While we are polar opposites, and Dr. Schmidt can’t find it within himself to respond to any of my emails or to allow my comments and many others to appear on RealClimate, let me offer congratulations anyway.
New Award from the American Geophysical Union Recognizes Excellence in Climate Communications
AGU Release No. 11–34 18 October 2011
WASHINGTON, DC — In recognition of his exceptional work as a climate communicator, the American Geophysical Union (AGU) has selected Gavin Schmidt as the recipient of its inaugural Climate Communications Prize.
Schmidt is a climate scientist at the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies and co-founder of the RealClimate.org, a blog that covers areas of science related to climate-from present-day measurements to paleoclimate proxies, from natural climate variation to anthropogenic change. Schmidt has also worked with photographers on a popular science book, on museum exhibits, and on online courses and has often appeared on TV and radio and in print.
The award, which was established by AGU earlier this year, recognizes excellence in climate communication as well as the promotion of scientific literacy, clarity of messaging, and efforts to foster respect and understanding for science-based values related to climate change.
“AGU created this award to raise the visibility of climate change as a critical issue facing the world today, to demonstrate our support for scientists who commit themselves to the effective communication of climate change science, and to encourage more scientists to engage with the public and policy makers on how climate research can contribute to the sustainability of our planet,” said AGU president Michael McPhaden. “That’s why we are so pleased to recognize Gavin for his dedicated leadership and outstanding scientific achievements. We hope that his work will serve as an inspiration for others.”
Schmidt said, “Talking to the public and the media is often neglected in assessing people’s contributions, and yet, as taxpayer-funded scientists we have a collective responsibility to share the expertise we have with the broader public. I’m very happy that the efforts I’ve made-in collaboration with many colleagues-have been recognized by this new award. I hope that this can serve as an encouragement for more scientists to dip their toe into the public discussions.”
The prize, which comes with a $25,000 cash award, is sponsored by Nature’s Own, a Boulder, Colo.-based company specializing in the sale of minerals, fossils, and decorative stone specimens.
“This award will help increase communication of our scientific understanding of climate change and its consequences, and I congratulate Gavin for all that he has accomplished and what it means for the scientific community,” said Nature’s Own president and founder Roy Young, an AGU member. “Gavin has worked tirelessly to bring the work of scientists in understanding our changing world to both the public debate as well as to the broader scientific community.”
The award will be presented to Schmidt in December during the honors celebration at AGU’s Fall Meeting in San Francisco.
The American Geophysical Union is a not-for-profit, professional, scientific organization with more than 60,000 members representing over 148 countries. AGU advances the Earth and space sciences through its scholarly publications, conferences, and outreach programs.
h/t to Dr. Leif Svalgaard
Gavin is what Loudon Wainright III was singing about years ago.
Exactly when did Mann clone hi’self into a younger version, I wonder?
Anthony is nicer than me.
Hmmm…watched the video. A very dangerous, plausable, reasonable type avoiding telling you his agenda. I can see why he would get a reward from warmistas. But I do agree with him on one thing, if scientists would go out and speak about the topic explaining the actual scientific evidence rather than being cowed by consensus and the research funders into mitigating the message through fear that would be much more healthy than where we are today.
At this moment, there are 91,939,378 reasons why Anthony would be a more deserving recipient .
Agenda driven…. Agenda rewarded….
while “winning” something used to mean something, anymore it means that he’s being given money to continue his agenda and it has nothing to do with real science…
Polar opposites. Was the pun intended?
I support KenB’s idea that “Its about time that Watts Up With That readers were given the serious duty of choosing our communicator of the year award“.
The award should be the Anthony Watts Award for Communicating Science (AWACS). This is an appropriate acronym, as the other AWACS “can be detected by opposing forces beyond its own detection range” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airborne_Warning_And_Control_System) This tallies nicely with the extraordinary reach of WUWT.
After reading RealClimate articles, readers’ comments and Gavin’s responses over the past few years, my overall impression is that he is to science communication and civility as Rosie O’Donnell is to ballet.
Rather he should get the Order of Lenin and be named Hero of Socialist Labour.
Good to see those financial rewards rolling in and making clear to everyone, that climate “science” is now much more about communication instead of science and the Soros footprint instead of the carbon footprint.
I gave up on RC about 3 years ago after a piece by Gavin where he slid from CO2 GH warming to Anthropogenic GHG warming, to Anthropogenic Global Warming in order to justify reducing CO2 emissions.
After following all the references, it was clear to me that they had significant science to support reducing CO2 emissions.
And if anything the science indicated reducing methane emissions was the best course of action.
But then the reviled on the Left, GWB had already done that 7 or 8 years earlier with his methane to markets program.
Not only did methane emissions level out, so did global temperatures. Quite the coincidence that.
That should have read,
After following all the references, it was clear to me that they had NO significant science to support reducing CO2 emissions.
Muamar Khadafi’s got one too!
In recognition of his exceptional work as a ONE WAY climate communicator, the American Geophysical Union (AGU) has selected Gavin Schmidt as the recipient of its inaugural Climate Communications Prize.
fixed.
@Andy One of the mods at RealClimate did comment – your message is post 114 at http://www.realclimate.org/?comments_popup=8938:
Whenever I have tried to post on RC (polite) comments that disagree with ideas put forward by Gavin and others I have had every single comment deleted by the moderators. However, when I have posted comments on sceptic sites that disagree with the sceptic author none of my comments have ever been deleted.
I hope this award will allow you to reflect Gavin, and hopefully accept that truly effective communication always allows both sides of the debate to be heard at all times.
[Response: Hmm. To the extent this is true (which I very much doubt), I suspect it has to do with very different understandings of what ‘polite’ means.–eric]
RDCII says:
October 20, 2011 at 1:12 pm
Well-deserved, but not in the way they intended. I credit Gavin, more than any other individual, with redirecting my initial positive interest in AGW towards skepticsm.
RealClimate was the first place I went to when I became concerned about this AGW thing. If it hadn’t been for Gavin, I might have been happily reading RealClimate all along.
After I realized, from his offensive (in multiple meanings) style and they strange way that comment threads seemed to end when Gavin had the last sarcastic word, that RealClimate was a propaganda site, I went to other sites, such as this one, the Bishop’s, and of course Climateaudit, and realized that AGW wasn’t science as I understood science at all, but rather politics, and of a particularly dirty kind.
I have since then read many others who said the same thing.
===================================
Repeated for effect. Excellent remarks!
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
LOL.
Well, this prestigious award prompted me to go and have a look. I logged on concerned that perhaps I had missed something in the climate debate and that a wave of revelatory reason was about to hit me. I needn’t have worried, Quite apart from the (relatively) infrequent posts, I didn’t find much there that was too taxing and an awful lot that isn’t science. By comparison I find myself stretched by the science content on Wattsupwiththat on a regular basis. Keep up the good work.
Hugh Pepper says:
October 20, 2011 at 9:19 am
“Good on you, Anthony, to note this citation.”
Anthony has achieved sainthood. He is Saint Anthony. The original Saint Anthony is a favorite of artists. He is shown among many demons who are scratching and pounding with all their might to no effect. Yes, the comparison is apt.
Can not agree with congratulations. On another blog it appears when the Schmidt number (Sc) was mentioned that he had to look up the properties which made up this dimensionless number in Wikipedia, and then asked what had that to do anything and then left the discussion. In my view he has no understanding of heat and mass transfer and that maybe the reason he does not allow free discuss on that biased website RealClimate. The repression of scientific discussion is a reason he should be ostracized rather than given an award. One only can put out misinformation in communications attempts if one does not understand what they are talking about.
Congratulations to GS here are superfluous. Did you read the glowing paean to him over at RC? Almost as though he’d written it himself …
“The award, which was established by AGU earlier this year, recognizes excellence in climate communication as well as the promotion of scientific literacy, clarity of messaging, and efforts to foster respect and understanding for science-based values related to climate change.”
I wonder if they might establish new awards. How about the award for excellence in scientific method, as follows:
The award, which was established by AGU [when Hell froze over], recognizes excellence in scientific explication as well as the promotion of literacy in scientific method, clarity of explanation, and efforts to foster respect and understanding for science as the critical enterprise par excellence related to hypotheses about climate change.
Another award might be for excellence in the ethics of science, as follows:
The award, which was established by AGU [when Hell froze over], recognizes excellence in the practice of scientific method as well as the promotion of literacy in the moral demands of scientific method, clarity of explanation, and efforts to foster respect and understanding for science as the critical enterprise par excellence related to hypotheses about climate change.
Who knows? If these guys were imaginative enough they might actually contribute to Western Civilization.
In case someone might be wondering about the moral demands of scientific method, the most basic is that you make your results replicable. That means that you provide everything necessary to replicate your experiment. When you don the garb of science, you promise to all other scientists that you will do this. So, all your data and all your methods must be made available. Not doing this is violating a trust. That is a serious matter.
The American Medical Association makes it quite clear to all physicians that they must not practice in a way that causes the public to conclude that doctors kill patients. Why? The moral reasoning is very simple. The most valuable asset of doctors is public trust. If the public does not trust physicians then the public will not take their problems to physicians. That would cripple medical practice.
A similar principle should be practiced in science. Scientists must not practice in a way that causes the public to distrust scientists. The obvious conclusion is disband the IPCC.
It should be called Excellence in Propaganda Award
Anthony;
Do you suppose your name came up for consideration for the award?
Give details, and show your work. 😉