November 24, 2009

I'm sure this still won't dissuade our friend

... Perry the Energizer Rabbit, that is, from his dogmatic belief that man-made global warming is a settled matter ... a done debate.

In one e-mail, the center's director, Phil Jones, writes Pennsylvania State University's Michael E. Mann and questions whether the work of academics that question the link between human activities and global warming deserve to make it into the prestigious IPCC report, which represents the global consensus view on climate science.

"I can't see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report," Jones writes. "Kevin and I will keep them out somehow -- even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!"

In another, Jones and Mann discuss how they can pressure an academic journal not to accept the work of climate skeptics with whom they disagree. "Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers in, this journal," Mann writes. . . .

Mann, who directs Penn State's Earth System Science Center, said the e-mails reflected the sort of "vigorous debate" researchers engage in before reaching scientific conclusions. "We shouldn't expect the sort of refined statements that scientists make when they're speaking in public," he said. (Source.)

Uh huh, right.

James Taranto asks in the link above a question I have for Perry (who's all over the DE blogosphere blasting anyone who questions man-made global warming with a zeal only matched by Al Gore), "If they (global warming believers) have the facts on their side, why do they need to resort to tactics of suppression and intimidation?"

Elsewhere locally, moonbat Nancy [Un]Willing has a post up calling for support for the Senate Climate Bill. She notes: "The December Copenhagen climate negotiations offer a terrific opportunity to send a message that nuclear power is neither an effective nor acceptable means of addressing the climate crisis."

Let's take the second, first. It's becoming quite clear that there IS no climate "crisis." Next, nuke power IS an effective means of addressing the supposed climate change about which the 'bats are perpetually worried. And just keep in mind that current nuclear power (fission reactors) is just part of the equation. The next step in nuclear is fusion which, when developed, will solve the planet's energy needs for the centuries to come.

Posted by Hube at November 24, 2009 01:06 PM | TrackBack

Comments  (We reserve the right to edit and/or delete any comments. If your comment is blocked or won't post, e-mail us and we'll post it for you.)

This is what Copenhagen is all about, Charlie Brown:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8345343.stm

I saw an interview on BBC the other morning with the Sudanese Ambassador speaking for the G33 bloc of "developing" nations (essentially China, India and Brazil and a gaggle of 3rd World mini-states and odd dictatorships) and he made it pretty clear. They want 100 Billion a year to "clean up their act" and they want the tech to do it, for free. And we have to cut our emissions by 30%...and if they don't get the bribe money, they'll go on clear-cutting the rain forests, burning all the coal they can get their hands on, and dumping their mining waste wherever they please, and it will all be our fault for being greedy capitalists.

Oh, and when the interviewer asked him about Darfur, he said the UN report was nonsense...but he was happy to accept the IPCC report. Copenhagen is a global cap-and-tax shakedown, nothing more.

Posted by: G Rex at November 24, 2009 05:22 PM

Here's the interview:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00p4r5t/HARDtalk_Abdalmahmood_Mohamad_Sudanese_UN_Ambassador/

Posted by: G Rex at November 24, 2009 05:24 PM