Though, he still thinks we are all funded by some sort of “machine”. It never occurs to him that he’s fighting a guerrilla war and that most skeptics are self motivated.
Update: the UK telegraph has a similar story here
Scientist hits climate change skepticism – UPI.com
EDINBURGH,Scotland,April 9 (UPI) –Environmentalists and climate scientists, facing public skepticism, are losing the debate on global warming, a U.S. scientist who first raised the issue says.
James Hansen, director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, who issued warnings about man-made climate change as early as the 1980s, said public skepticism is increasing even in the face of growing scientific acceptance of the reality of global warming.
“There is remarkable inconsistency between the scientific story and public story,” Hansen said in Edinburgh, Scotland, where he will receive the Edinburgh Medal at the Edinburgh International Science Festival this week, The Daily Telegraph reported.
Hansen said those opposed to major social and economic changes needed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions were attempting to undermine the scientific evidence.
“The science has become stronger and stronger over the past five years while the public perception is has gone in completely the other direction. That is not an accident.
“There is a very concerted effort by people who would prefer to see business to continue as usual. They have been winning the public debate with the help of tremendous resources.”
Without a dramatic change in public opinion, Hansen said,he fears future generations will inherit a world where global warming is out of control.
“Our parents honestly did not know what the consequences of continued development and reliance on fossil fuels as an energy source,” he said. “We can no longer claim that, as the science is now clear.”
Hmm.
The PDO has peaked and it’s now starting on its decline.
The Sun appears to be heading into another grand minimum similar to the Dalton
Minimum (1790-1840)—or maybe worse (another Maunder Minimum?).
How much longer before the divergence of the data from the models becomes
so large even Hansen can neither ignore it nor dismiss it?
Of course, the data will remain “obviously wrong” for quite a while yet.
In 3 years time, what will we see?
In 3 years time, what will the “true believers” have successfully imposed on the world in the
name of “climate change?”
We can say—without a shadow of doubt—we definitely live in interesting times …
@Charles Gerard Nelson
He will be amongst friends in Edinburgh.
David, UK says:
Can somebody change the record please? I’ve heard this one.
——————————————————————————————–
David, I am certain that James Hansen would be the happiest of all if he were to be left to his own devices. And, when did you last hear this story…where he will receive the Edinburgh Medal at the Edinburgh International Science Festival this week…?
Geoff A
I will believe that Hansen believes what he says when his own children and grandchildren live in mud huts without heating and AC, eating only what they grow in their own gardens. When his own children and grandchildren have given up electricity, telephones, TV’s and other modern conveniences…I will believe that his prophecies of doom include both him and us.
Meanwhile hot air and money drives global weirding in British politics…
http://fenbeagleblog.wordpress.com/2012/04/09/global-weirding-the-new-hot-air/
I think that James Hansen gets his scientific facts from the same sourse as the skeptics get their millions of dollars in funding.
That would be never never land.
When was the last time that JH debated this issue?
I guess trying to shut down the economy, oh yeah, and civilization, and going from a promise of boiling seas and fry-and-die for all, to a sudden “um, yes, that means it can get colder, too, LOOK, the snow proves it!” – turned out to be a bad idea.
Hansen said:
“…..a world where global warming is out of control”. Control by whom? Hansen himself? Does he he think thathe is God? Global warmings, and coolings and climate change have always been out of Man’s control. If Hansen believes that he can control the weather or global climate, then he must be sufferring from a serious bout of megalomania and should be wearing a straight jacket and locked up in a rubber-lined room.
“….growing scientific acceptance of the reality of global warming”. We all know that global warming (and coolings) has happened, will happen and will always happen. It’s the cause that we don’t agree on and more and more scientists, such as Professor Dr. Fritz Vahrenholt, a social democrat and green activist and geologist/paleontologist Dr. Sebastian Lüning. Vahrenholt who authored the now famous book Die Kalte Sonne. fact is that more andmore scientists are coming out of the woodwork exposing their skepticism on the anthropogenic cause of climate change.
I think that besides ‘climate deniers’ and ‘climate skeptics’, there should be another label added to this story, describing those scientists who are abondining AGW beliefs in exchange for a healthy dose of climate skepticsm. I am not proposing a label myself. Any offers?
Apparently, The Wellcome Trust is going to fund an e-journal for those scientists who are finding difficulty in getting their papers into mainstream journals. Is this going to be good, bad or neutral for the sceptics?
Anthea
When proponents of AGW start behaving as though it’s real, then I might start thinking there is something in it!
The UK FCO is doing their bit (using UK tax revenue) to keep the ship afloat.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/04/05/fco_climate_change_funds/
He looks pretty like this guy… 🙂
http://0.tqn.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/l/U/iraq_denial.jpg
There clearly is a disconnect between reality and what goes on in Hansen’s brain. History will not be kind.
He does not really mean science he means a narrow group of climate scientists when he talks about scientific opinion. Since their people were all recruited in an era when belief in global warming was a prerequisite of any hope of job acceptance he does not grasp that public belief now needs external examination of the theory by qualified specialists in every area from data collection to data analysis and the computer modelling.
Trust in climate scientists for many now ranks equal if not lower than that of of bankers and politicians so giving any climate scientist an award degrades and belittles every single member of the scientific community.
Hansen forgets that many of us were believers until the evidence that forced them to have a rebranding from global warming to climate change forced us to believe evidence we had already seen of deception, data manipulation and sloppy methods but up to then disbelieved. When the internal debate partially escaped into the public domain revealed the removal of those no longer committed to the AGW religion our previous commitment turned to antagonism for having been suckered deliberately using the integrity of other scientific fields to bolster the unjustified faith in them.
If the science is so clear why are the predictions not detailed and 100% accurate unlike the 100 months to doomsday temperature rises given so much publicity until it became obvious they were junk when there now seems a systematic attempt to write this prediction out from history of the web.
“It never occurs to him that he’s fight a guerrilla war and that most skeptics are self motivated.”
Typo alert. That should be “… he’s fighting a guerrilla war …”
I think James Hansen is the least “scientific” man I have ever heard of. He is worse in some ways that people who believe in magic.
Comical Jimmy ‘We are winning’.
Edinburgh? This means that Geoffrey Boulton must have a hand in it.
In science, skeptics “win” by default, so Hansen should not be surprised. The science has become stronger, unfortunately it didn’t point in the direction he hoped. At the TAR there was the hockey stick and the model results. At the FAR we knew of the problems with the hockey stick and we had a much improved model diagnostic literature that showed correlated model error larger than the phenomenon of interest. The case for net positive feedback and anthropogenic influence that was significantly greater than natural variation was always questionable.
Man made Global Warming and the run away green house effect! Old Classics!
I really have no idea how someone like Hansen can be so deluded. The science is clearly on the sceptic side. Every single one of their claims has fallen through … except the one which we sceptics now appear to be the main champions of…
CO2 causes around 1C of warming for a doubling.
Hansen just needs to accept this science and stops his non-science pontifications which just make him laughable.
Oh, NASA, hero organisation of my childhood! Now can’t launch anyone into space, is controlled by pork-barrellers, and employs nuts like Hansen.
“How have the mighty fallen”.
I can picture Del Boy Hansen leaning against his Error Bar with a glass of Old Pulteney, telling tales of Global Weirding as the Edinburgh chill creeps into his old bones. I wonder what the canny Scots think of his prophecies? Lets hope no-one lifts the lid on him.
http://youtu.be/AtboTwW-Jao
” … with the help of tremendous resources” ?!
What the hell is this jackass talking about? Even if it were true that “BIG OIL” was funding the skeptics, it’s a drop in the bucket compared to the funding that the alarmists are getting from BIG GOVERNMENT. Plus, the alarmist side has had virtually absolute control of the journals, though it looks like that’s starting to change now, thanks to Climategate. The only advantages we have are 1) the exposure of the deceipt, corruption, and arrogance of the other side, and 2) the cooperation of Mother Nature. Yes, we’re winning alright, not because of tremendous resources, but in SPITE of tremendous resources applied against us. Can the son of a witch not at least be honest about THAT much?
Alex:
How bout “climate apostates”?
He’s kidding right? For example the public in the UK were promised milder winters. It failed and they used their own eyes. Furthermore, the IPCCs temperature projections have diverged with reality and so on.
On the issue of “tremendous resources” need I remind him that the self-confessed liar, Peter Gleick, thought the same thing too until he inadvertantly revealed a relatively poorly funded empherically based science machine. I want to see evidence of the tremendous resources on the sceptics side.