Readers may recall this story last week: Ad hoc group wants to run attack ads
Here’s an update from GlobalWarming.org by Myron Ebell
According to recently disclosed e-mails from a National Academies of Science listserv, prominent climate scientists affiliated with the U.S. National Academies of Science have been planning a public campaign to paper over the damaged reputation of global warming alarmism. Their scheme would involve officials at the National Academies and other professional associations producing studies to endorse the researchers’ pre-existing assumptions and create confusion about the revelations of the rapidly expanding “Climategate” scandal.
The e-mails were first reported in a front-page story by Stephen Dinan in the Washington Times today. The Competitive Enterprise Institute has independently obtained copies of the e-mails. A list of excerpts, with descriptive headlines written by me, can be found below. The entire file of e-mails has been posted as a PDF and can be read here.
In my view, the response of these alarmist scientists to the Climategate scientific fraud scandal has little to do with their responsibilities as scientists and everything to do with saving their political position. The e-mails reveal a group of scientists plotting a political strategy to minimize the effects of Climategate in the public debate on global warming.
Selected Excerpts.
Note that the descriptive headlines in italics are by me. The statements in quotation marks are excerpts from the e-mails.
Can we get corporate funding for some splashy ads in the NY Times?
Paul Falkowski, Feb. 26: “I will accept corporate sponsorship at a 5 to 1 ratio….”
But our ads will be untainted by corporate influence.
Paul Falkowski, Feb. 27: “Over the past 24 h I have been amazed and encouraged at the support my proposal has received from Section 63 and beyond. We have had about 15 pledges for $1000! I want to build on that good will and make sure that the facts about the climate system are presented to a very large section of the public—unfiltered by the coal, oil and gas industries….”
What is it about the New York Times? Aren’t Paul Krugman and Thomas Friedman enough?
Paul Falkowski, Feb. 27: “Op eds in the NY Times and other national newspapers would also be great.”
Scientists should be effecting social and political change.
Paul Falkowski, Feb. 26: “I want the NAS to be a transformational agent in America.”
Snow in Washington is anecdotal, but no snow in Vancouver is proof.
Paul Falkowski, Feb. 27: “…the coal, oil and gas industries (who, ironically, are running commercials on NBC for the winter Olympics, while the weather is so warm that snow has to be imported to some of the events.)”
Robert Paine, Feb. 27: “The beltway’s foolishness about climate change seems especially ironic given the snowless plight of the Vancouver Olympics.”
David Schindler, Feb. 27: “I’d add that Edmonton is near snowless….”
This is a political fight, and we’ve got to get dirty.
Paul R. Ehrlich, Feb. 27: “Most of our colleagues don’t seem to grasp that we’re not in a gentlepersons’ debate, we’re in a street fight against well-funded, merciless enemies who play by entirely different rules.”
Top scientists adore Al Gore.
David Schindler, Feb. 27: “I recall an event at the Smithsonian a couple of eons ago that I thought did a great job, & got lots of media coverage. AL Gore spoke….”
Paul Falkowski, Feb. 27: “Al Gore has a very well written article in the NY Times.”
Forget the science, we want energy rationing!
William Jury, Feb. 27: “I am seeing formerly committed public sector leaders backing off from positions aimed at reducing our fossil fuel dependence.”
They’ll forget Climategate if an authoritative institution repeats the same old line.
Paul Falkowski, Feb. 27: “An NRC report would be useful.”
Steve Carpenter, Feb. 27: “We need a report with the authority of the NAS that summarizes the status and trends of the planet, and the logical consequences of plausible responses.”
David Tilman: Feb. 27: “It would seem wise to have the panel [writing the report] not include IPCC members.”
Stephen H. Schneider, Mar. 1: “National Academies need to be part of this….”
Stephen H. Schneider, Mar 1: “It is imperative that leading scientific societies coordinate a major press event….”
The last academic defense: It’s McCarthyism!
Stephen H. Schneider, Mar. 1: “…Senator Inhofe, in a very good impression of the infamous Joe McCarthy, has now named 17 leading scientists involved with the IPCC as potential climate ‘criminals’. …. I am hopeful that all the forces working for honest debate and quality assessments will decry this McCarthyite regression, and by name point out what this Senator is doing by a continuing smear campaign. …. Will the media have the fortitude to take this on–I’m betting a resounding ‘yes!’” [Note that Schneider has already sent this e-mail to the media asking for their help.]
To read all the e-mails that CEI has obtained, go to the PDF posted here.
“David Schindler, Feb. 27: “I’d add that Edmonton is near snowless….””
Like John Eddy, I too live in Edmonton and there was plenty of snow here on the 27th of February (and there’s still quite bit left to melt). I must say this is a bold faced lie from Schindler. Disturbing.
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHA…. lets asure the public that we are real life scientists an not advocates
It was posted here on WUWT somewhere (don’t recall) by someone (don’t recall) who said he was a geologist and know any geologists who believed in AGW.
The question is: who knows any biologists that don’t?
oooops. Try again with Correction:
It was posted here on WUWT somewhere (don’t recall) by someone (don’t recall) who said he was a geologist and DIDN’T know any geologists who believed in AGW! The question is: who knows any biologists that don’t?
AGW = Scientists Sans Data
Sorry Chip, I missed your posts as I was in the commenting process. You made excellent comments regarding Schindler’s Edmonton “observations”. Says a lot about the kind of people we are dealing with here.
“not investigating the scientists, all of whom were doing their jobs properly, sorting perspectives, data, analyses of data and how to proceed logically and
forthrightly.”
So they agree that what Jones et al were doing is OK for Climate Science and the other Sciences.
They really are in a world of their own.
These emails should go to the UK press so that the Public can see what Jones was doing is sanctioned by other Scientists.
Talk about bringing Science in to Disrepute.
“David Schindler, Feb. 27: “I’d add that Edmonton is near snowless….””
Time to clean your glasses Doc. My sun-bathed, south-facing front yard near Edmonton’s downtown still has over a foot of snow with grass barely peaking-out at the front edge.
Moreover, the “shirt-sleeve weather we’ve experienced this winter cost me 3 weeks of down-time because “Big-Oil” thinks it’s inhumane to work men outdoors when the temperature drops below -39C.
To those of us who do work outdoors when it’s only -38C, Global Warming has proved a huge disappointment.
Dont be too hard on them now. Remember this is the Climate-Gods of the Carbon Cult.
Perhaps Judith Curry would like to comment?
@ur momisugly 1DandyTroll (07:32:49) :”It only takes one irrational and insane, err, very special person to get into power somewhere for him/her to then surround them self with equally, hmm, very special people.”
A propos of which, Peter Preston, ex-editor, writes in the Guardian calling for the climate messiah:
‘Wanted: an eco prophet.
… the plain fact is that we surely need a prophet, not yet another committee. We need one passionate, persuasive scientist who can connect and convince – not because he preaches apocalypse in gory detail, but in simple, overwhelming terms. We need to be taught to believe by a true believer in a world where belief is the fatal, missing ingredient.’
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/mar/07/climate-change-inertia-prophet
And would the usual suspects be queuing up to preach holy war too ?
Though I do like the “gory detal” pun …
Or even detail …
Or even, again, a revision of the last sentence in the article
> in a world where belief is the fatal .. ingredient <
Fatal to scientific method and real enquiry, as well as to many people all over the world.
””By P Wilson on March 8, 2010 at 9:48 am – Browbeating based on a priori deductions, in the style of Immanuel Kant. This the new scientific procedure.””
P Wilson,
Any mention of Kant sends my antenna to alert mode.
Kant’s explicitly self stated purpose for writings such as “Critique of Pure Reason” was to unseat reason (in the Enlightenment) and re-establish religion (specifically Christianity) to its authority position of the late Roman Empire & Middle/Dark/Midieval Ages.
The antedote against Kant is to read his “Critique of Pure Reason”. It is an outright full frontal assault on reason. It uses a “trick”, but it is not Mann’s nature trick.
John
“David Schindler, Feb. 27: “I’d add that Edmonton is near snowless….””
Schindler is one of David Suzuki’s dear friends and a long time collaborator is the eco-crisis industry in western Canada.
Great to see his name pop up here, though it is no surprise.
There are more rotten apples at the University of Alberta and at the University of Calgary, especially in the so-called Conservation Biology gang. Don’t believe anything you hear about grizzly bears in Alberta – that phoney crisis is one of their most lucrative enterprises.
Hopefully the light shining on bogus climate ‘science’ will get to Conservation Biology in due time.
Correct me if I’m wrong but I got the impression that these emails were the result of an FoI request, not leaked.
DaveE.
I’ve written a detailed response to the list serv authors. If you’re interested, it’s at Visceral Rebellion’s Blog
Watching these people implode is like watching a drunk in the final stages of cirrhosis–sad but not unexpected.
From the longest email I have read for a while – a fatal spelling mistake (an r) places this controversy right up there with the selection of the safe schools czar, especially if you read point one below directly after the 1st sentence.
“OK, now to what I think needs to be done by us and others. Fist, we need to push getting a restoration of civility and honest discourse so the national business can proceed without the poisons of Inhofe and his ilk. We need several groups to do that:
1-Senior respected members of congress–know any? Suggest it to them. I have.
They are pawns… follow the money:
http://apnews.excite.com/article/20100308/D9EAM3200.html
Ah yes, David Schindler – a self-appointed green saviour. Had experience with him in Alberta back in the 90’s. Another celebrity scientist who loves to see his name in the news and an adoring public bowing and scraping before his superior intellect.
These celebu-scientists have vast (but fragile) egos marked by contemptuous attitudes toward those outside their inner circle. They seek the media spotlight, loving the public attention until their science is questioned. Then they turn into humble scientists in service to the pursuit of knowledge.
@CodeTech ‘These emails were written with the intent of people reading them. They are too complete, too large, too detailed. I highly doubt that the “authors” truly believe what they’re saying, since they know full well who is funded and by whom.’
You’re assuming they’re rational, and therefore use normal logical reasoning.
Take a look at their track record, it’s filled with narcissistic behavior with a flare for paranoid schizophrenia and a large portion of megalomania.
Unquestionably right, and a big evil conspiracy that is out to destroy ’em, and their preferred organization ought to have all the power to be able to make all the hard choices that is needed to save everyone from an ever ensuing catastrophe…. and an ever present evil conspiracy.
Special people need special treatment, or pitchforks to keep ’em at bay.
johnnythelowery (10:34:36) :
oooops. Try again with Correction:
It was posted here on WUWT somewhere (don’t recall) by someone (don’t recall) who said he was a geologist and DIDN’T know any geologists who believed in AGW! The question is: who knows any biologists that don’t?
————
Reply:
I’m one but not the only one.
Really, geologists are too smart (or well-educated or “grounded”?) to fall for AGW. They know the earth has seen CO2 levels much higher than humans could ever drive ours, and so wouldn’t this “tipping point” the Warmers are always screaming about already have happened?
You betcha.
So anybody with a thimbleful of logic can figure out AGWers are a lost cause, along with their movement and religion. Leave it to a bunch of biologists who know nothing of earth’s history to embrace it like they do.
Oh, those universities that do offer courses in “climate science” usually group it together with geography. Not that geography doesn’t have a place, mind you, but that should put “climate scientist” in perspective.
This was posted by Mia Nony after Dr. Ball’s latest article in Canada Free Press. It is Brilliant . ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~”Anyone simultaneously following the development of politicized science and the science of politics has by now realized that there are times when the two are inexorably intertwined.
Heaviest Element Yet Known to Science Discovered
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California has now identified with certainty the heaviest element known to science.
The new element, Pelosium (PL), has one neutron, 25 assistant neutrons, 88 deputy neutrons, and 198 assistant deputy neutrons, giving it an atomic mass of 312.
These 312 particles are held together by forces called morons, which are surrounded by vast quantities of lepton-like particles called peons.
Pelosium is inert, and has no charge and no magnetism.
Nevertheless, it can be detected because it impedes every reaction with which it comes into contact.
A tiny amount of Pelosium can cause a reaction that would normally take less than a second, to take from 4 days to 4 years to complete.
Pelosium has a normal half-life of 2 years. It does not decay, but instead undergoes a biennial reorganization in which a portion of the assistant neutrons and deputy neutrons exchange places.
Pelosium mass will increase over time, since each reorganization will promote many morons to become isodopes.
This characteristic of moron promotion leads some scientists to believe that Pelosium is formed whenever morons reach a critical concentration. This hypothetical quantity is referred to as critical morass.
When catalyzed with money, Pelosium becomes Senatorium, an element that radiates just as much energy as Pelosium since it has half as many peons but twice as many morons.”
Posted by Mia Nony on 03/08 at 02:24 PM | #
RichieP (11:34:31) :
“Peter Preston: …We need to be taught to believe by a true believer in a world where belief is the fatal, missing ingredient.
Hugs don’t work? “Whaaa, life is too difficult, whaaaa – it’s not fair, whaaaa! I want my bottle, whaaaaa.”
It appears Mr. Preston has looked at his own existence and into his own mind and found them “wanting”.
They’ll forget Climategate if an authoritative institution repeats the same old line.
If they believe this then they not only have a deficiency of scruples they are also dumb.