Members banned from this thread: Phantasmal, CharacterAssassin, ThatOwlWoman, Charoite, Poor Richard Saunders, Trumpet, Walt and jacksonsprat22


Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: NOAA Hires Climate Realist, Media Strokes Out

  1. #1 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    108,120
    Thanks
    60,501
    Thanked 35,051 Times in 26,519 Posts
    Groans
    47,393
    Groaned 4,742 Times in 4,521 Posts
    Blog Entries
    61

    Default NOAA Hires Climate Realist, Media Strokes Out

    .
    About bloody time as well, NASA GISS should be purged of alarmists as well!

    Dear Men of the Right, you might complain that you have not got all you wanted from President Trump. But you will not be able to deny he has the unparalleled ability to send his enemies into shivering bat-guano fits of drooling insanity. It is a beautiful thing to see. The entertainment value alone of his presidency makes his re-election imperative.

    Trump has done his signal service for us again by hiring a friend of ours, David Legates, for a top science position at NOAA.

    Long-time readers will remember Legates. He allowed me to tag along on a few papers on the climate (example). The most infamous of which caused—I’m guessing—at least seven TIAs, three full strokes, seventeen angina attacks, and four fatal myocardial infarctions. This was “Why Models Run Hot: Results From An Irreducibly Simple Climate Model“, with lead author Christopher Monckton.

    This peer-reviewed sensation made a simple claim: man, like all creatures, influences the climate; he is influencing this one, likely to the tune of a 1 degree C or so global temperature increase with a doubling of pre-industrial atmospheric carbon dioxide.

    Now, with all the worry, angst, consternation, fretting, wailing, lamentations, and just plain unhappiness about global-warming-of-doom, you’d think a paper like ours would be greeted with cheers and sighs of relief! Here was hope! We thought we were all going to die of heat death, but here was evidence saying maybe it will be okay. Isn’t that wonderful!

    Alas, no.

    Word is that that MSNBC reporter lady’s hair caught on fire when reading our story. Environmentalist activists lit torches. Members of Congress—and here I do not jest—launched investigations. Willie Soon, one of the other authors, was hounded, harassed, and hectored. Monkton was disparaged in many foreign languages. My old site was hacked. All of us were called names that I hadn’t even learned in the military.

    It was strange. It was almost as if the left did not want good news about the climate! It was as if the left hated the idea that their services to cure this non-problem were not necessary. But how could this be? They loved Science! Yet when science said “Calm yourselves”, that love evaporated.

    It’s true. The left became science deniers. A sad thing to see.

    Well, five years have passed and we have all grown in maturity and sobriety. We have come to appreciate the massive and unseen uncertainties that lurk in scientific models. We’ve seen how many forecasts have failed, we’ve seen that our fears were exaggerated. Our well-funded scientists, now abashed, have switched from temerity to timidity.

    Strange, then, that NPR said “Longtime Climate Science Denier Hired At NOAA“. They said Legates, “a University of Delaware professor of climatology who has spent much of his career questioning basic tenets of climate science”.

    Younger readers won’t recall that it used be the job of scientists to question basic, and even not-so-basic, tenets of science. That was how, in the old days, mistakes were recognized and progress made. All that has, of course, changed for the better. Tenets are now supplied by political agencies and are, as is proper, unquestionable.

    One has to admit that this change makes doing science much easier. Used to take years, even decades, of gruesome and mostly vain toil to ferret out flubs in theories, and even longer to discover fixes. Now all we have to do is check with the press and we know all the right answers.

    This is where the term denier originates. Anybody who questions the official line is called one. Anybody who can prove the parts of the official line are false are not only called deniers, but names I’m not allowed to print (my mother reads this blog). Truth and accuracy are not wanted. Compliance is all that counts.

    CNN sent plaintive emails to people asking for dirt on Legates. That MSNBC’s lady’s hair caught fire again. Science magazine, an international journal of politics, not realizing the pun, called Legates’s hiring an “escalation”.

    The most devastating critique of all came from the ex-head of the American Society of Interior Designers, Randy Fiser. He said Legates’s use of throw pillows and afghan carpet combination was sure to spell disaster for the country.

    Kidding! No, Fiser was hired by The American Geophysical Union, which is evidently an organization devoted to settle the scientific debate of wood floors versus tile. Fiser demanded Legates’s position be revoked. It’s not clear, but Fiser may be holding his breath until he turns blue to show earnest he is.

    Then came the hate calls. I have permission for you to delight in this mad woman’s ravings. She apparently believes “climate change”, and not admitted and caught arsonists, are responsible the wildfires out west (how many times have we been reminded that propaganda works?). I have removed all identifying information, so there are a few quiet spots.
    https://wmbriggs.com/post/32598/

  2. #2 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    108,120
    Thanks
    60,501
    Thanked 35,051 Times in 26,519 Posts
    Groans
    47,393
    Groaned 4,742 Times in 4,521 Posts
    Blog Entries
    61

    Default

    .

    All the warmist scumbags are coming out of the woodwork!


    The Washington Post’s coverage of David Legates’ appointment to a position with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is hopelessly biased and inaccurate, par for the course for the Post’s coverage of environmental issues.

    The lead sentences say Prof. Legates has “long questioned the scientific consensus that human activity is causing global warming.”

    In fact, Prof. Legates has long questioned whether there is a scientific consensus, and his writing (including in peer reviewed science journals) shows there is not. He is not alone. Most scientists disagree with the exaggerated claims of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

    The reporters say, disapprovingly, that Prof. Legates was “forced out of his role as [Delaware’s] state climatologist” by a Democrat governor who objected to his views on climate change. Yet later in the article, the reporters strenuously object to the idea that Prof. Legates may have been hired by the Trump administration because of his views. The reporters’ hypocrisy destroys their credibility.

    NOAA, according to the reporters, “has until now continued its climate research and communication activities unfettered by political influence.” No source is given for that claim. What they mean is that after President Obama thoroughly politicized and weaponized the agency in his war against coal, his administration’s hold-overs have done all they can to obstruct the current administration’s efforts to correct the situation. The Deep State is firmly in control of NOAA.

    The reporters quote an anonymous source inside NOAA calling the appointment a “midnight hire” and saying “the need for any new talent coming into this organization at this point is really not needed” (sic). Right. Why would any reporter use this ridiculous and transparently self-serving comment by an anonymous source in a “news” story?

    The reporters define The Heartland Institute as “funded in part by the fossil fuel industry.” How much? They don’t say. (They never say.) The truth is that less than 10% of the organization’s budget comes from companies in the energy industry, and this has always been the case. Heartland receives less funding from energy companies than nearly any of the environmental organizations in the country who are on the other side of the global warming debate. Haven’t you heard? Exxon-Mobil supports a carbon tax. This smear is just a Democrat Party talking point with no basis in fact. Five minutes on Heartland’s website would have revealed this.

    The reporters obviously spent less than five minutes on Heartland’s website because they go on to say Prof. Legates is lead author of a “Heartland-funded, non-peer-reviewed rebuttal to the IPCC, called “The IPCC Reconsidered.”

    Really? Heartland has published a series of reports (five volumes so far, each about 1,000 pages long composed of reviews of peer-reviewed scientific research) titled “Climate Change Reconsidered.” Those reports are produced by the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC); Heartland only publishes them. They are peer reviewed; as a lead editor, I know this first hand.

    According to the reporters, the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) is “a research and advocacy group” and its staffer is a “watchdog.” Right. And Black Lives Matter (BLM) is a charity that operates soup kitchens in low-income neighborhoods. In fact, the UCS is a hard-left advocacy group that uses scientific controversies to advance its anti-free enterprise, anti-America agenda. Of course it could be counted on to attack a scientist who refuses to go along with its propaganda efforts. No real reporter would go to such a source for a comment on Prof. Legates’ appointment.

    The article ends with some long quotations from a “marine scientist” and former Obama political appointee attacking Prof. Legates. They couldn’t find a climate scientist willing to criticize the appointment? Or someone who isn’t an Obama legacy? Was Michael Mann, the usual go-to character assassin of the liberal media, too busy blogging about his support for BLM? (Mann who, incidentally, is viewed by his peers as “an embarrassment to the profession.” A whole book with that title has been written about him.) Oh, check that, Mann was the first person interviewed by PBS when Prof. Legates’ appointment became known.

    The Washington Post continues to make a fool of itself by playing stenographer to the most radical fringe of the environmental movement. Prof. Legates is a fine man with a distinguished academic career, his appointment at NOAA may be a long-overdue attempt to inject new talent into an organization that lost its independence and integrity a long time ago.


    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/09/...tment-to-noaa/
    Last edited by cancel2 2022; 09-30-2020 at 09:28 PM.

  3. #3 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    108,120
    Thanks
    60,501
    Thanked 35,051 Times in 26,519 Posts
    Groans
    47,393
    Groaned 4,742 Times in 4,521 Posts
    Blog Entries
    61

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grajonca View Post
    .

    All the warmist scumbags are coming out of the woodwork!


    The Washington Post’s coverage of David Legates’ appointment to a position with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is hopelessly biased and inaccurate, par for the course for the Post’s coverage of environmental issues.

    The lead sentences say Prof. Legates has “long questioned the scientific consensus that human activity is causing global warming.”

    In fact, Prof. Legates has long questioned whether there is a scientific consensus, and his writing (including in peer reviewed science journals) shows there is not. He is not alone. Most scientists disagree with the exaggerated claims of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

    The reporters say, disapprovingly, that Prof. Legates was “forced out of his role as [Delaware’s] state climatologist” by a Democrat governor who objected to his views on climate change. Yet later in the article, the reporters strenuously object to the idea that Prof. Legates may have been hired by the Trump administration because of his views. The reporters’ hypocrisy destroys their credibility.

    NOAA, according to the reporters, “has until now continued its climate research and communication activities unfettered by political influence.” No source is given for that claim. What they mean is that after President Obama thoroughly politicized and weaponized the agency in his war against coal, his administration’s hold-overs have done all they can to obstruct the current administration’s efforts to correct the situation. The Deep State is firmly in control of NOAA.

    The reporters quote an anonymous source inside NOAA calling the appointment a “midnight hire” and saying “the need for any new talent coming into this organization at this point is really not needed” (sic). Right. Why would any reporter use this ridiculous and transparently self-serving comment by an anonymous source in a “news” story?

    The reporters define The Heartland Institute as “funded in part by the fossil fuel industry.” How much? They don’t say. (They never say.) The truth is that less than 10% of the organization’s budget comes from companies in the energy industry, and this has always been the case. Heartland receives less funding from energy companies than nearly any of the environmental organizations in the country who are on the other side of the global warming debate. Haven’t you heard? Exxon-Mobil supports a carbon tax. This smear is just a Democrat Party talking point with no basis in fact. Five minutes on Heartland’s website would have revealed this.

    The reporters obviously spent less than five minutes on Heartland’s website because they go on to say Prof. Legates is lead author of a “Heartland-funded, non-peer-reviewed rebuttal to the IPCC, called “The IPCC Reconsidered.”

    Really? Heartland has published a series of reports (five volumes so far, each about 1,000 pages long composed of reviews of peer-reviewed scientific research) titled “Climate Change Reconsidered.” Those reports are produced by the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC); Heartland only publishes them. They are peer reviewed; as a lead editor, I know this first hand.

    According to the reporters, the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) is “a research and advocacy group” and its staffer is a “watchdog.” Right. And Black Lives Matter (BLM) is a charity that operates soup kitchens in low-income neighborhoods. In fact, the UCS is a hard-left advocacy group that uses scientific controversies to advance its anti-free enterprise, anti-America agenda. Of course it could be counted on to attack a scientist who refuses to go along with its propaganda efforts. No real reporter would go to such a source for a comment on Prof. Legates’ appointment.

    The article ends with some long quotations from a “marine scientist” and former Obama political appointee attacking Prof. Legates. They couldn’t find a climate scientist willing to criticize the appointment? Or someone who isn’t an Obama legacy? Was Michael Mann, the usual go-to character assassin of the liberal media, too busy blogging about his support for BLM? (Mann who, incidentally, is viewed by his peers as “an embarrassment to the profession.” A whole book with that title has been written about him.) Oh, check that, Mann was the first person interviewed by PBS when Prof. Legates’ appointment became known.

    The Washington Post continues to make a fool of itself by playing stenographer to the most radical fringe of the environmental movement. Prof. Legates is a fine man with a distinguished academic career, his appointment at NOAA may be a long-overdue attempt to inject new talent into an organization that lost its independence and integrity a long time ago.


    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/09/...tment-to-noaa/
    Here are the obnoxious cunts at CNN doing what they do best!! Notice how in the title they call him a denier and later on a sceptic.

    Climate science denier appointed to top position at NOAA

    David Legates, a longtime climate change skeptic, has been appointed by the Trump administration to help run the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the federal agency charged with producing "much of the climate research funded" by the government, The Washington Post reports.Source: CNN

    https://edition.cnn.com/videos/polit...sr-pkg-vpx.cnn

  4. #4 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Posts
    20,638
    Thanks
    1,821
    Thanked 11,253 Times in 6,879 Posts
    Groans
    894
    Groaned 1,852 Times in 1,715 Posts

    Default

    There simply is no bigger or more important issue than protecting the environment right now.

    Just 2 hundred years into the industrial revolution, and we have already destroyed huge swaths of habitat, polluted our water and air and pushed the oceanic food supply to the brink. Our way of living is not sustainable - nothing is more obvious.

    Why people continue to oppose regulations and common sense environmental protection measures is truly mind boggling.

  5. The Following User Groans At BartenderElite For This Awful Post:

    cancel2 2022 (09-30-2020)

  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to BartenderElite For This Post:

    Charoite (09-30-2020), Guno צְבִי (09-30-2020)

  7. #5 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    108,120
    Thanks
    60,501
    Thanked 35,051 Times in 26,519 Posts
    Groans
    47,393
    Groaned 4,742 Times in 4,521 Posts
    Blog Entries
    61

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BartenderElite View Post
    There simply is no bigger or more important issue than protecting the environment right now.

    Just 2 hundred years into the industrial revolution, and we have already destroyed huge swaths of habitat, polluted our water and air and pushed the oceanic food supply to the brink. Our way of living is not sustainable - nothing is more obvious.

    Why people continue to oppose regulations and common sense environmental protection measures is truly mind boggling.
    I'm sorry but your opinion is not worth shit, stick to cocktail making science is not for you! CO2 is not a pollutant idiot, you would be dead without it ffs!! David Legates is a giant in the world of climatology, he is a man of huge integrity not some placeman appointed by the likes of Obama.

  8. #6 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    NC originally from NYC
    Posts
    35,172
    Thanks
    141,422
    Thanked 23,873 Times in 14,203 Posts
    Groans
    58
    Groaned 1,454 Times in 1,373 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BartenderElite View Post
    There simply is no bigger or more important issue than protecting the environment right now.

    Just 2 hundred years into the industrial revolution, and we have already destroyed huge swaths of habitat, polluted our water and air and pushed the oceanic food supply to the brink. Our way of living is not sustainable - nothing is more obvious.

    Why people continue to oppose regulations and common sense environmental protection measures is truly mind boggling.
    Thailand for example is a garbage dump from all the farang tourists

    “If we have to have a choice between being dead and pitied, and being alive with a bad image, we’d rather be alive and have the bad image.”

    — Golda Meir

    Zionism is the movement for the self-determination and statehood for the Jewish people in their ancestral homeland, the land of Israel.


    “If Hamas put down their weapons, there would be no more violence. If the Jews put down their weapons, there would be no Israel."






    ברוך השם

  9. #7 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    NC originally from NYC
    Posts
    35,172
    Thanks
    141,422
    Thanked 23,873 Times in 14,203 Posts
    Groans
    58
    Groaned 1,454 Times in 1,373 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Nasty people, shit hole country

    “If we have to have a choice between being dead and pitied, and being alive with a bad image, we’d rather be alive and have the bad image.”

    — Golda Meir

    Zionism is the movement for the self-determination and statehood for the Jewish people in their ancestral homeland, the land of Israel.


    “If Hamas put down their weapons, there would be no more violence. If the Jews put down their weapons, there would be no Israel."






    ברוך השם

  10. #8 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Location
    Phoenix
    Posts
    38,770
    Thanks
    14
    Thanked 19,350 Times in 13,456 Posts
    Groans
    3
    Groaned 846 Times in 805 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BartenderElite View Post
    There simply is no bigger or more important issue than protecting the environment right now.
    Protecting it from what?

    Just 2 hundred years into the industrial revolution, and we have already destroyed huge swaths of habitat, polluted our water and air and pushed the oceanic food supply to the brink. Our way of living is not sustainable - nothing is more obvious.
    The Industrial Revolution started about 1700 to 1750 depending on who you want to cite. That's roughly 300 years ago. Since the peak of that era about 1950, we have been moving into the Electronics Revolution and the Industrial age has come to a close. With that, we have restored much of the damage of the Industrial Age to the environment and things are getting far better, not worse.

    Why people continue to oppose regulations and common sense environmental protection measures is truly mind boggling.
    Give me some examples of "regulations and common sense environmental protection measures" you mean please.

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to T. A. Gardner For This Post:

    cancel2 2022 (10-01-2020)

  12. #9 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    27,505
    Thanks
    5,209
    Thanked 7,295 Times in 5,845 Posts
    Groans
    1,263
    Groaned 390 Times in 368 Posts

    Default

    cancel.
    Don't be afraid to see what you see

  13. #10 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    27,505
    Thanks
    5,209
    Thanked 7,295 Times in 5,845 Posts
    Groans
    1,263
    Groaned 390 Times in 368 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BartenderElite View Post
    There simply is no bigger or more important issue than protecting the environment right now.

    Just 2 hundred years into the industrial revolution, and we have already destroyed huge swaths of habitat, polluted our water and air and pushed the oceanic food supply to the brink. Our way of living is not sustainable - nothing is more obvious.

    Why people continue to oppose regulations and common sense environmental protection measures is truly mind boggling.
    Where do you live right now? I'm not asking for your location I'm just asking if you live in a new development.
    Don't be afraid to see what you see

  14. #11 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    108,120
    Thanks
    60,501
    Thanked 35,051 Times in 26,519 Posts
    Groans
    47,393
    Groaned 4,742 Times in 4,521 Posts
    Blog Entries
    61

    Default

    When will Joo-no get the message that he is on ignore?

  15. #12 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    108,120
    Thanks
    60,501
    Thanked 35,051 Times in 26,519 Posts
    Groans
    47,393
    Groaned 4,742 Times in 4,521 Posts
    Blog Entries
    61

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
    Protecting it from what?



    The Industrial Revolution started about 1700 to 1750 depending on who you want to cite. That's roughly 300 years ago. Since the peak of that era about 1950, we have been moving into the Electronics Revolution and the Industrial age has come to a close. With that, we have restored much of the damage of the Industrial Age to the environment and things are getting far better, not worse.



    Give me some examples of "regulations and common sense environmental protection measures" you mean please.
    He's one of those that just spouts the standard talking points without ever thinking about it. Tragically there are many like him, not one of them is able to think rationally and logically.
    Last edited by cancel2 2022; 10-01-2020 at 11:02 PM.

  16. #13 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Location
    Phoenix
    Posts
    38,770
    Thanks
    14
    Thanked 19,350 Times in 13,456 Posts
    Groans
    3
    Groaned 846 Times in 805 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Guille View Post
    Where do you live right now? I'm not asking for your location I'm just asking if you live in a new development.
    I'd be more interested if it's the same planet as the rest-of-us...

  17. The Following User Says Thank You to T. A. Gardner For This Post:

    cancel2 2022 (10-01-2020)

  18. #14 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    27,505
    Thanks
    5,209
    Thanked 7,295 Times in 5,845 Posts
    Groans
    1,263
    Groaned 390 Times in 368 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
    I'd be more interested if it's the same planet as the rest-of-us...
    Me too.
    Don't be afraid to see what you see

  19. The Following User Says Thank You to Lightbringer For This Post:

    cancel2 2022 (10-02-2020)

Similar Threads

  1. Trump has had a series of strokes!
    By Jarod in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-31-2020, 06:27 PM
  2. I"m a Race Realist.. Which means i'm honest.. No prob with bashing White people also
    By Mitchthomas20172017 in forum Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories Forum
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 08-24-2018, 02:27 PM
  3. NOAA scientist blows the whistle on NOAA
    By Celticguy in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 02-21-2017, 02:02 AM
  4. Swallow up: how a climate skeptic became a realist
    By Legion Troll in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 11-15-2015, 08:12 PM
  5. Heat Strokes
    By Cancel7 in forum Off Topic Forum
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 08-01-2008, 08:33 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •