23 total posts
re: "Al Gore's closest ally"
"?Hansen has been for 20 years the world's leading scientific advocate of global warming (and Al Gore's closest ally). But in the past year a number of expert US scientists have been conducting a public investigation, through scientific blogs, which raises large question marks over the methods used to arrive at his figures.?"
Oh yeah, Al Gore is the NASA guy's friend so what he says must be wrong. Yep, that's all he had to tell me... that Al Gore is involved. That was the deciding factor right there.
Sheesh ! Utter BS. One has nothing to do with the other (if the article is really about science), but let us mention it anyway.
Right, Al Gore has nothing to do with the issue.
so we can use a tangential (albeit true) bit of information to totally dismiss what is said.
Can you dispute that there is a problem
with the data being used to claim AGW?
Strange that three seperate groups of data show one trend, and Hansen's shows the complete opposite .
That's what the article is about.
Indeed... that IS what the article is about.
... and I respect the desire to discuss it. Consequently... why color the readers perception of the SCIENTIFIC discussions by mentioning who the guy's acquaintances are ?
You have no understanding of this topic if you don?t know the symbiotic connection between Hansen and Gore.
And you display a confusion between political motivation,
... and concerns for truthful and accurate science. Don't be embarrassed. Smarter people than you have made the same mistake.
Just remember... science deals with facts. Politics deals with who the scientist knows.
Science = what you know
Politics = what you feel.
Facts versus emotion. You won;t be the first, nor the last, to get the two confused.
Learning something new every day is what life is all about. I'm glad I was able to help you on this journey.
Have a great day !
It is an opinion piece, dealing with a scientific topic.
Bringing up Al Gore is entirely germane and relevant. Indeed, it would have been stupid NOT to.
You are merely building another straw man, and your high and mighty attempts at sarcasm are both offensive and pathetic.
And your attempts are better ? ROTFLMAO
But I am not attempting to lecture from on high...
in the most pompous way possible. Nor am I failing miserably in making my point. See the difference?
Uh... yes you are... lecturing from on high that is.
Oops! Almost forgot....
I'm glad you agree that Hansen/Gore
are politically motivated and have completely ingnored the science.
The connection goes back...
Grim, the connection goes back to the Senate Energy and Natural Resources on June 23, 1988. At that time, the concern was Global Cooling. But in the statement Hansen said "Number one, the earth is warmer in 1988 than at any time in the history of instrumental measurements.". Gore became concerned now with Global Warming. However, other scientists did not agree with Hansen. One made this statement:
"I see that we are once again having to hear how NASA's James Hansen was dissuaded from talking to the press on a few of the 1,400 media
interviews he was involved in over the years.
Well, I had the same pressure as a NASA employee during the Clinton-Gore years, because NASA management and the Clinton/Gore administration knew that I was skeptical that mankind's CO2 emissions were the main cause of global warming. I was even told not to give my views during congressional testimony, and so I purposely dodged a question, under oath, when it arose.
But I didn't complain about it like Hansen has. NASA is an executive branch agency and the President was, ultimately, my boss (and is, ultimately, Hansen's boss). So, because of the restrictions on what I could and couldn't do or say, I finally just resigned from NASA and went to work for the university here in Huntsville. There were no hard feelings, and I'm still active in a NASA satellite mission and fully supportive of its Earth observation programs.
In stark contrast, Jim Hansen said whatever he wanted, whenever he wanted to the press and congress during that time. He even campaigned for John Kerry, and received a $250,000 award from Theresa Heinz-Kerry's charitable foundation -- two events he maintains are unrelated. If I had done anything like this when I worked at NASA, I would have been crucified under the Hatch Act.
Does anyone besides me see a double standard here?
-Roy W. Spencer
The University of Alabama in Huntsville"
It about data not opinions or politics
If the data shows something you analysis the data and try determine the "why" of it. It's not opinion or politics involved here. The question being is the data good and what does it mean? People and personalities have little to do with it? NASA has the data and is trying to determine what it means. Once this is determined then a plan of action will be made to correct it, if possible then it becomes political. I suspect we are at the political stage with Global Warming, now it's about mobilizing people and governments to get something done. Your to late, the process is under way.
But sadly for you
The best data disproves what you believe in !!!!!!!!!!!!
So reports of the big chill are all made up?
Hansen is a worthless hack.
I don't know much of his history but he hasn't been an objective scientist for 20 years. It's an abomination that he still holds the position in the government that he does.
The only good thing is that with the AGW fraud/hoax quickly falling apart, Hansen will become an absurd parody of himself.
Even if there is global warming
And every bit of the ice melted, it wouldn't be the first time, according to this article. Somehow life on the planet managed to survive.
Are you really
That ignorant of EVERYTHING?
If you really knew anything about this topic, you would know what the four main sources for data are. But since you only believe what Hansen/Gore spoon feed you??