Rational Advice on ‘Carbon Act’ Censored (Part 2)
Posted by jennifer, July 4th, 2009 - under News, Opinion.
Tags: Climate & Climate Change, People
A WEEK ago President Barrack Obama praised the House of Representatives for passing the ‘Clean Energy and Security Act’. Everyone agrees that it’s far reaching legislation.
The US Environment Protection Agency had one of its employees, a 35-year veteran of the agency, Alan Carlin, critique the supporting technical documentation for the legislation. Mr Carlin’s report advised that the scientific hypothesis on which the draft legislation is based is seriously flawed. Instead of considering the report in some detail, Mr Carlin was censored. The claim of censorship runs contrary to the new President’s promises of more transparency as explained by Kimberley A. Strassel in the Wall Street Journal:
“ONE of President Barack Obama’s first acts was a memo to agencies demanding new transparency in government, and science.
“The nominee to head the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Lisa Jackson, joined in, exclaiming, ‘As administrator, I will ensure EPA’s efforts to address the environmental crises of today are rooted in three fundamental values: science-based policies and program, adherence to the rule of law, and overwhelming transparency.’ In case anyone missed the point, Mr. Obama took another shot at his predecessors in April, vowing that ‘the days of science taking a backseat to ideology are over.’
“Except, that is, when it comes to Mr. Carlin, a senior analyst in the EPA’s National Center for Environmental Economics and a 35-year veteran of the agency. In March, the Obama EPA prepared to engage the global-warming debate in an astounding new way, by issuing an ‘endangerment’ finding on carbon. It establishes that carbon is a pollutant, and thereby gives the EPA the authority to regulate it — even if Congress doesn’t act. Around this time, Mr. Carlin and a colleague presented a 98-page analysis arguing the agency should take another look, as the science behind man-made global warming is inconclusive at best.
“The analysis noted that global temperatures were on a downward trend. It pointed out problems with climate models. It highlighted new research that contradicts apocalyptic scenarios. ‘We believe our concerns and reservations are sufficiently important to warrant a serious review of the science by EPA,’ the report read.
“The response to Mr. Carlin was an email from his boss, Al McGartland, forbidding him from ‘any direct communication’ with anyone outside of his office with regard to his analysis. When Mr. Carlin tried again to disseminate his analysis, Mr. McGartland decreed: ‘The administrator and the administration have decided to move forward on endangerment, and your comments do not help the legal or policy case for this decision. . .. I can only see one impact of your comments given where we are in the process, and that would be a very negative impact on our office.’ Mr. McGartland blasted yet another email: ‘With the endangerment finding nearly final, you need to move on to other issues and subjects. I don’t want you to spend any additional EPA time on climate change. No papers, no research etc, at least until we see what EPA is going to do with Climate.’
“Ideology? Nope, not here. Just us science folk. Honest.”
*****************
Notes and Links
The EPA Silences a Climate Skeptic – The professional penalty for offering a contrary view to elites like Al Gore is a smear campaign. The Wall Street Journal. By KIMBERLEY A. STRASSEL http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124657655235589119.html
Part 1 of this series is here: http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/2009/06/rational-advice-on-%e2%80%98carbon-act%e2%80%99-censored/
“dhmo: There is another huge and IMO significant difference Hansen has his snout in the politically funded trough Crichton was self funded.”
What a load of crap. Chrichton was much wealthier than Hansen. If Hansens intent is only to make money, using AGW is bad career choice.
Comment from: SJT July 5th, 2009 at 11:50 am
If Hansens intent is only to make money, using AGW is bad career choice.
”””””
tell that to Gore and all the freeloading “scientists” riding on the AGW bandwagon!
Al Gore is fat, not a scientist. Climate research would be happening if there was AGW or not. Chricton made more money than any AGW scientist did. And Al Gore is fat.
SJT – Marcus really – what a gutter argument – how about the bandwagon of nano-tech scientists, or the gravy train of genetic engineering, or the vast waste of funds just to make Monsanto rich – it’s a world conspiracy, gravy train and conspiracy of quantum theory (how does Lubus Motl justify the outrage). ooooo “the astronomers …. oooo – what a gravy train”. And as for cancer research – we’ve spent billions and we still have cancer – they all need sacking too.
This sort of argument just tells you they’re going berserk – just randomly and wantonly scatter-gun attack everything in their sight. And this would be from a little arsehole that has never had to apply for, execute and be responsible for any research funds in his ill-foresaken life.
SJT – don’t they they love to focus just on Hansen and Gore for a diversion. It’s just wedge tactics by the desperate. Probably time for some vested interest sceptic stuff to ram back down their throats.
Jan I have no problem with your comment but these sort of money comparisons were started by the climate zealots. I have read (maybe Buchanan) about the difficulty of seeing faults with that which you depend on for a living. Hansen has totally committed himself to AGW and has no choice but to continue with it. Backing down is not an option since his whole career is built around it. The current trend in global temperature ought to be of great concern to him. Crichton on the other hand was independent. His income was not tied to what he was saying about AGW. More than that he only ever offered a reasoned opposing argument to the zealots. For that they try to condemn him even though he is dead. But who is paying you is nowhere near as important as the logic of your argument. The zealots would have you believe that who pays you totally determines your behaviour. They say then the argument is not worth consideration. The logic is that the validity of the argument is only a consequence of the source of funding. This means that if the head of Exxon says the sun will rise tomorrow then obviously it won’t because that is a proposition put by big oil. Bluntly I say this is bullshit and we should not play their game.
I showed that SJT’s argument that Crichton was not a scientist was totally wrong. The answer was to refer to your comment about who pays. This further confirms my opinion that Louis was insulting village idiots. The constant use of political manoeuvring on this blog is worthless and idiotic.
Luke
“don’t they they love to focus just on Hansen and Gore for a diversion. ”
Not really Luke, but if the shoe fits? It’s the warmenistas who carry on about big oil financing the sceptics, so I think it’s only fair to point out the large sums the governments are spending on AGW research. Not to mention Soros and co.
I agree with SJT that no matter, AGW or not, there would still be climate research, but I guarantee you, there would be less than half as many “scientists” involved. That’s why I made the point, “freeloaders”.
So Marcus – of CSIRO and BoM’s research team then – who exactly are the freeloaders.
‘Luke’,
That is 100% pure out back gibberish. I love it. It is about as clear as your climate thinking, and a lot more fun.
Please ask that member of your ensemble to do it more often.
SJT,
Defending the execrable Hansen, who is joined at the hip with Gore, while trying to belittle Crichton, who actually studied and created and built his wealth honorably makes you look more than a little creepy.
“of CSIRO and BoM’s research team then – who exactly are the freeloaders.”
I can think of a certain ensemble in- Queensland, is it?- that seems to have a great deal of time on their hands…….
Luke
You obviously did not read this, and this is only in OZ
http://sciencespeak.com/ClimateFunding.pdf
Now if you are telling me that all those involved were either needed, effective or produced useful work, than I say to you, “you are indeed living in an other universe”
Ps. CSIRO and BOM could probably have been involved in more useful activity!?
Am I reading this correctly that “Luke” is just a bunch of bloody govt. boffins!
Ahahahahahahahahaha
No wonder ,
we’re dealing with clowns who live in cloud cuckoo land ,not the real world !!
Ahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
SJT: “What a load of crap. Chrichton was much wealthier than Hansen. If Hansens intent is only to make money, using AGW is bad career choice”.
Obviously I have promoted you beyond Village Idiot level – no one was talking about Hansen vs Crichton’s personal wealth – rather that the funding Hansen gets is from the US Taxpayer, while Crichton funded his research from his own funds.
As I have pointed out before, you seem to have particular difficulties in english comprehension – this being merely the latest.
It would be fun comparing your KPI, and Luke’s as well – getting high scores from Ms Wong for posting here and pestering the skeptics?
As for Luke resembling an “ensemble” – hmm – I claim priority – I used the metaphor of “Medusa” some time back – though I would not have thought of Medusa being an “ensembe”.
And sincere apologies to the Village Idiots here for elevating SJT to te level of Village Idiocy – I just discovered a few errors in his KPI and he is summarily demoted.
To what however, boggles the mind – since it means going back to PreCambrian times to find the appropriate life form equivalent.
So you can’t name anyone then in our Aussie research organisations wasting climate change funds.
YOU PATHETIC CLOWNS.
Baseless bunkum allegations from political shonks !
(No Mack – alas you’re incorrect but we laugh ourselves silly how you conspiracy theorists love to talk yourself into all sort of things – you just feed off each other and auto-suggest to the max – which is why you’re so amenable to denialist propaganda – you’re all totally uncritical and jump on any new theory – love Qld Climate Change Alliance)
“I can think of a certain ensemble in- Queensland, is it?- that seems to have a great deal of time on their hands…….”
It certainly has been an interesting exercise, watching how the denialist mind works.
A random rumour becomes accepted fact in the matter of a few posts. The mind boggles. It is good to have some direct and hard evidence of how poor their acceptance of any evidence that is anti-agw is, and how they manufacture it.
Denialsim = pathetic.
Luke
You have a very good MO. you wear people down, by obnoxiously ignoring what they say and repeating your own line over and over.
I admit it works on me because I don’t like hitting my head against the wall and arguing with you is just like that.
For me a questionable warming of less than a degree over a century, produced by shady manipulations, relying on instruments where the error zone is greater than the resultant warming, is just a political, Machiavellian way to extract more money and gain tighter control over the population.
In the senate paper I linked to, I would say 99% of the recipients did not deserve to be funded for AGW research.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pe-MIDDfckw
Which one of the ensemble is you SJT – fess up !
But of course I must say it’s fun slaying denialists to such great art.
And look here’s the IPCC in unison delivering the sombre news. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d7cwbGBFyEQ&feature=related
God where would we be without Mahler. Ensemble casts hand over brows and exits stage left (of course)
The Waxman-Markey Bill seems to offer the clue to what we are in for – the Eco-Fascist State – meaning a sharing of power between the state, big business and big trade unions – all under the umbrella of “environmentalism”. Loser? The individual and his/her rights.
And what happens when you criticise the State’s (here the US EPA) procedural protocal?
Welcome to another Dark Age – strange that it happens when the global climate tanks temperature wise…..
Seems the Fabians have finally realised their goal since Maynard Keynes and the Bloomberries started off on their long march.
Luke is one person.
He’s studied to grade 8 piano hence the classical music references and that makes him well above your average okka.
He’s an excellent writer and expresses himself far better than most here – and he’s no fool.
No I don’t think he’s gay – dissatisfied with his marriage? well obviously, as he’s here most nights.
I actually think he’s coming around and he’s realised AGW is falling apart. :)
So why aren’t we celebrating? the planet is not going to die and we aren’t going to die with it.
I reckon that’s the kind of good news even Luke can celebrate.
SJT: “What a load of crap.”
Are you saying Crichton had his hand in the public purse?
I thought he had done rather well giving the people of the world what they want :- entertainment.
I agree Hansen’s horror stories haven’t done as well.
Luke might be one person janama but he has a tag team of researchers constantly at his disposal it seems……Qld Climate Change Alliance which Hunter and others are up against.
This group of boffins need to move a little further south to appreciate global cooling.
In fact if they came to where I live in the Sth Island NZ at the moment they would lose all their AGW beliefs in a second.
mack – I spent by teenage years in the south Island of NZ and got out as fast as I could because it was so damned cold!
Nah – Luke can’t beat the onslaught of opinion against him, it’s as simple as that.
Also janama when you see the word “Alliance” think hammer and sickle.
We have an Alliance Party here in NZ.
There are stylistic differences and tonal differences that leads me to guess ‘Luke’ is several posters.
It is interesting that Australia is so rich that it can afford to have a team of government workers take so much time to post so drivel as a fictional character.
‘Luke’,
Thanks for the Vivaldi. It is nice to be reminded that in a different age, people realized that the variations in weather, season and climate were beautiful and inspirational. Something to be appreciated and not fear mongered.
Here is a video that I think truly honors your valiant effort to defend the true faith of AGW from the unworthy who would move psat it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eMkth8FWno
Slight mistake on my part janama ,the Alliance Party is no more but its leader Jim Anderton has become the one man band called’ The Progressives’ ….. and thats a contradiction of terms. Regressives more like it.
Mack I have a greenie brother in Dunedin who reckons we are all going to cook soon. So I am interested in your comment “In fact if they came to where I live in the Sth Island NZ at the moment they would lose all their AGW beliefs in a second” why do you say this? I saw reference to a cold snap at Queenstown but could not find anything that showed such weather in Dunedin. Any info would be much appreciated.
“Are you saying Crichton had his hand in the public purse?”
I’m saying that if all you want to do is make some money, there are better ways to do it than becoming a scientist. The pay scales for the CSIRO would not attract a single MBA.
The local temps. for June about 2 thirds down ‘ Harsh words for deniers from nobel laurete’,dhmo. I cannot believe anybody living in Dunedin would think we’re going to cook.
The poor wretches have been snowed in several times already this year with the panelbeaters doing a roaring trade.
Mack: My neighbour, on a holiday to NZ , slipped on some “global warming” and broke his arm.
In these days of Ocupational Health and safety, shouldn’t Global Warming come with a warning?
Quite right chris ,but the media will say it was ’sunstroke’ that caused his fall.
SJT “The pay scales for the CSIRO would not attract a single MBA.”
How much they are paid is NOT the issue, one issue is independence.
The other is the fact that you attempted to create the impression that Crichton despite being a novelist which helped him to be independent (and a physician) was in not in fact a scientist i.e and anthropoligist. Since this is the obvious source of your information you cannot claim ignorance.
Then there is the rest of your failed attempt to poison the well. If the science is beyond you at least have the good manners to remain silent.
Mack fortunately you don’t know my brother and his friends. Do you have any links to weather reporting in Dunedin please?
Sorry dhmo Im computer illiterate. You’ll have to look after yourself there.
apologies.
“How much they are paid is NOT the issue, one issue is independence.
The other is the fact that you attempted to create the impression that Crichton despite being a novelist which helped him to be independent (and a physician) was in not in fact a scientist i.e and anthropoligist. Since this is the obvious source of your information you cannot claim ignorance.
Then there is the rest of your failed attempt to poison the well. If the science is beyond you at least have the good manners to remain silent.”
Yeah, business is a huge source of income for pure research ….. not. They want to apply the results that can be commercialised, that’s usually about as far as it goes.
He was not a scientist. Tell me what he published.
By the way dhmo don’t take too much notice of your brother and friends . Dunedinites are compulsive liars when it comes to talking about their weather.
I should know I’ve lived there 8 years and trust me it’s perishing.
Try TVNZ weather.
Little Will: “He was not a scientist. Tell me what he published.”
Being a scientist is a matter of training you keep on going off in in irrelevant directions.
I’m sure all those molecular biologist, histologists chemists, biochemists that work in the path labs that test the tissue samples (you didn’t really believe that doctors do the test like in House did you?) would be pleased to hear that you have unilaterally demoted them to amateur status because they don’t and are never likely to publish.
Any person living in Dunedin still believing in global warming illustrates perfectly the degree of firm fixedness with which these ostriches have their heads buried in the sand.