You have to laugh at the dueling statements in this circus event, its almost like a fire and brimstone speech from Rep. Edward Markey, who thinks this will be the “End of Climate Change Skepticism” as if he were casting out the devil from his green vision of paradise. Plus, you gotta love how he insults about half of his constituents by calling them “climate science deniers”. How unprofessional and petty. Then again, this is politics, not science.
In the best practice of reprehensible political style that personifies Washington, the announcement comes on the eve of the three day holiday weekend, where it won’t attract much notice in time for rebuttals to be mounted. And of course, none have been scheduled. How convenient.
But here’s the joke on Markey, and it’s hilarious. Compare his fire and brimstone headline with the recent update to the FAQS on Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature BEST website, emphasis mine:
Do Judith Curry and Richard Muller disagree?
Below is a joint statement by Judith Curry and Richard Muller:
In recent days, statements we’ve made to the media and on blogs have been characterized as contradictory. They are not.
We have both said that the global temperature record of the last 13 years shows evidence suggesting that the warming has slowed. Our new analysis of the land-based data neither confirms nor denies this contention. If you look at our new land temperature estimates, you can see a flattening of the rise, or a continuation of the rise, depending on the statistical approach you take.
Continued global warming “skepticism” is a proper and a necessary part of the scientific process. The Wall St. Journal Op-Ed by one of us (Muller) seemed to take the opposite view with its title and subtitle: “The Case Against Global-Warming Skepticism — There were good reasons for doubt, until now.” But those words were not written by Muller. The title and the subtitle of the submitted Op-Ed were “Cooling the Warming Debate – Are you a global warming skeptic? If not, perhaps you should be. Let me explain why.” The title and subtitle were changed by the editors without consulting or seeking permission from the author. Readers are encouraged to ignore the title and read the content of the Op-Ed.
We do not agree with each other on every feature of climate change. We have had vigorous discussions, for example, on the proper way to analyze hurricane records. Such disagreements are an essential part of the scientific process.
Dr. Judith Curry said it “best” on her blog today:
JC comments: The “end of skepticism about climate change” meme seems to have caught on with the warm PR groups. I suspect that pushing this will be as successful as Gore’s 24 hours in terms of changing anyone’s mind.
It will be interesting to see if Richard Muller repeats the following statements on this topic that he has made on the BEST website:
Continued global warming “skepticism” is a proper and a necessary part of the scientific process.
Are you a global warming skeptic? If not, perhaps you should be. Let me explain why.
Berkeley Earth has not addressed issues of the tree ring and proxy data, climate model accuracy, or human attribution.
Dr. Muller will either come off as a skeptic, and agree with what is written on his website above, or he’ll embrace the fire and brimstone of Markey. Either way, he’s in the hotseat. Buy popcorn.
Since it is impossible now for me or most anyone to attend and rebut at this hearing on such short notice, one can only hope that there will be somebody there to ask some tough questions.As I understand the rules of this meeting, public comment questions from the audience can even be asked.
On the plus side, as I said in the headline, this is circus. But more circus minimus than maximus because this is not a sanctioned committee meeting, its a sideshow put on by Waxman and Markey, who aren’t majority members, but minority members. Basically its a PR dog and pony show that has no bearing on a committee decision. Watch how much of the left media will fawn over this and repeat the headline put out by Markey, likely ignoring Muller’s own statements and what’s on his website right now.
And still, he hasn’t published anything and his papers have not passed peer review, but the political apparatchik wants to showcase the incomplete and rushed, non quality controlled, error riddled BEST science as if it were factual enough to kill off “denialism” worldwide. That’s political desperation in my opinion.
Given the PR missteps BEST has made so far, I welcome their participation in this circus.
It will be webcast. Here’s the details:
WHAT: Congressional climate science briefing: “Undeniable Data: The Latest Research on Global Temperature and Climate Science”
WHO: Reps. Ed Markey, Henry Waxman, others
Dr. Richard Muller, Director of the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature Project
Dr. Ben Santer, research scientist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Dr. William Chameides, Dean of Duke University’s Nicholas School of the Environment and ViceChair of the National Academies’ Committee on America’s Climate Choices
WHERE: 1324 Longworth House Office Building, Washington, D.C.
WHEN: Monday, November 14, 2011, 2 PM
More information & live webcast of this briefing >>
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
polistra says:
November 13, 2011 at 12:39 pm
Wouldn’t bet on any surprises. The first rule of any Cong hearing (just like any TV interview or court proceeding) is that a witness won’t be called unless his answers are thoroughly known and predictable in advance.
If Muller actually surprises Markey, he will be ushered out quickly and his reputation will be trashed. I’m sure Muller knows the rules.
__________________________
Of course he know the rules.
This is what the whole thing is really about – Selling his Consulting Services.
http://www.mullerandassociates.com/index.php
Gack, it is enough to make you lose your dinner… Note how Muller positions himself as “Neutral” That is why he has “re-invented” himself as a “Sceptic”
I go into detail about Muller & Assoc here: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/10/30/the-best-whopper-ever/#comment-783396
Arbitrary arrests are coming next…
Eco totalitarism is a plague.
Jeff Alberts says:
November 13, 2011 at 2:12 pm
Typo:
“It will be webcast. Here’s the details:”
==============
If this wasn’t a family friendly website, I would tell you to go f’ yourself.
Seeing as it is a family friendly website, I say go f’ yourself.
Gotta love these ‘internationalist’ democrats pushing for economic changes in order to enrich other nations at our expense.
Wouldn’t it be amusing if the REpublican House leader shut off the heat to the room and opened all the windows?
You have to laugh at the dueling statements in this circus event, its almost like a fire and brimstone speech from Rep. Edward Markey, who thinks this will be the “End of Climate Change Skepticism” as if he were casting out the devil from his green vision of paradise. Plus, you gotta love how he insults about half of his constituents by calling them “climate science deniers”. How unprofessional and petty. Then again, this is politics, not science.
It has always been about politics; not science and certainly not English. Cancel the Congressional Briefing and AGW will cease!
” So the world is warming at a congressional briefing “
@ur momisugly Noblesse Oblige
“Rich” is not going to the Big Show, just to a side show, where he’ll find the oddities, freaks and frauds. Perhaps those will satisfy his need to be known.
On air promoting the Waxman-Markey bill in a point-counter-point with James Inhofe (OK) a few years ago, Ed Markey said, “nine of the last ten years have been the warmest in the history of the planet.”
Apparently, we are dealing with an astonishing level of ignorance guised as leadership.
Hugh Pepper says:
But I find your responses somewhat disingenuous given that in the past so many have been critical of the peer review process itself.
Being critical of peer review, including the ridiculous idea that it produces the “given truth”, is not the same as saying that pre-publication peer review should not occur, but also especially after a study is published.
But then perhaps you have missed why Climate Science style peer review has been criticized, in addition to the above anti-science Climate Science claim as to peer review’s omniscient authority: no release of the “materials and methods” which are the science behind the conclusions, no evidence of the materials and methods having even been checked by the peer reviewers, pal review, publication of all sorts of trash under the auspices of peer review, obstruction of other studies by the “peers”, vilification of scepticism itself, propagandistic press releases not backed by the actual “peer reviewed” study, the necessity for FOIA actions and leaks concerning the data methods and process, biased funding of “peer reviewed” papers reaching the conclusions the funder pays for?
Waxman – elected in California
Markey – elected in Massachusetts
‘Nuff said
Catcracking says: November 13, 2011 at 5:21 pm
Wouldn’t it be amusing if the REpublican House leader shut off the heat to the room and opened all the windows?
Nice ref (to Hansen, for those who didn’t know he ensured the rooms were stiflingly hot on the day he first introduced the Global Warming nonsense to Congress).
But Hansen must have had an insider accomplice. And Taxman / Malarkey wouldn’t know or believe that story anyway probably.
Hugh Pepper says: November 13, 2011 at 2:21 pm
davidmhoffer says: November 13, 2011 at 3:21 pm
JPeden says: November 13, 2011 at 10:36 pm
It seems the joke is on you Hugh m’lad. The peer-review issues have all been about omitting vital pieces of information. Like the not-noticing of Mann’s c**p statistics that weighted bristlecone pines 390 times the rest of the data, so that 500 years’ temperature records overrode decades of previously agreed interdisciplinary understanding, and declared the Medieval Warm Period null and void (key propaganda, if one is to declare present warming “unprecedented”). Like the not-noticing of the upside-down Tiljander data that was used to reinforce the bristlecone pine data… Like… Like…
So you too have omitted vital information.
You’ve been here long enough. Do you find it hard to face and examine the hypothesis that Climate Science has been deeply corrupted?
I don’t think he uses Email
There is some classic linguistic programming going on in this debate that all should be cautious of.
The only people in the debate on climate that deny climate change – are the alarmists. It is essential for their argument that the world climates only change in response to anthropogenic ‘forcing’ *and* that the change is from a halcyon ideal to something much worse. The climate change deniers are the alarmists. So they call those skeptical of their arguments the climate change deniers – a classic strawman tactic.
A similar approach is taken with Global Warming – the alarmists have attempted to conflate Anthropogenic global warming – with natural global warming. They have even their opponents using ‘global warming’ as a synonym for ‘anthropogenic global warming’ – having confused the terms they now claim rightly that if asked even skeptics accept global warming – this is *precisely* the approach now taken by Muller and ‘BEST’ who are claiming that BEST has ‘validated the fact that the world is warming’. Yet everyone agrees the world is warming – but for those convinced by the alarmists they see this as BEST has ‘validated the fact that the world is warming due to anthropogenic causes‘
It is really important to use the correct terms and not be drawn by the alarmists into using their ambiguous phraseology. It is a deliberate ploy to assist them in debates. Remember, it is the alarmists that deny natural climate change and natural global warming.
Judith is sitting on a fence rail. And seems to be saying that it is okay to use statistics to say anything you want to say. The process of discovery is mired in the mud because of such fence sitters. Come on Judith, your belief that playing nice will get the two groups together is just keeping your boots dry. It is not advancing the science. Get off the fence and slog through the mud.
I expect the ‘super committee’ has called their brokers and are gearing up for a little carbon tax.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/congressional-insider-trading-gone-wild
The deals are being cut.
http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/e2-wire/193325-apec-forges-green-deal-but-obama-warns-china-on-trade
NBC started running their green peacock logo last night…..
Mac the Knife says:
November 13, 2011 at 12:52 pm
Here in the Great NorthWet (SE of Seattle WA, USA), we are colder and wetter than normal. That is no longer ‘just weather’, as it has been true for the last few years.
Here in BC we used to get grapes from WA for wine making. This year they are all from CA. What happened to the WA harvest?
Ian W says:
November 14, 2011 at 3:02 am
There is some classic linguistic programming going on in this debate that all should be cautious of.
…
It is really important to use the correct terms and not be drawn by the alarmists into using their ambiguous phraseology.
I agree – we should not let the CAGW crowd define the words used within the discussion or the skeptical positions.
So much for jobs and energy security in the US:
Wall Street Journal
Just a few days after the U.S. said it would delay approval of an oil pipeline that would boost Canadian exports to the U.S., Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper said Sunday the country would push to sell its crude to Asian markets instead.
The Hill
President Obama and other leaders at the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit vowed Sunday to ease trade barriers on “green” products, but Obama emphasized that he remains frustrated with Chinese trade policies that U.S. officials call unfair.
Zero Hedge
In sum, the findings from this study of the U.S. House of Representatives’ common stock transactions are generally supportive of the previous study of the U.S. Senate. We find strong evidence that Members of the House have some type of nonpublic information which they use for personal gain.
Apparently insider trading is only illegal for the average person. It is perfectly OK for US politicians and presidents to invest ahead of time based on the laws they intend to pass.
So. The US will not import dirty oil from Canada. Instead that dirty oil will be shipped to China, where it will be turned into Green products and dirty jobs. Those dirty jobs that used to be done in the US will now be done in China, making the US much cleaner. In place of dirty jobs, these Green products will be shipped into the US with reduced tariffs, even though the US complains that Chinese trade is unfair.
Isn’t the real green – the greenback – being shipped from the US to China? The cheese shop was also much cleaner without any cheese.
Rep. Markey has been consistent —–and wrong throughout his long career of policy warp and unintended consequences without costs assigned all along the way. There should be an Oscar or Nobel for lifetime achievement in bad public policy and he above all others deserves it.
I have the misfortune of living in Fast Eddie Malarkey’s district. I’ll definitely be checking out Mr. Semon; thanks for the tip!
/Mr Lynn
Waxman “The North Pole is evaporating”….and all that “tundra being held down by that ice cap”.
Embarrassing as this is to watch…it is also immortally funny:
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
In an earlier post here I referred to the fact that congressional Democrats, headed by Kongressman Murkey, had issued a press release immediately in the wake of Muller’s PR blitz, and speculated that Muller had given them a heads-up on his findings, and that he was working hand-in-glove with them as part of a coordinated PR venture. This confirms my suspicions.