#AGU19 becomes “political science” – invites candidate Bloomberg to speak

From the “green just isn’t the color of money department”. You can watch this live for free.

From AGU:

Mike Bloomberg and Jerry Brown will participate in an on-stage conversation about America’s Pledge, which brings together private and public sector leaders to ensure the United States remains a global leader in reducing emissions and delivers the country’s ambitious climate goals of the Paris Agreement. Bloomberg and Brown launched America’s Pledge together in 2017.

AGU Executive Director and CEO Chris McEntee will join Bloomberg and Brown after their conversation in a fireside chat.

Livestream is available via AGU Go (registration required): agu.org/go or YouTube Live: www.youtube.com/user/AGUvideos.

0 0 vote
Article Rating
50 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
wharfplank
December 11, 2019 8:32 am

Not your Daddy’s AGU…

Mandobob
Reply to  wharfplank
December 11, 2019 9:59 am

As a former AGU member (note the former moniker) and geologist, I find allowing a non-scientist as-yet non-elected US Presidential candidate to address the AGU Annual Meeting just another example of virtue seeking pandering that is all too common in scientific circles. The taint of leftist leaning thought (and yes Bloomberg is a leftest) has infiltrated AGU and now colors so much of what was, at one time in the not too distant past, a reputable scientific society. Science should be non-partisan.

PMuller
Reply to  Mandobob
December 11, 2019 10:10 am

+10 from another former AGU member geologist. Want to bet a AGU media consultant ‘specialist’ arranged this joke of a session.

Bryan A
Reply to  Mandobob
December 11, 2019 12:26 pm

Perhaps it’ll keep him in the running long enough to spend the other half of his fortune on a failed attempt and pull sufficient voters from a Dem Candidate that might otherwise show a stronger backing against Trump, thereby getting Trump reelected. Much like the Dems that couldn’t vote for Hillary.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  wharfplank
December 11, 2019 10:31 am

Yes, I can remember when the AGU was about science.

Pop Piasa
Reply to  wharfplank
December 11, 2019 10:55 am

That’s affirmative, wharf. More like your Grandkid’s AGU. All Gummed Up…

Dan Sudlik
December 11, 2019 8:40 am

Many, many better ways to waste my time.

Reply to  Dan Sudlik
December 11, 2019 1:30 pm

Do we know if Donald Trump, POTUS, has been invited to address the meeting?

Auto
And /SARC, I suppose.

ResourceGuy
December 11, 2019 8:41 am

No science or sense there.

Reply to  ResourceGuy
December 11, 2019 10:11 am

Political science is an oxymoron, or is it that politicians are morons?

Harry Passfield
Reply to  co2isnotevil
December 11, 2019 1:14 pm

Ditto: Scientific politicians.

Editor
Reply to  co2isnotevil
December 11, 2019 1:16 pm

co2isnotevil – What an interesting question. Which way do you interpret “political science “? If (a) “political science ” is a scientific process which is political, then it’s either (i) an oxymoron or (ii) just the way the scientific community have always behaved. If (b) “political science ” is the science of politics, ie. analysis/knowledge of politics, then “politicians are morons” is a good summary.

Joe Crawford
December 11, 2019 8:49 am

One more and they’d have a gospel quartet… singing the gospel of CAGW… i.e. “Right or wrong we’re hear to save ya.”

beng135
December 11, 2019 8:59 am

What the frack does Bloomberg or Brown have to do w/anything geophysical? Yeah, I know, rhetorical.

John Endicott
Reply to  beng135
December 11, 2019 9:37 am

They have as much to do with anything geophysical as CAGW has anything to do with science. I short nothing.

John Endicott
Reply to  John Endicott
December 11, 2019 12:10 pm

In short

where’s the edit button when you want it.

brians356
Reply to  John Endicott
December 11, 2019 3:30 pm

Right where you left it, as always.

John Endicott
Reply to  brians356
December 12, 2019 5:03 am

And in the last place I’ll look, I’m sure 😉

Joel Snider
December 11, 2019 9:12 am

Control-freaks gone wild.

Ron Long
December 11, 2019 9:18 am

wow! As I said before the AGU was once an honorable institution, now they are a bunch of Tarot Card Readers, at best. What a shame.

Joel Snider
Reply to  Ron Long
December 11, 2019 9:56 am

Any institution is only as honorable as its members.

Megs
Reply to  Ron Long
December 11, 2019 1:44 pm

What a sham!

Richard of NZ
December 11, 2019 9:20 am

Please remember that not all money is as $20 notes. Other notes are different colours.

John Endicott
Reply to  Richard of NZ
December 11, 2019 9:35 am

That’s as may be in New Zealand, Richard, but the phrase is an American one and in the US of A all the denominations of US paper currency is traditionally/predominately green (though other colors are also incorporated to better distinguish different denominations). US paper money is also sometimes given the nickname “greenbacks” due to it’s green coloration (even though that nickname originally applied specifically to certain civil war era currency created by the Lincoln administration). Hence why here in the US green is referred to as “the color of money”

Crispin in Waterloo but really in Eden Glen
Reply to  John Endicott
December 11, 2019 5:40 pm

Originally the green colour was made from the wings of a South American butterfly – a big one. It was irreproducible for a long time (artificially).

John Endicott
December 11, 2019 9:22 am

No real surprise. CAGW has been more politics than science since long before Hansen and friends turned off the AC and opened the windows the night before his big show in the Capital. So of course any organization that goes “all in” on CAGW is going to be long on politics and short on science.

A C Osborn
December 11, 2019 9:29 am

I definitely will not bother thanks.

Christopher Paino
December 11, 2019 9:47 am

It’s all about feelings these days. Actual experience not required or desired. Especially not desired.

John M
December 11, 2019 9:57 am

Try to find a real Geology graduate program anywhere.

Most have been incorporated into “multidisciplinary” Earth and Environmental Science departments.

Might as well have rolled them into the Political Science dept.

David S
December 11, 2019 9:59 am

Idiocracy at it’s normalcy.

Pop Piasa
December 11, 2019 10:03 am

This is turning The Fail Meeting of The AGU.

Pop Piasa
December 11, 2019 10:04 am

This is turning into The Fail Meeting of The AGU.

brians356
Reply to  Pop Piasa
December 11, 2019 3:32 pm

Read three times, “Post Comment” once.

ResourceGuy
December 11, 2019 10:13 am

The conman convention has convened.

Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
December 11, 2019 10:18 am

“America’s Pledge”:

Across America, states, cities, businesses, universities, and citizens are taking action to fight climate change, grow the economy, and protect public health. America’s Pledge brings together private and public sector leaders to ensure the United States remains a global leader in reducing emissions and delivers the country’s ambitious climate goals of the Paris Agreement.

That’s all very well and good, but how much of the UN’s expected $200 Billion/year are these pledgers actually going to, umm, pledge? More to the point, how much are they going to deliver?

If you took all the net worth of Bloomberg, Tom Steyer and Bill Gates together it might be enough to satisfy the UN for the first year. Add in all the other billionaires pledging to fight climate change and you might get through year 2. But I don’t think that’s what these “pledgers” have in mind.

Pop Piasa
Reply to  Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
December 11, 2019 10:42 am

I pledge to vote against all Dems until they oust the socialist progressive party leadership and move back towards the center, which they have come to see as “the far right”.

Global Cooling
Reply to  Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
December 11, 2019 10:50 am

No, Green Reich wants tax and tariff payers to pledge money to the green oligarchs.

John Endicott
Reply to  Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
December 12, 2019 10:53 am

That’s all very well and good, but how much of the UN’s expected $200 Billion/year are these pledgers actually going to, umm, pledge?

They’ll gladly pledge all of it. Oh, they don’t plan on being the ones to foot the bill, don’t be silly. They’re pledging to push for the tax increases (OPM) that the little people (IE you, me, and every other taxpayer) will be expected to shell out in order to pay for it.

A. R. Timms
December 11, 2019 10:23 am

If CO2 is so efficient in absorbing and trapping heat why isn’t it used as the insulating gas in sealed double glazed windows? From what I have read, carbon dioxide will break down in light and eventually turn into carbon monoxide and oxygen. Therefore, the resulting components from the breakdown of carbon dioxide would have a higher conductivity so it is not used for this purpose. Apparently AIR performs better between the two panes of glass than CO2. Does CO2 also breakdown in the atmosphere in a similar manner?

Pop Piasa
December 11, 2019 10:35 am

Isn’t a fireside chat somewhat of an act of hypocrisy in this case?

4 Eyes
Reply to  Pop Piasa
December 11, 2019 2:37 pm

The whole thing is hypocrisy I suspect. Did Bloomberg fly there and did he fly coach class? Ditto Brown.

Zigmaster
December 11, 2019 11:05 am

Ironically US is already one of the most successful countries in reducing emissions and it’s not because of renewables but the conversion of coal fired to gas fired energy generation. The Paris agreement provides zero guarantees of emission reduction. Why would anyone want to be in it. If your in it and your meeting your targets like Australia they ostracise you and condemn you for not doing enough. Why any country ( other than the ones with no targets and are recipients of funds ) would want to be in it is a huge mystery.

Chris Hanley
December 11, 2019 1:14 pm

That would be the Michael Bloomberg who assured Margaret Hoover on PBS that China was tackling Climate Change by building new coal-burning power plants away from cities.

4 Eyes
Reply to  Chris Hanley
December 11, 2019 2:42 pm

That’s a good one for Trump to bring up in a debate if Bloomberg wins the nomination.

Joel O'Bryan
Reply to  4 Eyes
December 11, 2019 10:11 pm

He won’t win the nomination. The Party of Bernie-AOC-Warren is completely incompatible with an elderly white billionaire heterosexual who recently left the Republican Party as its Presidential nominee.

Mikey Bloomberg is just adding more greenbacks to the green slime trail of the GreenSlime. And NGO Bootlicks, Democrat sycophants, and scientist-rentseekers are rushing in to lick it up.

niceguy
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
December 12, 2019 9:34 pm

He will fail; and then Mikey will be allowed to spend as much as he wants of his campaign money on other Dem candidates, flouting FEC regulations?

GeologyJim
December 11, 2019 2:42 pm

It would be far less painful to poke a very sharp stick into my ear than to listen to a couple of geezer greenies bloviate about how the “little people” need to change their lifestyles in order to “Save the Planet”

Pi$$ off, jerks!

The Planet has been around for a few billion years and is perfectly capable of taking care of itself. Or, to quote some brain-dead Climate Scientists, “It’s just simple physics”.

Yes, it is. Water (liquid, vapor, and ice) keeps us just as we are and have always been. Thanks God.

Andy Pattullo
December 11, 2019 5:16 pm

So maybe AGU meeting has become a surrealist version of America’s Got Talent where the louder you can shout “Armageddon” the more votes you get.

Crispin in Waterloo but really in Eden Glen
Reply to  Andy Pattullo
December 11, 2019 5:48 pm

America’s Getting Unhinged?

Chaamjamal
December 12, 2019 4:57 pm

That the science is really activism sold as science now fully exposed.

Here’s more on that topic.

https://tambonthongchai.com/2019/02/03/hidden-hand/

%d bloggers like this: