(CREDIT
Patrick Mansell, Penn State)
Guest essay by Eric Worrall
h/t Dr. Willie Soon – Identity thief Peter Gleick, who impersonated a Heartland Director while serving as AGU Ethics Chairman, and whose swag of rather boring stolen Heartland emails somehow got spiced up with a a nasty forgery, has just been congratulated by Michael Mann for receiving his Carl Sagan Science Popularization Award.
Congratulations Peter---well deserved for sure. You honor Sagan's legacy with your tremendous science outreach efforts my friend. 🙂 https://t.co/ctckVxac5a
— Dr. Michael E. Mann (@MichaelEMann) September 2, 2018
From the Carl Sagan Award Website;
PRESS RELEASE August 31, 2018 WINNER OF CARL SAGAN PRIZE FOR SCIENCE POPULARIZATION ANNOUNCED
SAN FRANCISCO — Wonderfest, the 21-year-old Bay Area Beacon of Science, announced today that environmental scientist Dr. Peter H. Gleick has won the 2018 Carl Sagan Prize for Science Popularization.
The prize, funded by Aduro Biotech, is presented specifically to recognize and encourage researchers who “have contributed mightily to the public understanding and appreciation of science.” Past Sagan Prize winners include UC Berkeley biochemist Jennifer Doudna, Stanford neuroscientist Robert Sapolsky, and SETI Institute astronomer Jill Tarter. The prize includes a $5000 cash award, and will be formally presented at a by-invitation event in San Francisco on November 9th, Carl Sagan’s birthday.
“Wonderfest was born in 1997, just a few months after the death of researcher and popularizer Carl Sagan,” notes the organization’s founding executive director, Tucker Hiatt. “Wonderfest’s work has been dedicated to Sagan’s memory ever since. Sagan would be proud to know that Peter Gleick, so renowned for his research and his outreach, has received Wonderfest’s Sagan Prize for 2018.”
Wonderfest is a nonprofit corporation dedicated to informal science education and popularization, particularly among adults in the San Francisco Bay Area. Several times every month, Wonderfest produces in-person science events — with accompanying online videos — in an effort to “enlarge the concept of scientific community.” Wonderfest also produces “Science Envoy” workshops to develop the science communication skills of Bay Area Ph.D. students.
Gleick is president emeritus and co-founder of the Pacific Institute for Studies in Development, Environ- ment, and Security in Oakland, California. The Pacific Institute, created in 1987, is a nonprofit research institution dedicated to creating and advancing solutions to the world’s most pressing water challenges.Gleick holds a B.S. degree in Engineering and Applied Science from Yale University, and an M.S. and Ph.D. in Energy and Resources from UC Berkeley. Among his more than thirty honors and awards are membership in the U.S. National Academy of Sciences and a MacArthur Foundation Fellowship (the so- called “Genius” award).
Gleick has coauthored or edited 11 books, more than 70 journal articles, and more than 80 peer- reviewed reports, book chapters, and proceedings. A strong public communicator, he gives dozens of public lectures annually; writes op-eds and popular essays on climate, water, and environmental issues for major newspapers, social media outlets, and blogs; and is popular on Twitter for his science and policy commentary. Gleick is regularly called upon by state and federal government agencies for advice on climate change and water resources.
Gleick said: “I’m thrilled to be honored with the Sagan Prize. Carl Sagan’s early efforts to bring science challenges and solutions to the public and policy makers was an inspiration to me, and has encouraged a whole generation of scientists now willing to speak up on the critical challenges of our day.”
Additional information: https://wonderfest.org/sagan-prize http://www.pacinst.org
Contact:
http://www.gleick.com
Tucker Hiatt
Executive Director, Wonderfest Email: tucker@wonderfest.org Tel: 415-577-1126
Read more: http://wonderfest.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/SaganPrize2018-release-peter-gleick.pdf
My question – what level of dishonesty and public humiliation do you have to achieve before the establishment climate science community decides your conduct is unacceptable?
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I see Sagan as being the ‘science guy’ of his day. He was a good communicator but it is somewhat ironic that his award goes to a faker when Sagan’s own science on Venus’s ‘greenhouse effect’ was a tad off-beam.
This is how it goes.
When people mess up, they get promoted, it’s a face saving exercise. When it first came out what this sack of uselessness did, committed a criminal act, and then created a forgery it is alleged, he was almost immediately promoted (demoted).
Gleick did not act alone, I guarantee you that. This is the result.
Mann, as we say in Ireland, has a neck like a jockey’s bollocks
It’s being “kicked upstairs”. When it’s considered cheaper and easier to promote screw-ups to positions where the damage they can do is minimized, than go through the headaches involved in terminating their employment.
Didn’t I read somewhere a couple of years ago that it was some rather dodgy interpretation of some aspect of atmospheric science by that same Carl Sagan that started all the positive-feedback-CO2-caused-back-radiation-tipping-point nonsense in the first place? Can’t remember the details, unfortunately.
Perhaps Gleick does actually deserve the award!
Sagan’s reputation was largely built on the book “Intelligent life in the Universe” which was actually a slightly revised version of Iosif Shklovsky´s “Vselennaya, zhizn’, razum”.
Boo hoo! Boo hoo!
Don’t cry, your mommy will come back for you some day.
Carl Sagan Award is worth sh*t if that is who they give it to.
well non science but the bush clintons n bummer era shows fame and money gets em out of everything any normal person would befired/ jailed for.
this pairs no different
Mosher might know the answer.
He might, but he’d rather just bash people, as seen above.
He also seems very reluctant to come forth now with the evidence he found that Gleick did forge said document.
Frauds of a Feather Frolic together.. We know of the fraud of MM and PG. How about Carl S? Well, Carl S. was on the “Nuclear Freeze” bandwagon, literally claiming that a post nuclear exchange would plunge the Earth into an “Ice Age”. (Ironic, I know.) Then came Gulf War No. 1. Carl S. bloviated about Saddam H. blowing up the Kuwait oil fields and the resulting smoke causing an “oil field” winter. Saddam DID blow up 750 oil field wells, and yes, they burned for 6 months. American HERO (compared to these ZEROES) Red Adair and his team put them OUT, and there was NO noticeable “climate change”. Sagan was shown to be the fraud that he was! So isn’t it appropriate…that these three are so wonderfully associated?
quite right. you must have been around and seen it as I did.
Red rox! Sagan sux.
The Kuwait oil fires showed several discrepancies between theory and practice as I recall. As I recall they were extinguished much quicker using much fewer resources than the self proclaimed experts claimed could be possible. Many experts denigrated Mr. Adair’s early claims about what he could do. They were silent when he beat his most optimistic estimates.
“Sagan was shown to be the fraud that he was!”
No, Dr. Sagan was shown to be wrong and he admitted that he had been wrong. It seems unlikely that Dr. Gleick or Dr. Mann would ever admit to being wrong.
you don’t know the backstory, i guess.
the lie was deliberate. the activists were intent on demonizing atomic energy.
they did a solid job of it, too, don’t you think?
your failure to understand the evil done in the name of saving the world is not getting by on the excuse that you are just too innocent to grasp it.
no excuse for you.
I remember that because while the fires were burning I was invited to speak to a biology honors class because I was teaching environmental assessment and management. (I never liked honors classes). I followed a poetic crisis talk. I gave biological examples of failed predictions, controversies and unknowns. At the end a bright student asked me about the fires and the atmosphere. I told them a little about the problem, but said they should have a physics (or one studying it) professor come talk about the details. I suggested that it was over exaggerated, which at that time (1991) was probable for most crises even with total ignorance.
Afterwards a frightened student came up and said –“but we just heard!!!” I replied that he could be right, but with something like this is a university and he deserves all facts and points of view. Thanks to the Texas fire extinguishing crews I was closer to the truth and Sagan was wrong.
Biological sciences have more than a few highly rewarded celebrity crisis types. They are
very brave (?) with their predictions.
I think you ask the wrong question. The 21st Century science establishment does not do Feynman’esque independently verifiable science as a discipline, they do it as a career for reward first.
Science is a means to maximise their grants, speaking opportunities, book revenues, and egos by whatever method. They are expected to support political agendas with “religious science” that must be believed to receive the funding, The higher they rise the more money and power and control over what science they promote and what they and the departments and institutions they control suppress, the more the money, the greater the deceit and suppression of the truth. So the question should be;
“What level of dishonesty and science denial do you have to achieve before the establishment climate science community decides your conduct is worthy of an award?
He fits that one. As does Al Bore, Piltdown Mann, Bill Nye “the science guy” (really? ) and so many more. All are paid disgraces to real science, promoting deceitful agendas to deceive the public and support fiscal frauds conducted in the name of the fake science they promote, that anyone who checks the data can see is phoney. Forget the science, follow the money.
“My question – what level of dishonesty and public humiliation do you have to achieve before the establishment climate science community decides your conduct is unacceptable?“
The sky’s the limit as Carl Sagan taught us. BILLIONS and BILLIONS of times worse won’t begin to scratch the surface.
(Be sure to pronounce the B sounds explosively with absurd dramatic effect)
He never said “billions and billions” in Cosmos.
Ok Jeff, that may be technically accurate that he didn’t use the redundant phrase. I don’t have any ready example to counter your claim. But watch this and tell me it’s relevant that he put a few different words than just “and” between the repetive instances of “BBBBBBBillions”
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HZmafy_v8g8
Ah, a liar and frAudster with a make-believe Nobel congratulating a thief, liar and hypocrite on his “award”. How charming.
Why would Mann want to be seen congratulating a self-confessed fraudster ? Is this the expected behaviour of someone of his supposed standing ?
There’s safety in numbers.
This is truly pathetic and proves Progressives have no morals or principals. As long as you tow the party line, merit and ethics are meaningless.
Progressives give these guys awards so they can keep them in power and shield them from attacks. When this guy is introduced to an audience they won’t mention his criminality, they will mention his awards. Just like Google, progressives will only let you know what they want you to know. The truth is meaningless.
The only difference between these two is the Gleick was unable to keep his corruption covered up.
what level of dishonesty and public humiliation do you have to achieve before the establishment climate science community decides your conduct is unacceptable?
The liar and the thief have no shame. Their face skin can deflect Dirty Harry’s 44 magnum
There is only one thing about this “prize” that gives it any prestige, and that is the name of Carl Sagan that has been attached to it. Otherwise, it is awarded by a small random unknown group called “Wonderfest”, which is interested in “informal science education” (i.e. low standards) and it’s from San Francisco and only is for scientists from the Bay area. Thus, it is a minor thing that of course Gleick and Mann try to make a big deal out of. Like climate science itself, it is all for show, all for the media consumption.
I wonder if the prize has anything directly to do with Carl Sagan himself or his estate, or if it is just named after him by this small group. No one on their Board of Directors, which decides the prize, is listed as related to his estate… in fact one of the directors is listed as a “comedy magician”. Another is a musician. Another is a previous recipient of the prize.
So it is a mutual back-scratching society I think.
The warmists defended the forged Glick document as authentic – which raises the question-
How is it that someone who lacks the basic intellectual skills to recognize an obviously forged document somehow possesses the superior intellectual capicity to ascertain the validity of climate science?
It’s like the Five Civilized Tribes named Elizabeth Warren Man of the Year.
Yuk. Another award I should refuse when offered. But G’s contribution to understanding is beyond question and totally obvious. He signals loud and clear that ‘climate science’ is corrupt and corrupting.
I’m not sure why, but every time I see Michael Mann’s picture, all I can think of is “Sniveling Weasel.”
You have insulted sniveling weasels everywhere.
To me, Dr. Mann’s picture looks like a chipmunk in the process of eating.
Fitting data to modeled results is fraud.
When Nobel prizes are awarded to the likes of Gore and Obama, then nothing like this should surprise anyone.
Eric you have it backwards. The “Team” is like the Mafia. You need to “murder science” to become a “made man” before they will let you in.
In this way the “Team” can be confident you will never rat them out because it would mean exposing yourself.
Omerta. The code of climate silence.
You have just insulted Sicilians, Neapolitans and Corsicans in one fell swoop.