Readers will recall that I launched a volley against former Senator Tim Wirth regarding his recent statement where he wants to “come after” skeptics. I also made him a standing offer to attend the upcoming ICCC6 conference, offering up my 15 minutes to him to address the conference. You can read that essay Bring it, Mr. Wirth – a challenge here.
This morning, doing some web searching to see if the challenge had been picked up elsewhere, I ran across this gobsmacking quote from Wirth in 1993. It was then that I realized that the former Senator is mentally incapable of addressing the issue of global warming on a factual level, and there would never be a response to my challenge and offer.
“We’ve got to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing, in terms of economic policy and environmental policy. ” – Timothy Wirth quoted in Science Under Siege by Michael Fumento, 1993
That’s true religion. Wirth’s quote makes Dr. Phil Jones look almost reasonable by comparison.
When asked by Warwick Hughes for this data, Dr. Jones famously replied:
Even if WMO agrees, I will still not pass on the data. We have 25 or so years invested in the work. Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it.
More wisdom from Wirth here
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Be careful when debating a fool, it quickly becomes difficult to tell who is who. He is not in your league, ignore him.
Between the two Phil Jones made the worst comment. He is supposedly a scientist. The purpose of the scientific method is to get at the truth of an idea. He should be looking for those that are trying to take apart his work. His work would be the better for it.
“. . .the right thing, . . .”
So, I wonder what he meant by that. The words “economic” and “environmental” follow but the sense of them as used suggest control of the former in the service of the latter. I’ve not heard of this Wirth person before this week, so, I don’t know about his beliefs, training, goals, religion and so on. At this point, I’d say he is not a nice person.
I could argue that a sitting Senator making that kind of statement is worse, but the level of worse depends on what the rest of the Senate looks like … umm, so not good …
It was in yesterday’s article or Mr. Wirth. It was in a comment by NikFromNYC
Typo:
“…..article on Mr. Wirth…….”
headline news: “politician caught telling lies”. that’s 365 days a year.
In reading the dossier on Tim Worth, I wonder why the concern of population. If there ends up being too many people, then some may starve and die. But isn’t it better to have lived to the age of 80, then die from hunger, than to have never lived at all, which appears to be Wirth’s preference (for others)?
Mr. Wirth is from the government and he is here to help.
Help himself, help the progressive cause, help world government, or …..?
“gobsmacking”
It’s about money. He’s on the dole. He’s the head of the “United Nations Foundation.” How much money does the UN make off it CO2 offset verification program? Do an article on the UN. How about one on Kleiner Perkins and Al Gore too?
“Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it.”
Um… because that’s how science works.
As I suspected and stated previously here, these people are of their own self righteous thought and at the root are only capable of expressing themselves with an inner desire to only serve themselves
Good job calling him out! 🙂
I wonder now if Wirth is going to include the US Supreme Court members to his hit list.
Of course you wouldn’t want to make your data available to people trying to find something wrong with it when you are personally aware that something is wrong with it. That’s a no brainer.
I agree with chemmen. Jones’ comment is worse because it is antithetical to the scientific method of which replication is a basic tenet. We expect as much from politicians.
I am embarrassed that I share a name with him.
The old adage is always true: Don’t debate a fool as he will pull you down to his level and beat you with experience.
“when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it.”
Shouldn’t it be “… try to find …” if everything was ok?
“Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing, in terms of economic policy and environmental policy. ”
How does Wirth reconcile his honest admission that AGW could be the biggest whopper in human history with his confidence in the AGW policies being the right thing?
For over twenty years these people have run the show. Britons, American, Australians, Germans, French, it matters not from where you hail. These are who you elected to office.
Some ran as progressives, like Mr. Wirth, some ran as conservatives, like Ms. Merkle. Where they differed is far less important than where they agreed. They all have betrayed the people who voted them into office. And for what? I’ll let you all think this one out for yourselves.
In reading the ‘More wisdom from Wirth’ link (at the bottom of the article), it state he is a follower of the teachings of Malthus . . . perhaps that isn’t surprising . . .
Dr. Phil Jones reveals some of the reasons why sceptics think they have a case.
Yet they use the D word for us. Odd world indeed. ;O)
Pascal’s Wager lives. The only problem with it is illustrated here (at ~2:15):
Anthony, wouldn’t it be fair and helpful to have the context in which Wirth’s comment was made? It is very conceivable that he simply meant that even if the evidence was incomplete (1993), it would still be advisable to act conservatively. In making ordinary risk assessments we often have to assume that danger lies ahead, even though we don’t have full knowledge of the perils waiting. Since 1993, there have been thousands of peer reviewed research papers presented which have enhanced our knowledge of climate change appreciably. As a matter of shear honesty, you must be aware of this and it is curious to me why you have not been impacted by this well documented information.
No doubt Wirth’s comments reflect the deepest impulse of the liberal greens. The interviewer on the video from yesterday was from The Nation. Wirth himself is with the UN Foundation a Ted Turner invention (from their website):
“Timothy Wirth is the President of the United Nations Foundation and the Better World Fund. Both organizations were founded in 1998 through a major financial commitment from Ted Turner to support and strengthen the work of the United Nations.”
So this is one more “important guy” who attends Davos, who, like Tom Friedman et al., would much rather have a more “efficient” way to manage our country. We need a high degree of vigilance. These people are on the wane right now (cf. Mead)…but they’ll be back. The impulse for command and control will always be there. So, while he is not capable of a technical debate, he must be shown for who he is. I say invite him any where and everywhere.
Hide the data, hide your thoughts. It’s all for our own good.
More quotes from Dr. Phil
This is why people should not immediately trust a word they say. That’s my 2 cents.