James Hansen on Climate change

Interview with James Hansen (from NASA's Goddard Institute) recorded at the UN University G8 symposium on innovation and climate change held July 4 2008 in Tokyo.

ourworld.unu.edu/en/2008/09/17/innovation-and-climate-change/

Category:

Education

Tags:

• climate change
• United Nations University
• NASA
• G8 Summit
• global warming
• James Hansen
• climate
• environment
• un
• unu
• hd
• climatematters

[UNUChannel]

It is great that you are having a discussion on the science of climate change. However, please do try to keep the discussion civil. We do not publish comments that are uncivil or use inappropriate language. Thank you.

[TAMPADOC64]

@ExperienceCounts2 It's undeniable that it's certainly not a case of me lying, but rather your stupidity. I cited multiple articles where your AGW gods admitted they tampered with data and tried to justify their actions. You can call me what ever you like, I doubt anyone pays attention to a spit drooling moron like yourself. Perhaps someday you'll remove your head from your rectum so you can smell reality. Until then I shall suggest that you self fornicate with extreme vigor until you expire.

[ExperienceCounts2]

@TAMPADOC64 I defy you to cite a specific case of data tampering. Until you cite a specific case of tampering or scientific fraud I will continue to call you a liar. Cite evidence or quit crying.

[TAMPADOC64]

@ExperienceCounts2 You're a funny if not pathetic creature. You were the one who started hurling insults, not I. Once again since obviously your lack of intelligence prevented you from understanding this the first time: The AGW cult only had to tamper with a small amount of data to skew the models. They eliminated little things like the entire MWP, and the cooling in the 50s and 60s.

Also, you mindless toad, they admitted these actions and tried to rationalize them, Are you that stupid????

[ExperienceCounts2]

@TAMPADOC64 Apparently you think by hurling enough insults it will make people forget that you present no evidence, that you have no explanation of why you throw away 80% of the data to make your claims, that you cannot cite a single specific case of scientific fraud and that you cannot answer the question that any rational person can easily answer: your own personal opinion on what evidence would have to be presented to convince you that AGW theory is correct. Insults don't hide your lies.

[TAMPADOC64]

@ExperienceCounts2 I would agree that you're a moron; you are babbling propaganda that is not factual! The IPCC INVITED it's members when it was for you spit drooling moron! What do you believe that the organization was formed and instantly scientist wanted to join? You continually demonstrate that you're nothing but a propaganda queen. You also demonstrate that you're a mindless tool and understand nothing of what you are commenting on.

Please do the world a favor and go away!

[ExperienceCounts2]

@TAMPADOC64 False. The people who serve on the IPCC committees are unpaid volunteers, they are not solicited by the IPCC. That has always been the case. Would you agree that a scientist who publishes papers containing the same error they made years earlier and who refuse to respond to (or even acknowledge) very clear, very specific fundamental errors, are not qualified to sit on the IPCC?

[ExperienceCounts2]

@TAMPADOC64 I didn't realize that the ability to read a news story to the end was called "MORON". When you develop the skills of "MORON" such that you can read the entire article instead of he one sentence from it, you'll actually see it was the very same person saying it. And once again, you make wild, unsubstantiated claims that the data was destroyed. Have you even glanced at the paper in question or looked at which data set it cited? (that's rhetorical, obviously you did not)

[TAMPADOC64]

@ExperienceCounts2 So what you're trying to say here is that IPCC picked; actually begged the top person at MIT (you do realize how hard it is to work at MIT I hope) but after he disagreed with their fake findings hes now not qualified?

Do you sniff glue a lot?

Do you understand the definition of propaganda?

If he's not really a scientist (laughing at your stupidity) and he is so unqualified: why did the IPCC want him badly?

You're a DRONE! You can no longer reason! You spew PROPAGANDA!

[TAMPADOC64]

@ExperienceCounts2 First of all, you constantly demonstrate your stupidity! They ADMITTED you MORON, that they substituted data and destroyed the original data. Not all of the data you idiot was from NOAA. If you're attempting to tell us that tree ring data from Siberia is from NOAA it further demonstrates your total lack of intelligence. It's obvious you bring nothing to this discussion but propaganda and since you refuse to face facts but instead insist on childish behavior, this is over.PUTZ