Sigh, it is the same old tired hateful argument from Dessler about tobacco. On the plus side is shows how desperate they are to have to resort to this garbage. [Full disclosure- both of my parents died prematurely from tobacco related diseases. – Anthony]
Climate Change Prof on PBS ‘Frontline’ Tuesday | TAMU Times
http://tamutimes.tamu.edu/2012/10/22/climate-change-prof-on-pbs-frontline-tuesday/
Climate Change Prof on PBS ‘Frontline’ Tuesday PBS Frontline, the popular investigative TV show, will feature Texas A&M University climate scientist Andrew Dessler in a segment titled “A Climate of Doubt” at 9 p.m. Tuesday (Oct. 23) on KAMU-TV. Following the broadcast, it will also be available for viewing here.
The episode will center on the public perception of climate change and how that perception has changed since the 2008 elections to this year’s political joust. After being hotly discussed in 2008, climate change has since been less of a factor in the political arena, observers note.
“Four years ago, there was widespread acknowledgement and the argument was ‘how do we deal with this,’” Dessler said. “What the skeptics have done is made a huge effort to cast doubt on the science of climate change, much like tobacco companies’ efforts to cast doubt on the science connecting tobacco and lung cancer.”
Even though the argument is made that thousands of scientists dispute the science of climate change, there are few true experts on climate change worldwide that doubt its occurrence because the science is solid, Dessler noted.
“There is some legitimate uncertainty, of course,” Dessler said, “but that is whether the climate will warm four or eight degrees over the coming century –whether it will be bad, or catastrophic – not if it’s happening.”
Frontline will spotlight the organizations that have been the most influential anti-climate change voices and attempt to explain how they succeeded in shifting the public debate and opinion.
There is a wide array of reasons for opposing action on climate change, but by delaying the corrective process, the opposition is only making the situation worse, Dessler said.
“Every year you wait makes the degree of change worse, and makes altering the change more expensive,” Dessler said. “They are giving people an excuse to do nothing by inducing doubt.”
Goldie says:
October 22, 2012 at 7:52 pm
Just gotta keep saying this – Al Gore’s family fortune comes from Tobacco.
The above is almost as true as saying George Washington is famous for growing cotton. Unless you are trying for the big lie thing, truth is a better option. Why keep saying something that is so far from even a grain of truth? From lots of material to read, try this:
http://www.slate.com/articles/briefing/articles/2000/04/was_albert_gore_sr_a_crook.html
Dessler is a bully and a political hack, trying to recreate his days as climate science adviser to then-VP Gore. I am betting he had his furniture picked out for his nice office as Gore’s climate czar, if Gore had won the 2000 election.
Now he is stuck in a conservative A&M University where he can only glower in rage at the center of the energy world, Houston just over the horizon from College Station.
He knows he is bullshyting when he makes these sorts of bogus claims, but they make him feel better. Heck, it might even get him some nice attention from the co-eds.
“…there are few true experts on climate change worldwide that doubt its occurrence because the science is solid, Dessler noted.”
–
So there are few experts who make their living from hyping climate change who are willing to bite the hand that feeds them. Does that surprise anyone?
Dessler suffers from tobacco lawyer envy, as do most alarmists and Greens of all stripes. He needs to learn that in the case of tobacco most folks had some first hand experience of the harm.
Texas A & M….home of the presidential library no other university wanted.
Texas A & M….home of the needless “Texas State Climatologist”…aka….Weather Astrology.
Texas A & M….home of the warmist who would only debate Lindzen….IF NO VISUAL AIDS WERE ALLOWED AND NO MENTION OF THE STOLEN CLIMATEGATE EMAILS WAS ALLOWED. This same warmist then turned defense witness in the multiple Penn-Mann whitewashes.
Texas A & M….home of Happy Andy who has repeatedly denied a debate saying, “No body in Texas is qualified to debate me. The last time i wanted to debate we had to import somebody from Canada.”
Texas A & M….home of the Climatology Aggie Joke.
the irony is this is what the CAGW crowd are endorsing!
infochangeindia: Keya Acharya: Indian tobacco giant turns carbon philanthropist
The India Tobacco Company claims to have stepped into the carbon sinks business in order to benefit village communities. But who really profits?…
The fortunes of the poor village turned when three years ago it began growing eucalyptus trees for the multi-billion-dollar India Tobacco Company (ITC), whose paper division buys the logs for wood pulp…
With new interest in green projects among industrialised nations, ITC hopes to turn a new profit from the village tree projects. It plans to do this by collaborating with businesses abroad that are trying to meet international clean air obligations under the Kyoto Protocol’s Clean Development Mechanism, or CDM…
With other big names in the Indian corporate world, like Reliance, Tata, Birla and Ambuja also involved in CDM projects, India tops the world list of CDM ventures…
But Miguel Lovera, a plantation expert from the international Global Forest Coalition, is cautious about the benefits. He says that carbon sinks are not viable on small scales like in Basavaga because carbon content must be verified before it can be sold, and measuring carbon absorption in the trees is only cost-effective on a large scale.
Lovera also warns of soil degradation from projects like the one in Basavaga, because single-species, cloned trees are very hard on the land…
http://infochangeindia.org/corporate-responsibility/features/indian-tobacco-giant-turns-carbon-philanthropist.html
Scientists: Do you wonder why people don’t respect you as much as they used to?
I get around 1.4 deg C from 1880 to 2100 using gistemp and a linear extrapolation.
What universe is this guy from?
Imperial Tobacco: Our climate change strategy
Climate change opportunities
Climate change also presents a number of opportunities, such as making use of renewable energy tariffs and tax incentives that can help deliver return on investment for reducing energy consumption and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions…
Using our community investment process, we have already made several investments aimed at proving concepts for generating carbon offsets within our supply chain. We have provided guidance to our suppliers to show the potential for an additional income stream from carbon credits by enlarging the reforestation activities they are currently undertaking, in order to be self sufficient in wood for tobacco curing. The extra financial incentive from carbon credits may help encourage suppliers to increase the size of managed woodlots in tobacco-growing areas…
http://www.imperial-tobacco.com/index.asp?page=390
pat,
Hilarious.
Dessler said. “What the skeptics have done is made a huge effort to cast doubt on the science of climate change….”
Huge effort?
Without wishing to minimise the magnificent work Steve, Anthony and many others have done and continue to do, not sure if this is really a “huge effort.”
All we have to do is keep pointing out that the Emperor’s scrawny arse is still in full public view.
The real effort is just keeping up with the massive number of taxpayer-funded fraudulent and incompetent shroudwaving fantasies that the likes of Dessler keep on regurgitating.
I’m confused, are they talking about human induced climate change or natural climate change?
From the interview with Phil Jones in February of 2010, the fastest trend was 0.166 C/decade from 1975 to 1998. Nothing has happened so far this century, so even if this maximum trend kicked in right now and was maintained for the remaining 8.7 decades in this century, the total warming would be 8.7 x 0.166 = 1.44 C. So how does Dessler come up with four or eight degrees over the coming century? Not only was the higher rate never sustained over a long period of time as climate seems to go in cycles, but the effect of added CO2 is logarithmic. On what grounds should we believe him?
If “the consensus” (the ‘science’) was so incontrovertible and settled like they claim, we wouldn’t be able to cast doubt in the public’s minds as easy as we do. .
Dessler makes the case for this: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-10-22/guest-post-dysfunctional-dishonest-insane-and-intolerable , might be a bit foaming at the moth for some.
With pal-reviewed papers, 16 years of NO WARMING, inaccurate and invalidated models, CAGW temperature projections exceeding actual temperature anomalies by over 2 standard deviations, etc., of course the “logical” course of action is to comparing skeptics to holocaust deniers and lung cancer merchants….
There is now a high probability that 2013 will go La Nina, which, if it does happen, would lead to at least 18 years of NO WARMING! On top of that, PDO is going negative, Antarctic ice mass and size are going, ISO negative, the weakest solar cycle since 1715 starting in just 8 years, AMO peaked in 2011 and starts it slow slide to its cooling phase, and on and on.
CAGW supporters know these natural phenomenon are all conspiring (lol) against their invalidated theory. If a theory can’t be defended, then the next best thing is to attack the opposing view.
When will this farce end? The only “catastrophe” is that this failed CAGW theory has lasted as long as it has, and the $TRILLIONS that have been wasted to avoid a “problem” that doesn’t exist.
martinbrumby says:
October 22, 2012 at 10:19 pm
“All we have to do is keep pointing out that the Emperor’s scrawny arse is still in full public view”
———————————————————————————————————————-
And He`s displaying His hopeless inadequacies in other , even less appealing areas too (o:
Someone should check if Dessler obtained his PhD from a mail order University. I recall a certain Judge in Australia (who was jailed over contempt of court after signing a false “Statutory Declaration”) bought (I think for $US9000) a PhD from a “University” I think called South West Texas University.
Dessler sure knows nothing about heat transfer. There seems to be a lot of corruption in sport (around world and USA)- some of it at Universities. Is it possible there is corruption in other subject areas at Universities?
We must send Dessler the following URL link that shows the comparison of IPCC projections with observation, which show global mean temperature below projections if CO2 had been held constant at 2000 level.
http://bit.ly/SPzOHn
“Even though the argument is made that thousands of scientists dispute the science of climate change, there are few true experts on climate change worldwide that doubt its occurrence because
the science is solidtheir careers depend on it, Dessler noted.”There, fixed it for ya…
“What the skeptics have done is made a huge effort to cast doubt on the science of climate change, much like tobacco companies’ efforts to cast doubt on the science connecting tobacco and lung cancer.”
Yeah, because the tobacco companies fought for more transparent science, for facts that are available to everyone and can be verified, and for scientists to follow both the scientific method and federal laws … oh wait no they didn’t. The actions of Big Climate mirror the actions of Big Tobacco.
“Even though the argument is made that thousands of scientists dispute the science of climate change, there are few true experts on climate change worldwide that doubt its occurrence because the science is solid, Dessler noted.”
Quite laughable coming form Dr. Dessler, who’s own papers assessing climate sensitivity rely on using OLS to fit a straight line to a scatter plot of two uncontrolled variables.
The fundamental assumption of OLS regression is that one variable is a “controlled variable” which has negligible experimental error. Using it as he does WILL give the WRONG answer.
Just switch the axes the other way around and do the same OLS on the same data and it will be wrong in the other direction. Amazing.
These guys can’t even get the high school maths right yet wave around their PhD and Professorships to pretend to be authorities.
“cast doubt on the science”
Doubt is the heart of science. Or should I say the lungs of science?
“Now I am skeptical of “climate science” as defined by “Climate Change Prof.” Andrew Emory Dessler. I do not understand what he and others are doing. It isn’t science and it isn’t right/smart/helpful.”
Simple, he’s doing what the tobacco industry did. Misrepresenting science to ensure their own income. Talk the pot calling the kettle black.
“…there are few true experts on climate change worldwide that doubt its occurrence because the science is solid.”
What a horribly and intentionally misleading statement:
1. No one doubts climate change is occurring. The Earth’s climate has been changing for the last 4.6 billion years.
2. If you have any doubts related to climate change you can’t be an expert? Apparently so.
3. The science is solid? Dr. Dessler, please show us your empirical data. Your climate science is ~99% bluster and ~1% solid science.