Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach
Normally, I might not deal with a four year old paper by James Hansen, the NASA doyenne of serial doomcasters. However, I note that this paper has been cited ten times this year alone, so I thought I might comment.
At some point when he was not giving a Press Conference, or getting arrested, or spending time complaining that he was being “muzzled”, Mr. Hansen wrote:
Abstract. I suggest that a `scientific reticence’ is inhibiting the communication of a threat of a potentially large sea level rise. Delay is dangerous because of system inertias that could create a situation with future sea level changes out of our control. I argue for calling together a panel of scientific leaders to hear evidence and issue a prompt plain-written report on current understanding of the sea level change issue.
I love the naked power grab. I mean, what an audacious plan!
First, you unilaterally declare that there is some huge looming disaster a long ways in the future. Using a variety of methods fair and foul, you obtain the full cooperation of other scientists, governments, educational institutions, and the media the world around. With all of you, the whole chorus, baying for skeptic’s blood in full voice, you spend a quarter century trying to convince the people of the oncoming Thermageddon.
Second, after said quarter century you notice that despite having the entire resources of the educational and media institutions of the planet and the blind agreement of other scientists and billions of dollars poured into trying … you have not been able to establish your case. Heck, you haven’t even been able to falsify the null hypothesis. In fact, after a long string of predictions of doom, none of which came to pass, and at the tail end of a 15-year hiatus in the warming, the US public doesn’t believe a word you say. Oops. Over two-thirds of them think climate scientists sometimes falsify their research. Oops.
In response, you say that the problem is that scientists have been too retice … too re … sorry, it’s hard to type and laugh at the same time … you say that scientists have been to reticent, that they haven’t been alarmist enough or aggressive enough in promoting their views.
That’s the problem? After 25 years of unbridled alarm from scientists and everyone else from Presidents to my kid’s teachers, the problem is that scientists are not alarmist enough, they’re too reticent to state their true opinion? Really? That’s the reason the public doesn’t believe you? Is that your final answer?
(Does he really, in his heart of hearts, believe that? Possible, I guess, but it presupposes a level of self-delusion that is scary …)
The real beauty of the plan, however, the sting in the tale, is the proposed solution—a “panel of scientific leaders” to inform the people of the error of our ways. I mean, the IPCC did so well, let’s make a sea level rise mini-IPCC. Staff it with people who will know what to say, who won’t have to be prompted.
Mr. Hansen claims he is a scientist first and an activist second. He and far too many other climate scientists are activists first, and scientists maybe fourth or fifth if at all. He proposes convening a Star Council of Jim and his hand-picked acolytes to lecture us sternly on a radical sea level rise slated to occur when they are dead? He wants us to listen to his pals make predictions they’ll never be held accountable for? And all this from the man who in 1988 predicted a 10 foot (3m) sea level rise putting parts of NYC underwater in forty years? Fuggedaboutit. He probably felt safe with such a long-term prediction. In any case, we’re more than halfway there, and since 1988 the sea level in NYC has gone up by 2.5 inches (6 cm). Would you buy a sea level prediction from Jim?
There certainly are many problems in the field of climate science. Reticence on the part of climate scientists to clean up their own backyard is high on the list.
Reticence on the part of climate scientists to make alarmist claims, about sea level or any other imagined future disaster, is not on the list at all.
The main problem, however, is thinking that it’s a communications problem. It’s not. The problem is that Jim and his Climategate pals lied and cheated and pulled strings and even destroyed evidence in order to advance their views. All of that was revealed clearly in the UEA emails. They stand convicted by their own words.
As a result, lots of folks don’t believe a word that the climate scientists say. And reasonably so. I have seen no reason to believe they are now acting differently. There has been no “mea culpa” from even one individual involved. Noble Cause Corruption appears to have rotted the ethical parts of their brains entirely. They don’t even think they did wrong … and the rest of the honorable, decent, good climate scientists? Well, by and large they played the faithful dog Spot, they rolled over and played dead.
That’s the problem, not communications or reticent scientists. I had hoped that Climategate would lance the boil and the healing could begin … foolish boy, wrong again …
So no, I believe I’ll pass on the brilliant plan for the formation of the Official Panel Of The Sea-Level Wise Men. No need to even read the novel, most of us have seen the IPCC movie, and would prefer not to be forced to sit through a bad sequel.
w.
Willis Eschenbach-whether or not you agree with James Hansen it is common courtesy to acknowledge his academic achievements by referring to him As Dr Hansen rather than Mr Hansen
Smart Guy says:
October 23, 2011 at 3:55 pm
Anyone who believes climate change is false or irrelevant, just need witness the dramatic changes in weather that are happening RIGHT NOW: more frequent droughts, snow storms, floods, tornadoes, higher temperatures, and mass deaths of animals, just to name a few. Don’t let one, or several, egotistical scientists ruin a theory that will change the course of humanity. Have perspective and look at both sides of the argument. Or just look at your window and see that it’s snowing in August.
*** This last statement “…Or just look at your window and see that it’s snowing in August…” actually took me back to the summer of ’90, when I was stationed in Galena, AK. There, I actually saw my first snowfall on the last day of summer (around Sept 22, IIRC).
Must have been CAGW then, too…
quote from article>>
“I love the naked power grab. I mean, what an audacious plan!
First, you unilaterally declare that there is some huge looming disaster a long ways in the future. Using a variety of methods fair and foul, you obtain the full cooperation of other scientists, governments, educational institutions, and the media the world around. With all of you, the whole chorus, baying for skeptic’s blood in full voice, you spend a quarter century trying to convince the people of the oncoming Thermageddon.”
>>
What specific foul methods has Hansen used? How did he gain cooperation with these groups, trick them? And while I agree with some of Hansen’s work, I don’t think he has convinced me to thirst for “skeptic blood”. Is he and others gearing up to physically hurt/kill skeptics?
As far as falsifying the null hypothesis, that can never be done in quite a few scientific fields, such as biology, medicine, etc (as I understand it anyway). What one can do is collect quite a bit of evidence.
Can you substantiate the quoted paragraph, or is it all satire? It sounds like satire. After reading the whole article, methinks it is satire.
Smart Guy says:
October 23, 2011 at 3:55 pm
Anyone who believes climate change is false or irrelevant, just need witness the dramatic changes in weather that are happening RIGHT NOW: more frequent droughts, snow storms, floods, tornadoes, higher temperatures, and mass deaths of animals, just to name a few. Don’t let one, or several, egotistical scientists ruin a theory that will change the course of humanity. Have perspective and look at both sides of the argument. Or just look at your window and see that it’s snowing in August.
*******
Unless you live in Australia snow in August would signal global cooling which CO2 cannot do no matter what the uneducated believe .
Mark S says:
October 23, 2011 at 3:21 pm
You type the letter “I” a lot. Sign of a narcissist. Just saying.
You, Mark, are “just saying”? Hey, I know that A implies B does not mean that B implies A, but in your case I’m afraid that either Alinsky has taken over your mind or else you are one of the narcissists you seek to tar solely by means of your feckless name-call. Or both. And I’m not just saying. Or else maybe you should get into the real game instead and explain why the people who you think are not narcissists, including you, are not bothered by the fact that their CO2 = CAGW “science” has not yielded even one relevant correct empirical prediction yet?
But me, I’m going to watch me some baseball. At least that involves a real game with rules, you know, the kind which the players follow to produce their specialized product?
Willis –
What prose. You write sooo well…its entertaining and enlightening at the same time. Well done! A nice read…
Thank you sir…..
They’ve been screaming it – along with impending (always impending) doom in its full glory for 25 years!
I cannot think of a single person who hasn’t been made aware of the issue. In fact, its a bigger propaganda machine than any other movement in history.
Re Hanson’s prediction, keep in mind that regardless of sealevel rise, The Westside Highway was planned to be put under water by a Big-dig style project. The project was since canceled due to the threat it posed to striped bass(thanks, environmentalists!) in 1985. Hanson must have not gotten the memo.
Mark S says:
October 23, 2011 at 3:21 pm
“You type the letter “I” a lot. Sign of a narcissist. Just saying.”
Actually, when a person undertakes the task of presenting his views on a topic, it is quite common to use the word ‘I’ quite often. Use of the word ‘I’ is symptomatic when a person cannot talk about anything without using the word.
Anthony Scalzi says:
October 23, 2011 at 5:45 pm
Hanson must have not gotten the memo.
I suspect there are a lot of memos that Hansen hasn’t gotten.
Wonderful essay, Willis! You strike exactly the right tone for writing about Warmista or addressing them. Keep up the good work.
Hansen’s words convict him of a messianic desire for control, power, and wealth. Anyone who cannot see that these desires dominate the man is willfully blind.
I’m (there’s that letter again) sure that it snowed somewhere in August. I think that Anthony might have even blog on it. But unlike alarmists, us skeptics think that snow in the summer is not a sign of warming. Only an idiot (oh oh, two letter “I” in that word) would think that snow in the summer means out of control warming is occurring.
Ian, given what Hansen (along with his pals Gore, Mann, Phil Jones and others) has done to advance the AGW scam on the world, the only title he deserves is convicted [snip] !
Ian said @ur momisugly October 23, 2011 at 5:13 pm
“Willis Eschenbach-whether or not you agree with James Hansen it is common courtesy to acknowledge his academic achievements by referring to him As Dr Hansen rather than Mr Hansen”
While “Dr” Hansen used to claim a doctorate in his résumé, the institution he obtained it from, when asked, could find no record of his ever being a student there. Subsequently, the claim to a doctorate was disappeared from his résumé. Thus Willis is perfectly entitled to refer to him as Mr Hansen, just as NASA is within its rights to use it “as an honorific” to use their terminology.NOTE: This accusation is false, and while I don’t agree with Dr. Hansen on many things his PhD is not in question. Redacted. – Anthony
Steve from rockwood said @ur momisugly October 23, 2011 at 4:53 pm
“Mark S, a narcissist talks about themself in the third person. Like Jim Hansen saying “the Hansen ain’t happy with all these narcissist comments.””
Steve, you are correct. Whenever Mrs Git says to me “I love you”, The Git responds, “Yeah, me too.” 🙂
Ottor 17: Hansen has not distanced himself from groups like Earth First that do support violence to further their goals.
Ian:
“Willis Eschenbach-whether or not you agree with James Hansen it is common courtesy to acknowledge his academic achievements by referring to him As Dr Hansen rather than Mr Hansen”
YOU, sir, help make your “ilk” look ever more stupid. Sorry, but it does not matter ONE WHIT what title you have. If you don’t see that, then you are really really out of touch with reality. It just shows that you DON’T have the required moxy. Please google/bing/whatever “appeal to authority.”
AND, if you choose to respond to my comment, you have to address me as Dr. JAE.
JAE, PhD
Willis Eschenbach said @ur momisugly October 23, 2011 at 4:29 pm
“Sign of a pompous uneducated fool. Just saying.”
You rang? Oh wait, there’s another pompous, uneducated fool in the house? 🙂
My first editor had a bee in his bonnet about the use of the Perpendicular Pronoun which is what led to the creation of The World’s Most Famousest Pompous Git (according to Google). When I commenced a philosophy of science course in my first attempt at retirement, I lost marks for the paucity of perpendicular pronouns in my prose. Go figure.
As my grandaddy used to say: “You can’t fool all the people all the time, but you can jerk the rest off”.
Willis Eschenbach said @ur momisugly October 23, 2011 at 4:18 pm
“You left out “more frequent alien abductions” from your otherwise hilarious list … my own particular favorite was the “mass deaths of animals”, which immediately brought up images of endangered bats and windmills …”
Windmills are endangered? Oh, happy, happy, joy, joy. Or did you just say that to get me all excited?
Now if we could just get RC SS and TOM to allow this type of banter to take place.
Then again, not.
They are too afraid to be exposed.
LOL
Thepompousgit wrote:
“While “Dr” Hansen used to claim a doctorate in his résumé, the institution he obtained it from, when asked, could find no record of his ever being a student there. Subsequently, the claim to a doctorate was disappeared from his résumé. Thus Willis is perfectly entitled to refer to him as Mr Hansen, just as NASA is within its rights to use it “as an honorific” to use their terminology.”
Wait,what? Hanson doesn’t have a real doctorate? Am I right to infer that he originally claimed to have one – but didn’t?
For Left/Greenies such as Hansen and his acolytes, “the truth” is defined by power struggles.
As always, good stuff, Willis.
I heard “Mr.” Hansen on an NPR radio show recently. The subject was, I believe, natural gas fracking. There were multiple people being interviewed.
Yet every time Hansen spoke, he hijacked whatever question that was asked and started in on his propaganda message that all hydrocarbons are bad etc.
He truly has lost it. I wish him well.
However, I do not wish him to collect another paycheck of the public’s money.
If I were elected president, Hansen and his smirking ilk Schmidt, among others, would be among the first that I would fire, if I could.
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
thepompousgit says:
October 23, 2011 at 6:20 pm
Windmills are endangered?
For your reading / can’t call it pleasure it really is kinda sad.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/10/18/holy-irony-batman/
TomT said @ur momisugly October 23, 2011 at 6:04 pm
“I’m (there’s that letter again) sure that it snowed somewhere in August.”
It snowed in August here in southern Tasmania. And in September. And in October. Dunno if it snowed in November yet, not being a climatologist. My potatoes still haven’t recovered from being bitten by the hard frost of a fortnight ago. Usually we have our last frost in late August.