From LiveScience, another reason for NASA to fire Jame Hansen now:
Here’s the basis for his actions in a nutshell:
If carbon dioxide emissions aren’t reduced in time, the Earth will pass a tipping point with irreversible, catastrophic consequences, including the disintegration of ice sheets and large-scale extinction of species, according to the scientific analysis Hansen provided to the lawsuit.
I think Dr. Hansen has lost it. Earth has had higher CO2 concentrations several times in its history and it didn’t head to runaway roasting. So far, this all hinges on positive feedbacks, and there doesn’t seem to be much conclusive evidence for it. Here’s what Pielke Sr. has to say about CO2 as a control knob for Earth’s climate system.
Read Dr. Hansen’s latest non peer reviewed paper where he justifies to himself the use of kids as legal pawns here:
The Case for Young People and Nature: A Path to a Healthy, Natural, Prosperous Future
This is even more pathetic than Ben Santer’s cartoons aimed at little kids.
A perfect oppertunity to ask for full disclosure of the GISS data and methodology.
Mr Hansen must be able to prove his assertions in a court of law. This would require more than his word as a scientist (which seems to be all that was needed in this country)
@richard S Courtney says:
May 10, 2011 at 8:22 am
Yes, but Richard, the government had all the DNA experts in the world available to them to put O.J. Simpson in the slammer, and he was still acquitted.
Courts may accept expert testimony as fact, but they are still subject to logical arguments, and the CAGW side has no logical argument to stand on. In short, Experts can be made to look like fools in a court, this is especially true if their argument is weak.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/richardblack/2011/05/the_term_megafire_sounds_a.html
“At 17:38pm 10th May 2011, Brunnen wrote:
“The day will come when kids go to school and claim climate change ate their homework. Dogs are SO 20th century.”
“Megafires – a vicious climate circle?”
M White, the problem is that you forget who is being sued. If it were somebody rational, they would use this opportunity for discovery in a way that would blow Hansen out of the water. I doubt Jackson will avail herself of the opportunity.
In any case, I have serious doubts about the standing of a case based on hypotheticals.
Sue a beggar and get a louse.
A simple caveat of filing a lawsuit is that you could lose, and it could backfire on you.
In this case, If you sue the EPA for failing to protect the air, then you open up NASA’s pollution. Each and every time they launch, a veritable cocktail of pollutants are spewed into the air. Not limited to rockets, there’s also the pollution from aircraft and vehicles, and every other form of pollution NASA is responsible for.
Bottom line, after all, is our kid’s atmosphere they argue, and polluting it in the name of saving it is no excuse. Like the Japanese collecting whales to save them…?
There’s also no small precedent’s set by this, and I don’t really think Hansen has recognized the unintended consequences.
James Hansen.
70 years old.
Asking kids to do his work? Maybe he sees this as his last chance. The tides of gov’t are changing, and soon they’ll see a need for “newer blood, fresher minds” to take this into the future.
He need to find a nice, secluded island to retire to.
While they’re still above water…
Jan Curtis said (May 10, 2011 at 10:34 am)
“I thought Federal employees cannot sue the Federal Government.”
Apparently, this federal employee is different. He was also allowed to take part in a protest against the policies of his boss, the President:
“…Around 100 people have been arrested outside the White House while protesting against mountaintop removal mining, including NASA scientist James Hansen. The protesters were arrested Monday after refusing orders from U.S. Park Police to leave the sidewalk outside the White House…”
Which, by the way, was his SECOND arrest for tresspassing.
And still works for the Gov’t.
Should a court decide to actually hear this case – which sounds similar to the suits being filed in various states – I would think the defendants would have to provide a vigorous defence . A loss would be a political disaster for this administration and Mr. Bammy won’t like it .
c.s says:
May 10, 2011 at 9:29 am
“Using kids as legal pawns?” er…hate to break it to you all, but we kids were the ones who started this action. check it out at http://www.imattermarch.org
Most of us are just under 18, so we need an adult to fight for us in court.
Quit it with all your claims of us being “used” or “abused”- its ridiculous. We care about the planet and the many people and ecosystems that will be (and already are) very adversely affected by human-caused climate change.
I’m going to try to not sound condescending. Please understand that when you’re young, you are more susceptible to lies. You are more willing to believe someone who says they need your help to save the world. You are more willing to accept a story that paints your lifetime as unique or special, or a generation chosen to stand against a great evil of some kind. You want to believe this, and indeed everyone wants to believe this because frankly the alternative is outrageously dull and meaningless. The great Chinese proverb of “May you live in interesting times.” might as well be “Good luck.” in English for it’s desire to wish a meaningful life on a stranger. I personally prefer the Klingon philosophy in this regard, “Perhaps today is a good day to die” which encourages sentient beings to try to make their ends as meaningful as their existence. Our culture is a bit new, and has only fear of death to guide it.
Having grown up in a christian cult that paid particular attention to inspiring the young people into believing nonsense for the purposes of self-promotion of the organization, I have a unique position to tell you that you *are not* using your critical thinking skills in this matter. That’s right, I grew up having adults tell me how I should behave, how I should deal with the opposite sex, how I should pray, how I should compete, etc..etc… all under the guise that in doing this, I was helping to prepare the world for the return of Hey-Zeus. I didn’t question them, I had no reason to. I had seen the evidence that the world was getting worse. I had seen their videos that showed increasing human conflict, increasing cultural depravity, increasing destruction of families, etc… Why would I question when I had seen it all? I had never questioned anything in my life, and their case seemed rock solid.
What was really going on was abuse that I will never fully recover from. A false sense of the world was painted in me, and it stains me still.
The world isn’t perfect. There are threats to human existence everywhere you turn, even and –> especially from fellow human beings. This was the truth I didn’t have in my brain yet, that humans, even those you trust, can and really do hurt each other badly. They also lie/cheat/steal enough for you to cling tightly to the people you find in life who don’t lie to you. Hansen and others are lying to you. I’m not going to counter their lie with another lie and say that “the world is fine, go home now.” but I’m also going to say that those people *do not know what they are talking about*. As with the cult their ultimate goal is self promotion only. They may care about the world anyway, but their use of kids and conversion of kids over to a belief system is an exercise in pure narcissism. You worshipping their gospel and through your life convincing others to believe is what they want.
Ask yourself why these people are even involved with you. You say it is because you need an adult in order to file a lawsuit. What are they getting out of it? How does Hansen gain by supporting you? If you can answer that question honestly and completely, you’ve taken you first step towards thinking about the situation with a critical eye.
I can’t help but think that this is a setup. If the case were heard impartially there is a very high liklihood that the plaintiffs would lose, and a legal defeat would surely endanger at least a portion of GISS’ funding. There would be tremendous pressure by GISS to have Hansen to withdraw – if a fix wasn’t in.
If private attorneys represented the public in this case, I would have no worries at all. But the plaintiff and defense attorneys are all on the same side, and they all have the same motivation to see Hansen’s little wind-up dolls prevail.
I would feel much better if an outside law firm filed an amicus brief, and got involved in this case. Because the government’s attorneys are absolutely not to be trusted here; they serve at the pleasure of the Administration. They want to keep their jobs. And their boss Eric Holder is nothing short of a gangster, with no regard for the law or precedent – a hallmark of this Administration.
If the suit were to succeed, we would be forced to file a counter suit as a class action against Hansen et all, on behalf of all farmers deprived of their livelihood due to the CO2 depletion resulting from their political science.
———-
c.s says:
May 10, 2011 at 9:29 am
“Quit it with all your claims of us being “used” or “abused”- its ridiculous.”
____________
OK. I’ll settle for “just plain stupid”, and I agree- you are ridiculous.
Consider yourself hereby ridiculed.
“If you want justice go to a whore house. If you want to get screwed go to court.”- John Grisham.
@ShrNfr
May 10, 2011 at 11:53 am
It’s a beautiful plan. I’m sure you will agree.
Peter Kovachev says:
May 10, 2011 at 8:45 am
…“poppies red and roses filled with summer rain.”***
***Ian Anderson/Jethro Tull, “Songs from the Wood,” Aqualung, 1971.
I like a good Ian Anderson cite more than most. You have the lyrics and song right, but wrong album. Surprising actually, since the song title and album title are one and the same.
What a cock-up. Congress overruled by the courts or NASA’s credibility destroyed in a witchtrial. Hansen, at 70 and looking to retirement and his place in history, has nothing to lose. America and the world, excluding Gore, Schmidt and Suzuki, lose both ways, at great cost.
The Scopes Monkey Trial Redux. Filmed by Cameron in 3D, coming to an Imax theatre near you!
Richard Courtney,
I would urge you not to be so pessimistic about the weight that courts will necessarily attatch to expert evidence. A good legal team (and I speak, all modesty aside, as a past member of many) can destroy an expert’s credibility through incisive cross-examination. In the witness box (or the stand, if our colonial cousins prefer) there is nowhere to hide from difficult questions. Trouble is, catastrophic man made global warming has never truly been on trial. The issue in the Kingsnorth and Inconvenient Truth trials was never about whether CAGW (call it what you will) was true or not. It was enough in those cases that a broad “consensus” existed. The question of just what exactly the “consensus” was, or whether it held water, just wasn’t relevant to the questions that the court had to decide.
It would be splendid if Hansen’s evidence could be properly tested at trial. I read through his witness statement that was produced in the Ratcliffe power station trials (protesters were convicted, but will now be acquitted on appeal due to undercover officers going native). It was tosh; real End of Days stuff. If he was properly taken to task over his claims….well, let’s just say that I don’t think he would emerge with his reputation intact It would be far from easy, I’ll give him that. He’s no doubt a slippery old fox, well used to giving evidence and to obfuscation, diversion and distraction. But I’d say: bring it on.
I have devised an ulterior simple policy: Have the UN IPCC only be populated by, and consulted by, only using properly peer reviewed scientific studies from, people who have a, no older ‘an twelve month, proper clean bill of mental health.
et voila: No more IP(e)C(a)C.
Or, as one wag put it, “in a nutcase”…
Smokey ,
What you said above is likely true , but I think that Obama realizes the potential political harm that his administration might suffer . There’s a reason that no significant climate legislation has been passed – it’s a hot potato and I suspect that he’s not willing to risk it . He would probably throw Hansen , Jackson , Holder – the lot of them – under the bus to win four more years .
I rather have AGW tested in the courts than by the media or by the corrupted peer review process.
Cheers
Michael
Jeremy says:
May 10, 2011 at 11:44 am
Yes, but Richard, the government had all the DNA experts in the world available to them to put O.J. Simpson in the slammer, and he was still acquitted.
OJ had a trial by jury where the prejudices of the jurists could be given free rein. This won’t be heard by a jury but by a Judge – big difference.
To add to what Jeremy above has said to the young plaintiff I would pray in aid Clemenceau:
“Not to be a socialist at twenty is proof of want of heart; to be one at thirty is proof of want of head”
In other words: don’t worry, you’ll grow out of it.
So, maybe I need to file a counter-suit against c.s. and Hansen, on behalf of my sons, to keep them from being turned into beggars even before they earn their first paycheck. How about it, c.s.? Feel like answering a subpoena?
“The Hansen 5” (warmists) v US Govt (Lisa Jackson EPA {warmist})
Both call expert witnesses who agree with each other.
“The Hansen 5” win. Govt pays out lots of compensation. Kids get rich and release their first album, ooops sorry wrong group of 5 kids.
The Jackson 1 goes back to her office and apologises for losing the case, but now promises they will make things right by introducing laws to combat rising CO2. And its not her fault. After all the case was proved in court.
This is looking bad 🙁