UPDATE: An AAAS member and WUWT reader relates how he’s finally had enough, and has canceled his AAAS membership today. See below the “Continue reading>” line.
Gee, it’s been a crazy day, one embarrassing thing after another for warmists today. I’m sure Chris Mooney will do his usual smear of WUWT during the seminar, it’s always a crowd pleaser.
Via Dr. Judith Curry’s inbox.
Dear Member,
This fall, AAAS is launching MemberCentral, an exclusive website for AAAS members. MemberCentral is dedicated to highlighting AAAS activities and fostering community among our members. To support these goals, the site will feature original content presented as webinars, videos, podcasts, blogs, and more.
On September 27, 2010, at 12:00 p.m. ET, AAAS MemberCentral is conducting its first webinar: “Climate Change and the Public: Overcoming Skepticism After Climategate.”
Featuring panelists Gavin Schmidt, Ph.D., of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS); Edward Maibach, M.P.H., Ph.D., of George Mason University ; Brenda Ekwurzel, Ph.D., from the Union of Concerned Scientists; and author and science journalist Chris Mooney, this discussion will explore ways the scientific community can combat negative public attitudes toward climate change. Panelists will share their best practices for public and media engagement, debate how to respond to critiques, and explore the idea of reframing climate change as a public health issue.
As an audience member you will have the opportunity to submit questions to the panel during the event.
A short registration is required to view this webinar. Space is limited and on a first-come, first-served basis. Reserve your space today.
Register Now
Can’t make the live webinar? ” Climate Change and the Public: Overcoming Skepticism After Climategate” will be available for on-demand viewing at the launch of AAAS MemberCentral.
==============================================
Remember what “we shall overcome” used to stand for?
==============================================
UPDATE: This comment is worth elevating. – Anthony
Lance Wallace 2010/09/16 at 3:47 pm
I got the invitation today and after 20 years of paying my dues to AAAS it was finally too much–I requested an immediate cancellation of my membership.
“Today I received my invitation to the first Webinar of
your new website Member Central. This is titled Climate
Change and the Public: Overcoming Skepticism After
ClimateGate. I and I believe many other AAAS members
am personally affronted by your choosing to present
this panel, containing only apologists for the
“consensus” view on climate change. The revelations of
Climategate are a stain on science, and your attempt to
treat it by an intensified PR campaign is distasteful
and self-defeating. How much better it would have been
had you chosen to present a proper debate, with AAAS
scientists (e.g., Lindzen of MIT or Freeman Dyson) on
both sides of the issue.
For the first time, I am ashamed of my membership in
AAAS and request that you terminate my membership
immediately.”
I am a long-time member of AAAS and I’m less than impressed with this pseudo-science organization’s baloney about global warming. The only reason I have not cancelled my membership is that this organization occasionally does publish items of real significance to science. Forget the likes of Orekes, Mooney, and Schneider — all they do is publish neo-stalinist baloney, you know, the kinds of stuff we used to read in publications like the New Masses back then and in the Nation, the New York Times and the New Republic today!
AAAS is a lobby group. The advancement of science requires money to pay scientists to advance science. And there’s been no gravy train like the CAGW train. They’re just doing there job. And, hey, the public health angle is, at least, mildly creative.
It’s a down economy.
Government funded science concludes we need more government to fund more science. Who knew?
They say they will “debate how to respond to critics”.
Debate Options.
[1] Show up with hard, physical, empirical evidence that CO2 (and other GHGs) will cause Catastrophic Global Warming, and that CO2 and other GHGs are being primarily increased in the atmosphere by human industrial activities.
[2] Ignore sceptics and hope they go away.
[3] Use ad-hom attacks, and smear sceptic’s reputations.
[4] Claim that sceptics are all in the pay of Big Oil and Big Tobacco.
[5] Claim that sceptical science has not been “peer reviewed”.
[6] Claim that the majority of scientists support the consensus position and therefore it (CAGW) must be right.
[7] Claim that only the UN IPCC has the right science on climate and that disagreement with the UN IPCC is simply mis-informed.
[8] Claim that scepticism is “too risky” – after all, the world is at stake and “something must be done.” If asked what must be done, propose carbon trading.
[9] Claim that scepticism is “too risky” – after all, future generations (our children’s children) are at stake and “something must be done.” If asked what must be done, propose carbon trading.
[10] Claim that scepticism is “too risky” – after all, Polar Bears and Penguins are at stake and “something must be done.” If asked what must be done, propose carbon trading.
[11] Claim that scepticism is a mental health issue – which neatly dovetails with the idea of reframing Man Made Global Warming as a public health issue – and hence supports two objectives at the same time.
[12] Claim that scepticism is a conspiracy to establish a tyranical global government that will enslave the world with a statist ideology that will result in massive human impoverishment.
Guess which option will not be debated.
“explore the idea of reframing climate change as a public health issue.”
You can switch off now if you work in private health delivery.
We shall overcome.
So does the Mafia, not?
http://motls.blogspot.com/2010/09/sicilian-mafia-goes-green-police-seizes.html
How crazy is that?
Hang on a minute, will they charge public servants to be innoculated against climate change or will taxpayers have to foot the bill?
PaulH said on September 16, 2010 at 5:30 pm:
It is always possible to do more good from the outside than the inside.
To demonstrate this, ground troops would be calling for air support.
Richard Feynman on honors, and his resignation from the NAS
To Ken Smith,
If the consensus folks have good evidence to make a case, and there are certainly data out there to support some concern, then they ought to appeal to people’s reason rather than standing on authority. The few “debates” that I’ve seen have have either been filled with condescention, staged for “real experts” to gang up on a political hack (sometimes with comical consequences) or mismatches between groups of people talking past one another. The most interesting technical exchange I saw recently was between Ken Trenbreth and Roy Spencer over at Roger Pielke Sr’s blog discussing the total ocean heat content. They attacked the topic with short and long wave emissions data as measured by satellites, both complained about the precision they had to work with to get a proper energy balance and they passionately presented their positions. They did not talk past one another. The exchange was dissappointingly brief and left me wanting more. If Trenbreth wants to move me to his position, he has to go head to head with other scientists and carry the argument on the science. Climate science is a marvelously interesting and complex. I think we have just about reached an interesting fork in the road in the evolution of the climate. If the AGW people are right we should continue to see more warming over the next 10-15 years. However if the solar-ocean natural cycle people are right, we should see measurable cooling. The AGW debate has resulted in unprecendented monitoring of the climate system and a an opportunity to observe how it reacts to a couple of major perterbations. We live in interesting times.
Sean says:
September 16, 2010 at 8:22 pm
…
If the AGW people are right we should continue to see more warming over the next 10-15 years. However if the solar-ocean natural cycle people are right, we should see measurable cooling. The AGW debate has resulted in unprecendented monitoring of the climate system and a an opportunity to observe how it reacts to a couple of major perterbations. We live in interesting times.
Well said.
Lance Wallace:
Bravo! Climategate and the IPCC are going to get a proper investigation starting in just a few months. Those scoundrels will not get away with it.
Opening Address:
“Dearly beloved, we are gathered here today to discuss how it can be that we seem to be failing when we so clearly have God on our side. I beg each and every one of you not to lose faith, but even more, not to fall into the sin of despair.
“This is but a test sent by Him Who Is The Source Of All Warmth on our little and precious planet. The venom of the iniquitous snake that appeared last November and bit hard into the jugular must not be allowed to debilitate our congregation.
“And I say to you: I have a dream, oh yes, I have a dream. Of a world in which the blessed truth will be received with an open heart. A dream, I say, in which our tongues will be blessed by the Spirit and our words become the means to liberate the heretic from his heresy…
“What’s that, my brother? You ask if we might not perhaps start listening to what these malaflicted wretches are saying and engage with them, honestly addressing their calumnies with persuasive rejoinders? But my brother, I say unto you that this is no part of the dream. The Law will not brook disputation, is what it is, and ever shall be so, however alluring the sly words of the serpent.
“Yea, though we be struck down an hundred times, we shall arise in new forms and fight the good fight. We shall never, never, I say, be defeated, and Right shall be our invincible protector. We SHALL overcome.
“Let us now proceed, and may God bless us all. Amen.”
It’s good to know that Gavin is earning his six figure NASA salary. And from my online research, he also got a whopping big raise in 2009…no doubt in honor of his blogging efforts on government time.
Well hopefully someone will be left in AAAS to attend and report on the panel. We don’t want to lose the star power.
In answer to 3:22 “So AAAS is an advocacy group?”
AAAS is a lost group.
Finally, be particularly concerned when you see the phrase “public health”. In California it is raising its ugly head to apply non-specific, qualitative and subjective judgement to bear to arrive at a determination of the impact of virtually anything on obesity, asthma and other public health issues. It is being used to justify the spending of many $’s in compensation to communities for the non-environmental causes of community despair. It is as tricky and gimmicky and unfounded as any global climate disruption argument ever presented. And its all in the name of public health.
George E. Smith says:
September 16, 2010 at 6:14 pm
“….. Speaking of which does everybody remember that twice Governor; would be illegal three time Governor Moonbeam Brown used to have the hots for Joan Baez; or vice versa as the case may be.”
You may be thinking of Linda Ronstadt. I don’t recall Phony Joanie and Moonbeam being an item, although anything was possible in those days.
Whoever came up with the PR stunt of renaming “Climate Change” to “Global Climate Disruption” should not only be fired, but should undergo a defrocking, much like the beginning of the old TV show “Branded.”
Actually I think this alarmist pow wow is a good thing. Whenever they get together about “better communication” or “better information” or “explain the settled science in laymans terms”, they dig themselves in deeper and more people switch off.
These “twits” have had billions of dollars and almost every government on side for over a decade yet they still can’t make inroads. One more “Ar*se sniffing” session won’t matter.
They should be looking for ways to combat negative climate scientists’ attitudes toward climate change.
Policyguy says:
Finally, be particularly concerned when you see the phrase “public health”.
True, remember Slip slop slap and the film industry
And response to Baa Humbug
Did you mean the new age public and population health urban planner’s ball?
“An old but true story
“Once upon a time, when dogs ruled the earth, a gala dog ball was organised and all the dogs in the world were invited.
When the dogs arrived at the ball they checked their tails in at the cloak room, as was the custom in those happy, far-off days.
It was a wonderful, glittering occasion and all the dogs, regardless of breed or background, danced the night away and were thoroughly enjoying themselves until suddenly the fire alarm sounded.
The ballroom was alight and an uproarious panic broke out. The vast yelping pack stampeded to the cloak room and in the confusion the tails were mixed up.
To this day you will see them sniffing each other’s tails as they go about their forlorn search for their proper tails. This is the eternal aftermath of the night that THE DOG BALL CAUGHT FIRE…” Leunig
I have finally solved the riddle of their acronym, the triple A society, now so far removed from any fuzzy likeness to the triple 9 society.
Anthropogenic Anabolic-Androgenic Stupidity, er sure Society, and somehow that is actually short for alarmistas estúpido.
The links didn’t work for my response to Policyguy and Baa Humbug
So here they are:-
Slip Slop Slap http://www.theozonehole.com/australianskincancer.htm
Film Industry http://www.brockovich.com/
Seems that American Journal of Public Health http://ajph.aphapublications.org/
are calling for papers to publish on environmental justice http://ajph.aphapublications.org/cgi/issue_pdf/advertising_pdf/100/8.pdf
“What do we want?”
“Climate Change Disruption!”
“When do we want it?”…
Well they know how to create an unbiased panel – not!
Where did they learn this technique? From the BBC?
As a non scientist I was wondering what AAAS stood for. Went to Google search and found “American Association for the Advancement of Science”. I find it most depressing that such a distinguished organisation with such an aim could indulge in this type of blatant brain washing.
Steve Koch says:
September 16, 2010 at 8:39 pm
“Bravo! Climategate and the IPCC are going to get a proper investigation starting in just a few months. Those scoundrels will not get away with it.”
Hmm, after three whitewashed “investigations” into Climategate over here, I ain’t holding my breath.