Fox Climate Reporting Rates “Pants on Fire” – “Retired Accountant” as Climate Expert

http://climatecrocks.com/2015/02/17...oting-a-retired-accountant-as-climate-expert/

Fox News continues it's lie campaign on climate change, this time claiming climate scientists have fabricated data (They have not) and claiming people to be climate experts who are no such thing.

Meanwhile conservatives want Brian Williams head because he misremembered something. Give me a break.

 

Attack the messenger, not the message?

 

What message? Fox made up the message.

 

Still my FAVORITE of the RIGHT WING and the Bush administration made a NASA CLIMATE SCIENTIST be interviewed with LAWYERS IN THE ROOM, sitting still off camera. In other words, a NASA SCIENTIST was too much an expert/B] to speak without the approval from the WHITE HOUSE. The 60 Minutes piece showed WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF (a petroleum lobbyist) on memos from the WHITE HOUSE!!

Video below...


Rewriting The Science
Scientist Says Politicians Edit Global Warming Research

2006
Mar 17

This story originally aired on March 19, 2006.

As a government scientist, James Hansen is taking a risk. He says there are things the White House doesn't want you to hear but he's going to say them anyway.

Hansen is arguably the world's leading researcher on global warming. He's the head of NASA's top institute studying the climate. But as correspondent Scott Pelley first reported last spring, this imminent scientist says that the Bush administration is restricting who he can talk to and editing what he can say. Politicians, he says, are rewriting the science.

But he didn't hold back speaking to Pelley, telling 60 Minutes what he knows.

Asked if he believes the administration is censoring what he can say to the public, Hansen says: "Or they're censoring whether or not I can say it. I mean, I say what I believe if I'm allowed to say it."...

What James Hansen believes is that global warming is accelerating. He points to the melting arctic and to Antarctica, where new data show massive losses of ice to the sea.

Is it fair to say at this point that humans control the climate? Is that possible?

"There's no doubt about that, says Hansen. "The natural changes, the speed of the natural changes is now dwarfed by the changes that humans are making to the atmosphere and to the surface."

Those human changes, he says, are driven by burning fossil fuels that pump out greenhouse gases like CO2, carbon dioxide. Hansen has a theory that man has just 10 years to reduce greenhouse gases before global warming reaches what he calls a tipping point and becomes unstoppable. He says the White House is blocking that message.

"In my more than three decades in the government I've never witnessed such restrictions on the ability of scientists to communicate with the public," says Hansen.

Restrictions like an e-mail Hansen's institute received from NASA in 2004. "… there is a new review process … ," the e-mail read. "The White House (is) now reviewing all climate related press releases," it continued.

Why the scrutiny of Hansen's work? Well, his Goddard Institute for Space Studies is the source of respected but sobering research on warming. It recently announced 2005 was the warmest year on record. Hansen started at NASA more than 30 years ago, spending nearly all that time studying the earth. How important is his work? 60 Minutes asked someone at the top, Ralph Cicerone, president of the nation's leading institute of science, the National Academy of Sciences.

"I can't think of anybody who I would say is better than Hansen. You might argue that there's two or three others as good, but nobody better," says Cicerone.

And Cicerone, who's an atmospheric chemist, said the same thing every leading scientist told 60 Minutes.

"Climate change is really happening," says Cicerone.

 

There is no such thing as a climate scientist.

You do not get a degree in "climatology" from a university. Basically anyone that claims to study anything in regards to anything that may affect climate can call themselves a climate scientist. If you look at all the so called top experts you will see that they are comprised of the traditional hard sciences, meteorology, geology, biology....there is no such thing as climatology.

There are a few universities that offer stupid climatology classes but those are simply lures to get young liberals enrolled who think that climate change is man-made. You will not see those universities giving them a degree in climatology however.

So every time I hear one of you left-wing nuts talk about what this or that "climate expert" says, it makes me chuckle at your ignorance and how easily you fall for the buzz words the left invents to keep you engaged.

 

"Why is it that when politicians make basic science mistakes in support of the hypothesis of dangerous human-caused global warming, no government agency or university representative corrects them? It is not as if such errors are rare; they are happening all the time.
For example, all climate modellers correctly label their speculations of future temperatures as “projections”, meaning that they have no validated forecast skill. Yet lawmakers instead treat the models as providing forecasts or predictions. Because this misusage is never corrected by those in-the-know, our leaders get away with basing expensive public policy on misinformation."
http://www.buckscountycouriertimes....cle_16bf6753-a266-5540-8fa6-3647c7e181ac.html

The lying, fraud, data manipulation, and bogus credentials as "climtate scientists" has been the core of the AGW nonsense. Apparently, the Daily Kos never mentioned Michael Mann, Climategate, or the amazing flaws in the computer games that are supposedly predicting the weather so Tao missed all of that.

And when your messenger is ClimateCrocks you have to hope people don't attack the messenger.

 

He knows it very well but is playing stupid. Hell, a 10 second google search will produce tons of sourced material about faulty data but some people just choose to put those partisan blinders on and keep repeating the same crap.

It is really amazing isn't it?

 

There is no major in it because that's an unnecessarily specific thing to major in. What's the point in majoring about a specific subject only relevant to a current event when you could learn about the chemistry and physics that are the mechanics for climatology.

There isn't a bee science majors either but there are bee scientists. Scientists who specialize in bee behavior.

I'm a software engineer. I majored in Computer Science. I didn't major in software engineering. That would be way too specific for a major. Majors are supposed to be broad and give the foundations to specialize in something.

There definitely are climate scientists. They majored in earth science or chemistry or physics or earth science and they specialized in Climate science.

Saying there are no climate scientists would be news to the thousands of people with the climate scientists job title around the world.

 

Misremembered being shot down in a blackhawk?

Give ME a break... lol.

 

You may be technical correct, but you can get advanced degrees from U.S. universities and others around the world in climate change, which is close enough as far as I am concerned. Now, where do you go to get your degree in denialism?

 

I've watched saving private ryan so many times I started telling my friends I stormed Normandy beach. They had to remind me that it never happened, I was in denial for a bit but eventually realized I only thought I was at D-Day.

 

Bee scientists are called biologists.

lol

I have a PHD in political science but guess what, I could technically call myself a climate scientist because I did take some hard science courses and have contributed to research projects in geology.

That officially would make me a climate scientist and as a climate scientist I am saying that climate change is not man-made.

You may feel free to use me as a source if you wish.

 

If there has been scientific fraud then why is there no uproar in the scientific community? You're telling me it's not just the climate scientists involved? It's literally every scientist ever? Because that's what it would take for no scientists to be outraged by this. You know why they're not outraged? Because the data adjustments were basic statistical adjustments every scientist ever has done. The problem isn't the scientists. The problem is you don't understand how science works.

 

But Obama is an expert on global warming and we should believe him.

 

They're called both. Biologist is a broad term. You wouldn't hire any biologist to talk about bees.

- - - Updated - - -

He's not. And we shouldn't.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes. If you did research on climate science you would be considered a climate scientists. Not sure where the scandal is on that.

 

Just glancing at that list I did not see one single program that was from an accredited school.

What are those, like those online doctor degrees you get?

"BE A SURGEON IN ONE SEMESTER".

lol

 

Might want to check what the neuroscientists and memory experts are saying on the subject.

 

The scandal is that I could call myself a climate scientist and I do not know the first thing about the science behind climate change.

Nada, zilch, zero.

Now I can recite the political history of climate change without looking at a note but as for how it actually works I do not know more than I can research while I type on these forums. I am in no way even an amateur at it let alone some sort of accredited scientist.

So when you see things quoted by "climate scientists" it may behoove you to research their credentials before using them as a source for your argument.

 

I cant believe someone actually believes that lie. You may be the first person I have ran across that does.

 

Hmm, that's funny:

http://cms.bsu.edu/academics/colleg...ons/programs/bachelors/meteorologyclimatology

Are you going to claim that Ball State is not accredited?

 

Good luck getting hired to do climate research without knowing anything about the science.

Biochem, earth science, physicists, chemists and all other majors typically hired for climate research are all very well aware of the science behind climate change.

 

Where in the hell is Ball State University?

Is that a joke or something?

 

Ball State is a good school in Indiana.

 

Still does not alter my point though.

And I actually started my scholastic career as a computer science major but failed miserably as soon as the math hit me. I have no idea how people like you or engineers do that.

Obviously I dropped that career path very early on.

 

Are you serious? Ball State is a really good school in Indiana. There goes your credibility.