to work at a university in the midlands
Were/are you a keen runner
If you answer yest to all of these questions you may recognise my name.
Having read a long set of diatribes against Dr. Hansen and NASA, it appears that we deniers are impatient to have major government entities held accountable for a hoax that they have perpetrated with the help of politicians, consenting scientists, and the main steam media on humanity. Why? We have already won. If people like Dr. Hansen who are the leaders of AGW movement have to appear on National Television on Letterman’s show to prove that they and their sponsors have been honest and truthful about their temperature correlations, it speaks volumes already about their confidence in defending what they have done, especially because a small television station decided to present to local audiences their take on AGW. The whole issue of AGW is a house of cards ready to tumble especially when they start to eat their own. What is really helping to pull the rug out from under this intermarried family of alarmists is the truth revealed in this BLOG and other like it by openly sharing detailed analyses, giving other points of view on climate research and the sharing of world climate data. I find these contributions very stimulating and enlightening.
I for one am impatient too. We have been waiting too long and for too many years for breath of clean air would come in and sweep the foul smell of the emanating from the IPCC stable. I suppose it is easier to cover up the truth with lies than to hide the lies with more lies told protect themselves from being disclosed for telling the first lie. Nevertheless, personal destruction of people will give the unknowing public a reason to doubt our sincerity and honesty because we are attacking them rather that their ideas and activities.
Finally, I have a serious question. I have read that weather is not climate. Then why is temperature the only measure of climate? Another way of asking this, is temperature the cause of a climate change or vise versa?
hro001 quotes:
“Forget the climate change detractors…”
Where have I heard words similar to those words before? Oh yeh. King George musing about the irritating folks across the pond a few years back.
John Finn
Are you from the UK?
Do live in the Midands
Did you make regular appearances at a Midland’s university under the pretence of pretending to work there?
Did you play football?
If so, you owe me a beer.
Based upon what he has written on his website, Hansen is probably the most arrogant, power-hungry bureaucrat in the history of the world. His utter contempt for truth and opposing viewpoints remains astounding. If I were running for President in 2012, one of my first promises, if elected, will be to fire that man and replace him with a real scientist who is willing to be open to other points of view.
It is concerning when a public servant manages spin on a talk show.
John Finn
Sorry, I owe you a beer!
I would buy it you in Bolivia, La Paz/Alto – but I don’t know if it would be cold or warm.
When the MET office/Hadley was fingered by the Russians recently with selecting weather stations which overstated the temp profile in Russia their defence was ‘We don’t pick the stations its the WMO’
http://www.wmo.int/pages/index_en.html
By looking at their website you find they do the same for the other 2 databases including GISS
So who in the WMO make the selection, on what basis do they pick them and how can you say all 3 databases are independent if they use the same set of weather stations.
A friend directed me to this write-up from Hansen on why it has not been cooling for the last decade. Hansen claims GISS data is better than HADCRUT because:
The good doctor appears never to have heard of the Nyquist-Shannon Sampling Theorem, and believes he has divined information which HADCRUT neglected. But, he claims the technique is legit because the result can be replicated “via use of the complete time series of global surface temperature data generated by a global climate model that has been demonstrated to have realistic spatial and temporal variability of surface temperature”. Circulus in probando anyone?
John Finn (09:16:53) :
Finally, I have a serious question. I have read that weather is not climate. Then why is temperature the only measure of climate? Another way of asking this, is temperature the cause of a climate change or vise versa?
From Wikipedia: “Climate encompasses the statistics of temperature, humidity, atmospheric pressure, wind, rainfall, atmospheric particle count and numerous other meteorological elements in a given region over long periods of time. Climate can be contrasted to weather, which is the present condition of these same elements over periods up to two weeks.”
Cause of changes in climate is an interesting question. The earth is a dynamic system being driven far from equalibrium by all the energy that we receive from the sun. Chaos theory tells us that such systems often exhibit self organizing behaviors. There are sufficient feedback loops to keep the climate fairly stable. But anything from orbital mechanics (Milankovitch cycles) to subtle variations in the sun’s TSI/magnetic output can nudge the climate into new tracks. But it seems to return to its base state which in the last few million years has been largely ice age.
Not surprisingly, James Hansen misunderstands the role of Court Jesters (as he misunderstands economics, public policy, political philosophy, and pretty much everything else I’ve heard him talk about).
Far from being merely clowns, court jesters kept a monarch aware of his/her limitations, and foibles. Also, jesters could raise issues that would otherwise be unmentionable by anyone in polite court society.