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

[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 We do not publish comments that are uncivil or use inappropriate language.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.

[david222444]

So why did we all freeze this winter?

[UNUChannel]

Think you may be confusing climate and weather.

[ExperienceCounts2]

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.

[ExperienceCounts2]

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.

[ExperienceCounts2]

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]

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)

[ExperienceCounts2]

You're a liar. You cannot cite any data, otherwise you would have. As for your link, do you even know what an FTP server is? It's used to serve up files for transfer. When files are removed from the ftp download directory it doesn't mean the data was destroyed. I repeat, you're a liar. No data was deleted. As the original article said "We haven't destroyed anything. The data is still there -- you can still get these stations from the [NOAA] National Climatic Data Center."

[ExperienceCounts2]

ossfoundation us/projects/environment/global­-warming/myths/richard-lindzen "What is interesting [...] is that Hansen made two appeals to the data gathering community to test a) whether water vapour feedbacks can be observed, and b) whether the ocean heat content is increasing in line with the model predictions. It is quite telling that both of these data analyses have since been made and they confirm Hansen's contentions, not Lindzen's."

[ExperienceCounts2]

"I must give him points for brazenness by doing a blatant cherry pick right in front of his audience. They seemed to buy it.

I'll go the other way. Look at the graph on the lower right and then look at it in context in the graph on the top right with the red line showing the trend. It's clear that warming didn't stop in 1998 and it shows just how misleading Lindzen's cherry pick is."

Yeah, sounds like "the foremost expert" to me. Even his own graphs call him a liar.

[ExperienceCounts2]

scienceblogs com /deltoid/2006/05/richard_lindz­en_claims_global.php "Yeah, it appears that not only was Lindzen cherry-picking, he was cherry-picking with manipulated data. Here's Lindzen's graphic and a graphic based on data downloaded from the source he cites.

You can see that he chopped off the temperature for 2003-2005 in order to make it appear to have flattened out when it was rising.

Holy cow."

[ExperienceCounts2]

Climate scientist comment on your "expert": "it is impossible to calculate the net greenhouse effect without knowing where heat is deposited by the dynamic heat transports." This sounds like a repeat of many of the L&C criticisms. And yet his 2010 revision (17 years after this correspondence) of the L&C paper completely ignores this issue!