Tom Nelson points out that Michael Mann’s sabbatical gives him time to take a break from his sober, objective, apolitical, just-the-facts, hard-science-only work to discuss the environmentalist movement on:
Seems rather ho-hum until you look up what network “Inside Story” is on:
Great, maybe after appearing on Al Jazeera, he’ll be inspired to some sort of Hockey Stick Jihad. Oh, wait.
He seems desperate to me.
http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/insidestoryus2012/2012/04/201242462010275243.html
Antony,
It doesn’t matter how much you abuse the privilege of having my email address to reveal details about me this post is still a fail.
And just for your info you’re assuming to know too much about me just from my email address. Yes the address is from a non-profit medical research institute but for the past 15 years I’ve only ever worked for stockmarket-listed companies.The present model in the pharmaceutical industry is to take ‘academic research’ and spin off companies with venture capital money and private investment, that’s were I sit in small spin-off biotech. So no ‘academic bubble’ for me unfortunately, the job disappears when the investor money dries up. The job even disappears when you’re successful and the products and patents get gobbled up by pharma giants. Heads you lose, tails you lose.
From what I know of academic medical research there are no free rides. It encourages intelligent and enthusiastic young scientists to work hard for relatively poor pay and then rewards most of them by spitting them out at the mid-career stage. Only a very small number of people actually make a life long career in academic science, most of the people I know or knew in science had to have a plan B. The ‘academic bubble’ is an anachronism, long past. But I guess it’s such a seductive image for disgruntled tax-payers that it’s hard to let go.
REPLY: Abuse the privilege? Gosh, next time I’ll just address you as some off color title rather than your name, and not offer praise to your organization for not having an AGW bent, which they could easily do. Well good to hear your .edu doesn’t make you an academic, but you still missed the satire….and it doesn’t matter how much you dislike the fact that I don’t like what Mann or Al Jazeera does, IMO they are still both FAIL. BTW its Anthony, with an h, you keep misspelling it. I’m told that lack of attention to detail will get you in trouble in medical research. – Anthony
bladeshearer;
I’ve seen apologists for a lot of things, but I never thought I would see an apologist for biased reporting. But at days end, you are correct. The biased reporters with an agenda to outnumber the reporters who strive for excellence that there remains little hope for excellence and objectivity. Which is why the mainstream media is in steady decline and being replaced by active debate of the issues in the blogosphere. Newsprint is all but dead, TV is close behind. Radio is hanging on but only because of “talk radio” which, while not the free for all of the blogosphere, still allows for some level of active debate rather than the pablum served up on TV and newsprint disguised as journalism.
Your understanding of elections in places like Gaza is equally sad. Elections in which opposition newspapers are burned down, opposition television and radio stations forcefully shuttered, and opposition leaders thrown off of roof tops hardly constitutes any rational definition of democracy.
Is that 20 with some weird precision? Or did you just mix separators?
I gather that the English AJ service differs “radically” from the Arab-language broadcasts, which are far more forthright in their jihadism, and very inflammatory. But as a non-arabic-speaker, that’s hearsay, of course.
Does anyone know what Mike Mann was doing in Vienna? I feel uneasy when he is around.
Found out. It’s the European Geosciences Union General Assembly 2012, where he got that “Oeschger”- Medal yesterday. Video is here http://www.cntv.at/EGU2012/index.php?modid=18&a=show&pid=182 At Min. 7:50 the twenty or so medalists are named and enter the stage and that’s it. Shakehands only, no speech or laudatio. So it’s not that a big thing.
davidmhoffer says: Your understanding of elections in places like Gaza is equally sad. Elections in which opposition newspapers are burned down, opposition television and radio stations forcefully shuttered, and opposition leaders thrown off of roof tops hardly constitutes any rational definition of democracy.
On January 25, 2006, elections were held for the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC), the legislature of the Palestinian National Authority (PNA). Final results show that Hamas won the election. The British Conservative head of the European Parliament’s monitoring team described the polls as “extremely professional, in line with international standards, free, transparent and without violence”. From Wikipedia
bladeshearere;
The British Conservative head of the European Parliament’s monitoring team described the polls as “extremely professional, in line with international standards, free, transparent and without violence”.
>>>>>>>>>>>
right. the day if the poll there was no violence. so all the burning of opposition papers, forced shut down of opposition TV and radio stations, murder of opposition leadership prior to the election is OK and never affected the election?. Your bias is ugly, obvious, and your defense of bias in journalism is nothing more than giving youirself a free pass to excuse your own obvious bias.
Anthony, “I think Al Jazeera has an agenda, and they wear it on their sleeve. I don’t watch it for that reason.” May I conclude you stopped watching FOX News?
REPLY: Actually I don’t watch Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, nor CBS/ABC/NBC and other sat news feeds (inlcuding Al-J) much anymore, and I used to be an avid watcher of TV news. They almost all have agendas of some kind. Now, I rely on the Internet almost 100% for my news. – Anthony
@davidmhoffer says: April 24, 2012 at 10:32 am
David, you miss my point. I did not say they were “good”. I said they were a good “source”. I never said I agree with their editorial views, I merely said that you know what their agenda is since they do not keep it a secret. Knowing that, you can then cull the truth from their reports. This is in stark contrast with the MSM of America who lies about their agenda, attempts to hide their bias, and report opinion as news.
@Some European says: April 25, 2012 at 4:01 am
And for us “stupid” colonials, could you possibly educate us on the Fox Agenda? And provide specific examples?
I beg to disagree with the reaction to al-Jazeera. The debate gave equal time to the alarmist and skeptical sides. When has this happened in any of our western media?
What I noticed most about the debate was that Mitt Romney has put forward a winning strategy by putting economic growth ahead of Mann’s policy aims, the latter delayed for ~15 years. In my opinion a very smart move: check-mate for alarm.
davidmhoffer says: “so all the burning of opposition papers, forced shut down of opposition TV and radio stations, murder of opposition leadership prior to the election is OK and never affected the election?
In that election, Hamas was the opposition. A better news source might help you get your facts straight.
bladeshearer;
In that election, Hamas was the opposition. A better news source might help you get your facts straight.>>>>>
Wow. You want to mince words? Fine. Newspapers opposed to Hamas were burned down. TV and radio stations opposed to Hamas were shut dfown by armed thugs on orders from Hamas. Politicians who were publicly opposed to Hamas were murdered by being thrown from roof tops. But the day of the poll itself there was little or no violence.
I have my facts straight. Your bias is astounding and the attempt to confuse the issue by substituting the user of the term “opposition” to mean “official opposition of the current government” when it was clear to anyone who read what I wrote that the intent of my use of the word “opposition” was to mean “opposition to Hamas”.
So, you’ve tried to ignore murder and force being used against Hamas’ opponnents, when I pointed it out, you attempted to convince people it never happened by quoting from an official source in regard to events limited to the day of polling itself, and then had the audacity to try and confuse the matter by twisting my use of the word “opposition” to mean the opposite of its inent.
You are a fine example of exactly what is wrong with today’s brand of journalism.
philjourdan says:
April 25, 2012 at 4:33 am
@davidmhoffer says: April 24, 2012 at 10:32 am
David, you miss my point. I did not say they were “good”. I said they were a good “source”. I never said I agree with their editorial views, I merely said that you know what their agenda is since they do not keep it a secret. Knowing that, you can then cull the truth from their reports>>>>
1. You THINK you know their agenda.You THINK that you are smart enough to discern the facts from their biased reporting. Their agenda is EXTREMELY sophisticated and not nearly so straight forward as some would think.
2. By supporting them in the fashion that you do, citing them as a good “source” you increase their credibility, their revenue, their audience. Congrats. They’ve suckered your into supporting them so that they can broadcast their agenda to even more people.
HR whines:
“From what I know of academic medical research there are no free rides. It encourages intelligent and enthusiastic young scientists to work hard for relatively poor pay and then rewards most of them by spitting them out at the mid-career stage. Only a very small number of people actually make a life long career in academic science, most of the people I know or knew in science had to have a plan B. The ‘academic bubble’ is an anachronism, long past. But I guess it’s such a seductive image for disgruntled tax-payers that it’s hard to let go.”
Nobody forces anyone in this country (yet…) to pursue any particular career path. You made your choices, HR – don’t whine to us about it.
BTW I have a Ph.D. in mechanical engineering, and deliberately chose NOT to go into academia. It was a choice I made knowing full well that an academic career was much too uncertain to raise a family on.
Finally…
“The ‘academic bubble’ is an anachronism, long past. But I guess it’s such a seductive image for disgruntled tax-payers that it’s hard to let go.”
As a father who is putting his oldest daughter through college, it’s not “disgruntled taxypayers” but “disgruntled parents paying outrageous tuitions”. Why do tuitions increase by double digit percentages every year? Academic bubble indeed…
davidmhoffer: “burning of opposition papers, forced shut down of opposition TV and radio stations, murder of opposition leadership prior to the election
Interesting allegations. Your source?
I took part in the first Earth Day. Well, I took part because it was force on me by my 7th grade teachers. That day I went home very worried. I told my father we had to stop pollution, because if we don’t there would be another ice age. I was repeating my teacher’s alarmism. My father, who had seen it all before, said “yeah and a few years ago they were worried about warming, and give it a few years and they will be worried about warming again, these things come and go.”
David Hoffer wrote:
Newspapers opposed to Hamas were burned down. TV and radio stations opposed to Hamas were shut dfown by armed thugs on orders from Hamas. Politicians who were publicly opposed to Hamas were murdered by being thrown from roof tops. But the day of the poll itself there was little or no violence.
Not that I doubt you, but being a skeptic, what is the source of that info? I always like links to info like that. It sounds right, but it’s nice to be able to verify.
@davidmhoffer says: April 25, 2012 at 6:41 am
I doubt my reading some articles on their web site is going to bring them any money. The ads that pop up? I know not to patronize them.
I understand your contempt for them, but think you anger is misplaced. I do not read them for opinion. I read them for information on an area of the world that we get only lies from in the normal press.
You need to trust your own judgement more
re request for sources:
I follow events in the middle east on a daily basis, and from multiple news sources (yes, even AJ). So, my assertions about newspapers being burnt down, opposition leaders being thrown from roof tops, and so on are from memory. Links to same regarding events leading up to an election that was held over half a decade ago? Sorry, not handy.
But these things were not a secret at the time, they were widely reported by multiple media sources, though they hardly made the “front page” in most media.
I get it now. Mike Mann is the John Edwards of climate science. Stay on point with the catch phrases and rake in the money from deep pockets that don’t think past those catch phrases.
davidmhoffer says: “…my assertions about newspapers being burnt down, opposition leaders being thrown from roof tops, and so on are from memory.”
Sounds like Phil Jones’ “the dog ate my homework” response to data requests. In fact, it’s easy to find online reports on the 2006 Palestinian election won by Hamas. Here are just a few:
Javier Solana, the European Union’s foreign policy chief, said in a statement that the Palestinian people had “voted democratically and peacefully.” http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/26/AR2006012600372.html
“We drove to Ramallah to meet with the leaders of the Central Election Commission, one of the most honest and effective I have ever known…It seemed obvious to us and other observers that the election was orderly and peaceful and that there was a clear preference for Hamas candidates even in historically strong Fatah communities.” Jimmy Carter. http://www.cartercenter.org/news/documents/doc2287.html
No mentions of newspapers burnt, radio/TV shut down or opposition leaders murdered, etc. I welcome anyone to find and post credible reports of Hamas violence leading up to the January 2006 election.
you’ve already made up your mind bladeshearer. your bias on the matter is clear, and I’m not about to start googling for articles that are drowned out in the long lists of articles on the elections themselves on which there were many times as much written, much of it biased reporting attempting to paint the elections in Gaza ad democratic. They are as bbiased a set of reporting as one finds about global warming in the mainstream media.
I suggest also if you want to bother to actually educate yourself instead of making snide comments about dogs and homework that you also take a look at what happened AFTER the election. The violence got worse, much worse, and Fatah’s leadership was pretty myuch exterminated in Gaza. Those that survived fked to the west bank.
Even if you could make the case that the election in 2005 was democratic, in the aftermath, Hamas made certain that they would never have to compete in an election again. Fatah has been eradicated in Gaza, there is no democratic oipposition, and there is no democracy.
snipe away, I’m dropping this thread.
@Anthony, good on you! That makes at least two of us!
Al Jazeera English: In my opinion, by far the best source of news available today, and far better than watching the appalling NBC or worse FOX. And better than BBC.
Anywhere I can get it in Asia, this is the new channel I watch. Precise, interesting, varied, and has good interviews which are not all about the host trying to prove he is the biggest loudmouth and bully in the room.
Biased? Sure! Just like every other channel! It is a news source, not the holy grail of truth and light. If you’re gonna watch and listen to the MSM you better be prapared to do some of your own interpretation.