Marc Morano’s Round Up For This Week

Woody Harrelson calls for green activism

Excerpt: Woody Harrelson called for more anti-oil activism at a media and technology conference Thursday, though he declined to say how far he was willing to go personally as a protester. “In spite of the fact that there’s an increase in awareness of what’s going on in terms of polar ice caps melting and just global warming generally … oil companies don’t seem to be making much of a change,” the 46-year-old actor said. Harrelson was at the “Picnic” conference, which has a green theme and features a contest in which British billionaire Richard Branson will award $700,000 to the winning idea for an environmental project. “Certainly (oil companies) just want to get as much out of the ground and make as much money as possible before they transition into anything else,” Harrelson said. “So I still think it’s time for some strong activism, especially as it relates to our dependency on oil.”

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/celebrity/la-et-ap-harrelson27sep27,1,1133949.story?coll=la-celebrity-news&ctrack=1&cset=true

Update: NASA’s Hansen Mentioned in Soros Foundations Annual Report

Excerpt: Since this editorial was published, according to LexisNexis and Google News searches, not one major media outlet has reported these allegations. Maybe even more shocking is that had press outlets looked into this matter – you know, acted like journalists instead of advocates! – they would have found Hansen’s name prominently mentioned in the 2006 Soros Foundations Network Report (relevant section on page 123): < > Here, in Soros Foundations’ annual report, is a direct connection to Hansen, along with an admission that “The campaign on Hansen’s behalf resulted in a decision by NASA to revisit its media policy.” As is typical, a global warming obsessed media don’t find this newsworthy. Think they’d be so disinterested if this smoking gun involved an oil company giving money to a Republican official? While you ponder, forward to page 143 (emphasis added): note: The Strategic Opportunities Fund includes grants related to Hurricane Katrina ($1,652,841); media policy ($1,060,000); and politicization of science ($720,000). Add it all up, and everything the IBD editorial claimed – that a high-ranking official at NASA may have received money from an organization funded by George Soros in order to politicize science — is actually available in this annual report. Yet, not one media outlet thought this was newsworthy.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2007/09/26/nasa-s-hansen-mentioned-soros-foundations-annual-report

U.S. Senate Hearing on Global Wamring & Sea Level Rise

Excerpt: Senator Inhofe detailed the latest peer-reviewed science that counters global warming led sea level rise fears. “Greenland has cooled since the 1940’s. According to multiple peer-reviewed studies, current temperatures in Greenland have not even reached the temperatures from the 1930s and 1940s. It is important to note that 80% of man-made CO2 came after these high temperatures were reached in Greenland. We have seen global average temperatures flat line since 1998 and the Southern Hemisphere cool in recent years,” he explained. (LINK) Dennis T. Avery, of the Hudson Institute, testified that the recent warming cycle is tied to natural climate factors. “The natural climate cycle is apparently driven by the sun, and the warmings are unstoppable,” Avery said. Avery co-authored the 2006 book “Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1500 Years” with atmospheric physicist Dr. Fred Singer.

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=435fb939-802a-23ad-40c2-677f4b36edbf

‘Too Late To Avoid Global Warming’

Excerpt: A rise of two degrees centigrade in global temperatures – the point considered to be the threshold for catastrophic climate change which will expose millions to drought, hunger and flooding – is now “very unlikely” to be avoided, the world’s leading climate scientists said yesterday.

The latest study from the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) put the inevitability of drastic global warming in the starkest terms yet, stating that major impacts on parts of the world – in particular Africa, Asian river deltas, low-lying islands and the Arctic – are unavoidable and the focus must be on adapting life to survive the most devastating changes.

http://www.countercurrents.org/milmo190907.htm

VA’s Skeptical State Climatologist Forced out for views?

Excerpt: The Washington Times reports that prominent global warming skeptic and Virginia State Climatologists Patrick Michaels was pressured to step down from his post over the summer. The Times writes: “Mr. Michaels has been a leading skeptic of global-warming theories. Although he thinks global warming is real and influenced by humans, he contends it is caused primarily by natural forces.” The administration of Gov. Tim Kaine, a Democrat, asked Mr. Michaels last year to refrain from using his title when conducting non-state business because of fears his views would be perceived as an official state position. The governor’s office said Mr. Michaels, appointed by Gov. John N. Dalton, a Republican, was not a gubernatorial appointee, contending that the climatology office became UVa.’s domain in 2000. Mr. Michaels, 57, called his resignation a sad result of the fact that his state climatologist funding had become politicized, compromising his academic freedom. “It’s very simple,” he said. “I don’t think anybody was able to come to a satisfactory agreement about academic freedom.”

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2007/09/global_warming_and_freedom.html

Intellectual dishonesty in peer review? (Climate Audit)

Excerpt: On Sep 21, 2007, Hugues Goosse, the Climate of the Past editor responsible for the Juckes article, published a statement saying that a revised version of the Juckes et al article had been submitted to “conventional” refereeing and accepted on Sept 21, 2007. He said: “On the other hand, the authors disagree with one reviewer on some points for which no clear consensus could be gained from published literature. The arguments of the authors appear reasonable from our present knowledge of the field and are presented in a balanced way. As a consequence, I decided to accept the paper for publication in Climate of the Past.” I presume that I was the “one reviewer”, although Willis Eschenbach and Mark Rostron also submitted critical reviews. Under CP policies, authors are supposed to respond to review comments. I’ve collated my review comments together with Juckes’ replies. It is remarkable how insolent and unresponsive Juckes’ comments are. In virtually every case, I’ve provided a detailed and analytical comment and Juckes virtually never makes a direct and straightforward reply, rebutting the comment in straightforward terms. See what you think.

http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2105

Academic Misconduct Alleged in Climate Research

Excerpt: The European Science Foundation just wrapped up the first World Conference on Research Integrity. Held in Lisbon, this historic three-day conference drew hundreds of scientists to address what they call the “open sore” of science — the falsification or misrepresentation of research data. < > Keenan filed a Freedom of Information Act claim to find the source of Wang’s data — a report written jointly by the U.S. DOE and the Chinese Academy of Sciences. He quickly found a smoking gun. The data came from only 84 stations, 60% of which had no history whatsoever, and the report claims “details regarding instrumentation, collection methods, observing times … are not known.” Of the 35 remaining, over half had moved large distances (one station moving as many as five times) or had serious, known inconsistencies in the record. The report specifically contradicts Wang’s claims, concluding that “even the best stations were subject to minor relocations or changes in observing times and many have undoubtedly experienced large increases in urbanization.” Keenan immediately filed a formal allegation of fraud against Wang, a charge which is pending investigation at this time. Why is all this important? Because even though the Earth is warming, the rate of warming is critical. Even the IPCC admits natural factors are responsible for some of recent temperature rises. The entire theory of anthropogenic global warming hinges on one factor — whether the rate is too fast to be explained by natural causes. Put simply, if UHI effects really are raising temperature readings substantially, the primary justification for human-induced global warming vanishes. Kaput.

http://www.dailytech.com/+Academic+Misconduct+Alleged+in+Climate+Research/article8988.htm

Wetlands Methane Counteracts Kyoto Emissions Cuts

Excerpt: new study that will appear in Thursday’s journal Nature revealed that methane being released from bogs in what is now Great Britain likely contributed to global warming 55 million years ago. Maybe more importantly, when you add up the methane being released from wetlands around the world, it could completely counteract all the carbon dioxide emissions reductions mandated by the Kyoto Protocol. < > As reported by National Geographic Wednesday (emphasis added throughout): Huge belches of methane from bogs in what is now Britain likely contributed to global warming some 55 million years ago, a new study says. The emissions probably amplified an ancient and extreme global warming event that heated Arctic Ocean waters to a balmy 73 degrees Fahrenheit (23 degrees Celsius). The finding adds weight to the idea that methane being released from wetlands today may accelerate modern global warming.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2007/09/19/methane-wetlands-counteracts-kyoto-protocol-s-emissions-cuts

Congressman John Dingell Proposes 50-cent Gas Tax Hike to Fight Global Warming

EXCPERT: Dealing with global warming will be painful, says one of the most powerful Democrats in Congress. To back up his claim he is proposing a recipe many people won’t like — a 50-cent gasoline tax, a carbon tax and scaling back tax breaks for some home owners. “I’m trying to have everybody understand that this is going to cost and that it’s going to have a measure of pain that you’re not going to like,” Rep. John Dingell, who is marking his 52nd year in Congress, said Wednesday in an interview with The Associated Press.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,298271,00.html

18 Responses to Marc Morano’s Round Up For This Week

  1. SJT September 28, 2007 at 7:11 pm #

    “Even the IPCC admits natural factors are responsible for some of recent temperature rises. ”

    Nice framing for something the IPCC has openly stated right from the start. Natural factors affect the climate.

  2. SJT September 28, 2007 at 7:14 pm #

    “Excerpt: new study that will appear in Thursday’s journal Nature revealed that methane being released from bogs in what is now Great Britain likely contributed to global warming 55 million years ago. Maybe more importantly, when you add up the methane being released from wetlands around the world, it could completely counteract all the carbon dioxide emissions reductions mandated by the Kyoto Protocol. As reported by National Geographic Wednesday (emphasis added throughout): Huge belches of methane from bogs in what is now Britain likely contributed to global warming some 55 million years ago, a new study says. The emissions probably amplified an ancient and extreme global warming event that heated Arctic Ocean waters to a balmy 73 degrees Fahrenheit (23 degrees Celsius). The finding adds weight to the idea that methane being released from wetlands today may accelerate modern global warming.”

    And why is it being released? And is it one of those feedback effects that have been predicted? Reducing CO2 now will help stabilise such methane stores. Waiting till the feedback is running at full speed is one option, because then we won’t be able to do much at all. A ‘tipping point’.

  3. Louis Hissink September 28, 2007 at 8:22 pm #

    This post by SJT has to be the most abjectly impoverished understanding of geology extant.

    No Bogs of peat, according to the standard theory, from 55 Ma could, or should, exist.

    According to Poppererian logic, any observation of a 55Ma peat bog might pose problems for those who propose them, (Plate tectonics and all that).

  4. rog September 28, 2007 at 10:10 pm #

    Woody Harrelson…..anti-oil activist

    “”I spent much of my life following the path, hot on the trail of the American dream. I dreamed of seeing my name in lights and hoped one day everybody would know my name. I later came to realize it wasn’t all about me…

    ….The importance of the fight to make hemp legal cannot be over emphasized. Hemp is synonymous with sustainability and the fight for freedom.”

    http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendID=205655747

  5. Woody September 29, 2007 at 10:18 am #

    Hansen gets $720,000 from Soros yet the global warming fanatics get their panties in a wad when it’s claimed that Exxon offered $10,000 to science skeptics.

    With this revelation, Hansen has been firmly shifted from an advocator of science to an advocator of leftist political philosphies. He was secretive on his climate program (which was used to predict both the coming ice age and the coming global warming but was independently proven flawed) and he has been secretive on his radical left-wing, below the radar funding.

    If it wasn’t clear before, it should be clear now that Hansen has a financial and political ax to grind and that he puts those conflicts of interests ahead of honest science.

  6. Luke September 29, 2007 at 12:03 pm #

    Booooring Woody – are you still banging on with that right wing clap-trap. Really you’ve got nothing and rightist creeps like you just keep lying and lying over and over again. Do you not think people have any discriminating ability.

    Do you think that Aussies fall for drivel like “secretive on his radical left-wing”. You have to be kidding mate.

    What we’re seeing is Exxon funded swift-boating of Hansen.

    http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2007/09/the_exxon_funded_swift_boating.php

    Always Exxon lurking around. And we all know.

    http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/listorganizations.php

    As for ice age – new term – “to Rasool” ….

    http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2007/09/to_rasool.php

    Don’t think we don’t know how you guys operate. Doesn’t wash – try subtly sometimes.

  7. rog September 29, 2007 at 5:19 pm #

    Where is the lie in that Soros has given aid to Hansen? In leftist terminology Hansen is a shill for the big end of town, someone who has convictions for insider trading.

  8. Luke September 29, 2007 at 6:17 pm #

    Where’s your proof – heresay – Hansen says he hasn’t received a dime. Just another try-on by the jack-boot nazis who are relentless in their swift-boating of AGW personalities. Might work for the never-change rightist cheer squad but that’s about all.

  9. Jim September 29, 2007 at 9:58 pm #

    Great – another principle established ; if anyone advocating a position on AGW is alleged to have received funds and denies it , we have to give them the benefit of the doubt.

    I’ll add it to the list…..

  10. Jim September 29, 2007 at 10:26 pm #

    Still some confusion though about how to treat scientists who have benefited financially from external sources;

    1. Michaels “has received financial support in research funding and consulting fees from the fossil-fuel energy industry” ( Wikipedia) and is consequently regularly smeared here as a corporate whore and a liar.

    2. Hansen receives pro-bono ” legal and media advice” but must not have any imputation of bad faith levelled against him?

  11. rog September 29, 2007 at 10:51 pm #

    Where’s your proof? limply cries battle scarred Luke Skywalker, recently from Hollywood.

    Why in Soros’ annual reporrt m’lud.

  12. rog September 29, 2007 at 10:53 pm #

    Jackboot Nazis?

    Soros wil be pleased, not

  13. Luke September 29, 2007 at 11:47 pm #

    Yep and what’s it say?

  14. SJT September 29, 2007 at 11:57 pm #

    Woody

    Hansen calls the accusation a lie.

  15. SJT September 30, 2007 at 12:01 am #

    ” That’s right, Hansen was packaged for the media by Soros’ flagship “philanthropy,” by as much as $720,000, most likely under the OSI’s “politicization of science” program.

    And if you invest just $10,000 in my get-rich-quick pyramid scheme you can make as much as $720,000 profit! Once you realise that “as much as $720,000″ includes the amount $0, you understand the scam.”

    As much as $720,000, why not as much as *doctor evil voice* 1 billion dollars?

  16. SJT September 30, 2007 at 12:03 am #

    http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2007/09/investors_business_daily_has_a.php

    “So what did the IBD build this story out of? Well, the OSI annual report says:

    Scientist Protests NASA’s Censorship Attempts James E. Hansen, the director the Goddard Institute for Space Studies at NASA, protested attempts to silence him after officials at NASA ordered him to refer press inquiries to the public affairs office and required the presence of a public affairs representative at any interview. The Government Accountability Project, a whistleblower protection organization and OSI grantee, came to Hansen’s defense by providing legal and media advice. The campaign on Hansen’s resulted in a decision by NASA revisit its media policy. …

    The Strategic Opportunities Fund includes grants related to Hurricane Katrina ($1,652,841); media policy ($1,060,000); and politicization of science ($720,000).

    So the OSI didn’t give Hansen any money at all. They did give money to the Government Accountability Project, “the nation’s leading whistleblower protection organization”, who provided legal advice for Hansen, and a detailed report. And the $720,000 is the total of grants to defend against the politicization of science, not the amount of money given to GAP.”

    I have to admit, I feel the need to call Morano out for his misdeeds, again.

  17. Woody September 30, 2007 at 2:59 am #

    Luke, despite recent Paul’s attempts to avoid personal attacks, I guess that it’s an impossible request for a lefty like you to follow, since personal attacks emit from emotions rather than logic from logic-challenged people.

    And, talking about “swiftboating,” you and Hansen seem more attune to using that tactic than being victims of it.
    [Hansen shoots back on NASA head Griffin’s “incredibly ignorant and arrogant statement”] http://www.climatesciencewatch.org/index.php/csw/details/hansen_griffin/

    If my comments are “Booooring,” then let me recommend that you not read or comment on them. At least they aren’t insulting or intentionally deceptive.

  18. Woody September 30, 2007 at 3:01 am #

    SJT, regarding Hansen calling this a lie, refer to a more recent post above and the additional information in the provided links. Discuss it there.

Website by 46digital