James Hansen: Global Warming Twenty Years Later: Tipping Points Near

My presentation today is exactly 20 years after my 23 June 1988 testimony to Congress, which alerted the public that global warming was underway. There are striking similarities between then and now, but one big difference.

Again a wide gap has developed between what is understood about global warming by the relevant scientific community and what is known by policymakers and the public. Now, as then, frank assessment of scientific data yields conclusions that are shocking to the body politic. Now, as then, I can assert that these conclusions have a certainty exceeding 99 percent.

The difference is that now we have used up all slack in the schedule for actions needed to defuse the global warming time bomb. The next President and Congress must define a course next year in which the United States exerts leadership commensurate with our responsibility for the present dangerous situation.

[The Respected Doofinator]

"CEOs of fossil energy companies know what they are doing and are aware of long-term
consequences of continued business as usual. In my opinion, these CEOs should be tried for
high crimes against humanity and nature."

James Hansen is a dangerous megalomaniac.

The Respected Doofinator

[Rick Moss]

Everyone knows CEO's (and their companies) fall into two distinct categories

EVIL -- CEO's of companies that make stuff that people need, like cars, timber, steel, oil.

BENEVOLENT -- CEO's of companies that make groovy things like frisbees, hacky-sacks, MP3 players and cool mobile phones.

[LessHypeMoreFact]

The Respected Doofinator wrote:

"CEOs of fossil energy companies know what they are doing and are aware of long-term
consequences of continued business as usual. In my opinion, these CEOs should be tried for
high crimes against humanity and nature."
James Hansen is a dangerous megalomaniac.
The Respected Doofinator

We hear your rant but note that it doesn't have any semantic content, must less scientific crediblity.

[tina anne]

Notice no one was there to provide a counter point.

[The Respected Doofinator]

LessHypeMoreFact wrote:

<quoted text>
We hear your rant but note that it doesn't have any semantic content, must less scientific crediblity.

Dear LessHypeMoreDoofuss:

Are you contending that Hansen's statement has "scientific" credence?

The Respected Doofinator

[The Respected Doofinator]

tina anne wrote:

Notice no one was there to provide a counter point.

Excellent point!

A number of years ago, a taxpayer organization did a study of who was called to testify to Congressional committees.

They found that 97% of the witnesses were advocates of bigger programs and more funding.

The Respected Doofinator

[tina anne]

The Respected Doofinator wrote:

<quoted text>
Excellent point!
A number of years ago, a taxpayer organization did a study of who was called to testify to Congressional committees.
They found that 97% of the witnesses were advocates of bigger programs and more funding.
The Respected Doofinator

I have to find a copy of that study. It sounds as interesting as the study or studies.

[LessHypeMoreFact]

The Respected Doofinator wrote:

<quoted text>
Dear LessHypeMoreDoofuss:
Are you contending that Hansen's statement has "scientific" credence?
The Respected Doofinator

It certainly has credibility. It doesn't take a genius to understand the gap beween what science is saying and the understanding of "the retarded doofus" as well as 'tina anne' etc.

I'm also seeing a decline in academic standards in the U.S. A Bsc from a state university doesn't mean much any more in estimating the abilities of a job applicant.

[The Respected Doofinator]

LessHypeMoreFact wrote:

<quoted text>
It certainly has credibility. It doesn't take a genius to understand the gap beween what science is saying and the understanding of "the retarded doofus" as well as 'tina anne' etc.
I'm also seeing a decline in academic standards in the U.S. A Bsc from a state university doesn't mean much any more in estimating the abilities of a job applicant.

You ducked.

Does Hansen's saying that oil company executives should be locked up have "scientific credence"?

What experiments did Hansen perform to support the hypothesis that jailing oil company executives would stop human caused global warming?

If you think that Hansen's statement is a "science based" statement, I would assert that the science education in Canada is nothing to brag about.

The Respected Doofinator

[The Respected Doofinator]

tina anne wrote:

<quoted text>
I have to find a copy of that study. It sounds as interesting as the study or studies.

I think, but I'm not positive, that it was the National Taxpayers Union.

The Respected Doofinator

[Northie]

The Respected Doofinator wrote:

<quoted text>
You ducked.
Does Hansen's saying that oil company executives should be locked up have "scientific credence"?

Why shouldn't Hansen have the same rights as any other citizen to hold accountable those who harm his community? Are you saying that scientists studying the Bhopal disaster had no right to hold Union Carbide execs to account for their negligence, or that scientists monitoring Chernobyl's fallout shouldn't have criticized the Soviet Union because that "goes beyond science"?

[The Respected Doofinator]

Northie wrote:

<quoted text>
Why shouldn't Hansen have the same rights as any other citizen to hold accountable those who harm his community? Are you saying that scientists studying the Bhopal disaster had no right to hold Union Carbide execs to account for their negligence, or that scientists monitoring Chernobyl's fallout shouldn't have criticized the Soviet Union because that "goes beyond science"?

How does a "scientist" know that the correct degree of accountability is:

a. nothing
b. a slap on the wrist
c. a traffic ticket
d. a $250 fine
e. a year in jail
f. life imprisonment
g. mutilation and disembowelelment
h. drawing and quatering
e. burning at the stake.

Scientists are accountable for scientific questions: is chemical X toxic or not? what is the toxicity dose response? etc. etc.

Politicians and judges are responsible for legality and morality.

If you want scientists responsible for legal and moral issues, you end up with Joseph Mengele and T.D. Lysenko.

If you want politicians responsible for scientific questions, you end up with Ruth Bader Ginsberg deciding the CO2 is a pollutant and respiration is an environmental crime.

Hansen is supposedly employed on the basis of his "scientific" competence. For him to be offering judgements of criminality and personal culpability for private citizens engaged in lawful activity is extremely arrogant and WAY, WAY outside his job description .

If George Bush had any cajones, he would fire Hansen in an instant.

"You run your experiments, Mr. Hansen, and I'll decide the public policy. We have an entire Justice Department to decide who is or isn't committing crimes against humanity, and it's NOT your job. Butt out."

The Respected Doofinator

[Cthulhu]

I suspect George Bush doesn't have the power to fire Hansen

[The Respected Doofinator]

Cthulhu wrote:

I suspect George Bush doesn't have the power to fire Hansen

I wouldn't be totally surprised.

To my astonishment, I learned a while back that State Department careerists can't be fired.

There are things about the government that are totally nuts.

The Respected Doofinator

[tina anne]

The Respected Doofinator wrote:

<quoted text>
I think, but I'm not positive, that it was the National Taxpayers Union.
The Respected Doofinator

Thank you.

[Northie]

The Respected Doofinator wrote:

<quoted text>
Hansen is supposedly employed on the basis of his "scientific" competence. For him to be offering judgements of criminality and personal culpability for private citizens engaged in lawful activity is extremely arrogant and WAY, WAY outside his job description . If George Bush had any cajones, he would fire Hansen in an instant.

First, Hansen was not representing NASA; he testified as a concerned scientist. Second, he's as well within his rights to criticize energy execs for their blatant attempts to mislead the public as cancer researchers are to take tobacco company shills to task for doing the same. Third, if George Bush's cajones were any larger they'd stretch beyond Iraq, and that's far enough for me, thanks.

[The Respected Doofinator]

Northie wrote:

<quoted text>
First, Hansen was not representing NASA; he testified as a concerned scientist.

Hansen is claiming -- and profiting from the claim -- that the Bush Adminstration is censoring him.

If he WASN'T speaking for NASA, or representing that he was speaking for NASA, how could he claim the Bush adminstration is censoring him.

Hansen is a charlatan.

The Respected Doofinator

[Northie]

Doof, how is Hansen profiting? Follow the money: the oil, gas and coal industry is worth a trillion or two, it is run by mercenary profiteers making millions per year, and is directly funding several scientific think tanks to mislead the public with trumped-up "controversy" about settled science. Meanwhile, most of the far more qualified scientists who stand up to these greaseballs are earning little more than middle class incomes--a tiny fraction of what oil CEOs make. If you're upset about conflicts of interest, follow the money!

[Facts]

These global warming related activities specialy carbon trading is a cleverly crafted
racket riding on the coat tails of a natural climate change phenomena to make
Trillions (45 Trillion$ by their own admission) and really achieving nothing in the end.
Let alone stopping climate change they do not care if they bankrupt nations and
deplete them of resources that they could have used for disaster management etc..
Expect unending propaganda in every news cycle , they hope if they “repeat lies
infinite number of times it will become truth , bigger the lie higher the chances of
success”– Joseph Gobbels (Germany 1940)

[Facts]

Hotbed of Volcanic Activity Found Beneath Arctic Ocean
Link
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/...

THAT is what's melting the ice, not co2 claptrap