I just watched this video interview on MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow show (h/t to Poptech)
Despite the tacky caption, it was what Dr. Muller didn’t talk about that was, ahem, the best part.
To my surprise, when questioned on the issue, he didn’t list station quality as one of the things he ruled out. I think my message was delivered.
If you can get past the “genius” lead in part, its worth watching. Video here
A: Sorry you had to sit through Maddow’s show, and B: the ‘Weather’ Channel is harping about this every hour or so. (We have to have it up in the office 24/7.)
Reblogged this on Climate Ponderings.
MSNBC is so partisan on this there was no journalistic objectivity at all.
BTW Muller never claimed to be a skeptic until after the climategate e-mails were released. But he’s quite happy now to play the role of convert. I thought this guy had integrity, I’m really not so sure now. His whole position now seems contrived.
Deception!
Hi!
To map out who is who and why in the CAGWpropaganda circus. Who made Muller a “Voice” in the debate? Who appointed him as a speaker of “scpticism” in the kongressional hearings and put him on the stage and gave him a role? who is orcestrating this deceptive fars? Any leads?
Are you awere that we are dealing with strategies controlled by experts on information/desinformation an exact copy of how the Sovjet orcestrated thier propaganda. many “defectors” where programmed to leave desinformation and make it believeble. Muller has played his part extremely clumsy, bit the set up is beutiful.. Pretend to be a sceptic, use the allready destroyed credability of M Mann as a collateral to gain confidence and trust to give teh CAGWalarmism a reptuational clean voice.
So who made him sit in the kongressional hearing and who first introduced Muller as a “voice” in the debate. Today he has eggs floating all ower his face. Better performed it would have been a beutiful deception but the final made us all laugh. No more reaalstic than this filmclip.
Muller in action:
rk says:
July 31, 2012 at 12:02 am
“Why the fear of nuclear? I mean really, here you have a genius who’s afraid to talk about what to do 50 years from now? Clean fracking? Are you kidding? That’s the future? I guess the age of visionary physicists is over….so sad.”
Paging Dr Sheldon Cooper….. Dr Cooper………
Bazinga!!!
Pensionable age, book out, needs the money I guess! Consensus science? What’s that all about? They still keep carping back to consensus, that is the stuff of politics, NOT science! Apart from a couple of Greeks in the 4th century BC, they general scientific consensus was that the world was a flat disc, & that if you sailed too far in any direction you would fall off the edge to oblivion or be eaten by sea-monsters. The scientific consensus up until the 16th & 17th centuries, (endorsed with savage brutality by the IPCC of the time, the Holy Roman Catholic Church) was that the Earth was at the centre of the universe, & that the Sun, known planets, & stars revolved around it, & that sins could be forgicen for a Papal indulgence (slipping a few notes to the local priest in real terms). Then came the age of enlightenment via Copernicus & Gallileo in turn, the consensus changed. “Heavier than air flying machines are impossible!”………Lord Kelvin, President of the Royal Society (they know best, their members couldn’t see what all the fuss was about with this silly television machine of John Logie-Baird’s in the 1920s, who would want one, what is it for?) in 1895! The list is endless but they don’t want to see it, it hurts too much! 🙂
Latimer Alder says: July 31, 2012 at 2:17 am
Quite so. Perhaps he still fancies himself as, well, a Delinquent Teenager (who aspires to be the world’s top climate expert 😉 ) … His personal website is also quite a garish sight to behold – as I found when I was researching Will the real Richard Muller please stand up last October.
Funny how these Meeedddiiiaaa types never reverse the caption – ‘Former CAGW\Climate change\climate disruption believer’?
There is currently a story up at http://slashdot.org about Anthony’s paper. There is a lot of ad hominem. A bunch of us should go over there and straighten them up. We only have about an hour before the story becomes stale.
Richard Muller with full head of dark hair in 2008 before he crossed Anthony Watts.
http://probaway.wordpress.com/2008/09/30/physics-for-future-presidents-by-richard-muller-review/
Richard Muller four years later after he crossed Anthony Watts.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/07/30/richard-muller-get-rid-of-coal-power-to-halt-global-warming/
Moral of the story: HOLY RAPID AGING BATMAN! DO NOT CROSS ANTHONY WATTS!
P.S. to mods
18 hours ago you told me don’t get personal when I gave Steve Mosher a very very mild spank
now it’s a free-for-all no-holds-barred tag team mud wrestling contest on Muller
I REALLY need that list enumerating who’s fair game and who isn’t
[REPLY: Muller, Hansen, Mann, Gore, Gleick, Weepy Bill McKibben & Jones are always in season as long as it is not threatening, defamatory or obscene. The earlier point was to focus on the content of Anthony’s paper and not score points with other commenters. Besides, Mosh is like everyones eccentric, black-sheep uncle: still part of the family. -REP]
Stephanie Clague (July 31st at 12.10 a.m.)
very succinct! I wish that I could put it like that at will.
The still pic at the top of this post reminds me of a possum in the headlights, or another saying that is used here in New Zealand and elsewhere, “He looks like a stunned mullet!”
The question is, are these people now in a state of denial that they have been doing the wrong thing for so long? Their ivory tower is steadily loosing its foundations, which weren’t made of the ‘right stuff’ in the first place. I predict that there will only be one ‘catastrophic’ outcome amongst all of this in the end, and it will be their demise. Catastrophic for them that is.
Actually the picture of Dr Muller at the top reminds me of two photos shown here on WUWT several years ago of Dr Keith Briffa. The first when he was a young, bright-eyed, shiny looking scientist eager to get amongst the natural world with all of his skills. In the second Dr Briffa shows serious signs of wear and tear, like the game is no longer fun anymore. Some of his more ardent cohorts are changing the rules on him. He doesn’t look like he really wants to be a part of it, but he has to stay in it for the long haul even though it isn’t what he signed up for. A real conscience will do that to you.
I’m not to sure about Dr Muller though. By the time that he realises that it is the freight train of public concern heading in his direction, it may be too late to get out of its way! For Dr Muller it could be Jim Hansen’s ‘Death Train’ personified.
This is all metaphorical BTW!
Cheers
Coops
Notice the caption. Not Skeptic. That is MSNBC for you.
Watching anything on MSNBC (other than the Olympics) makes me throw up in my mouth and want to stick sharp objects in my eyeballs.
5:15 minutes in “…I’m hoping we can settle the science…”
Its a real shame that we have to have this circus.
Steve Mc knows Muller and thinks he’s a good egg. Thats enough for me.
It’s a shame the way it has been spun, some will say by Muller himself. He is painted as a former CC denier, a skeptic. In reality what Muller has always been is a scientist – sceptical as a default position. I say nothing about his recent “conversion”, but do note his comments on the hockey stick work. (No doubt Mann has been waiting ages to put the boot in).
It is true that BEST might need a rejig after Watts’ paper, but isn’t that how science works?
In my opinion there is far too much here that is personal. What will we say if Muller comes out in the next few weeks and agrees with Watts and says time to go back to the drawing board and have another look? Will all of those who have insulted him apologise?
Maddow asks him at the start if the intro had misrepresented him (he said no) but then the MSNBC caption rather amusingly labelled him as “RICHARD MULLER, FMR. CLIMATE-CHANGE DENIER” (e.g. at 6 minutes) which presumably he had no idea about as he was being interviewed.
Muller may not even realise it now, as his title kept switching between his Berkeley/BEST description.
Once you’ve made an appearance as a friendly guest on Maddow (or any other MSNBC show for that matter), whatever credibility you may have once had, is completely shot. The woman is mendacious slime.
And why didn’t the program get a response from a realist scientist? For example, a response geologist and palaeontologist Dr. Sebatstion Luning would have been interesting. Or how about a response from Dr Henrik Svensmark… that would have been even more amazing?
I keep wondering why Muller is now pushing the global warming doctrine.
They say the answer can often be found by simply “following the money”. So what’s going to be revealed next!!!!!
I got the impression that the Koch brothers were right up there peddling this fantasy.
Why do they accept being painted as the bad guys?
DaveE.
Well done, following up the intentionally funny video with an unintentionally funny one.
Fortunately, MSNBC is not mainstream and the appearances of articles/opinion pieces in the NYT is dooming that rag; one only need look at the ‘profit and loss’ statement of the NYT over the years to objectively “observe the decline” …
.
There are some people whose daughter’s papers I will no longer read.
===============
Here Muller says there’s a difference between being a scientific skeptic and a climate skeptic, and he makes it clear he was never a climate skeptic.
Has he walked this back, or are we just rewriting the past again to suit the present.