Comments:

  1. I keep waiting for Hansen to act out his role as defined by the denskepticons, that of wild-eyed doomsayer. Still nothing.

    Watching this video makes me even more embarrassed for our local meteorology expert Cliff Mass, who has been seduced into believing rumors about Hansen without having first collected his facts together. Dang.

  2. He wont act out that role.

    There are two James Hansen's out there. One, the one in the above video, is calm in the face of a potential planetary catastrophe (perhaps too calm) and backs up his claims with facts and figures.

    The other is a figment of the imagination of delusional people (with far too big a soap box to stand on). That James Hansen bears no resemblance to the James Hansen in the above video.

  3. Our friend Cliff Mass now seems about to launch a potentially Wattsian analysis of temperature records. This bears watching.

    http://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2012/08/sea-tac-heat.html

    Paul
    Another Pacific Northwest/very disappointed follower of Cliff.

  4. It's hard to believe he could live in such a hermetic bubble as to have failed noticing the UHI fiasco but Mass makes fairly regular mention of poorly sited thermometers.

    Hopefully Mass will save himself in time. Has anybody pointed out to him where he can learn about the issue?

  5. Here's Cliff responding to Steve Bloom:

    "The Climate Reference Network is generally first class...but unfortunately, there are so few of them and they are limited in time. By the way, I think very highly of Watt's surface station work...he has revealed how problematic many (most) of our surface stations are, as well as the poor QC work done by NCDC over the years. A national embarrassment, really...cliff"

    And away we go. . .

  6. Interesting. I see that the comment with a list of papers debunking Watts that I posted earlier to Cliff's thread on thermometer siting never appeared.

    Summing up recent events:

    -- Cliff says Skeptical Science is "a big disappointment" because SkS insults the like of Christy, and is not worth reading because it's not run by professional climatologists.

    -- Simultaneously Cliff has no answer to professionally authored rejection of the shopworn and discredited hypothesis he's now being conned into accepting, instead finds it better to "disappear" these problematic items from the sight of his readers.

    -- Meanwhile Cliff is rejecting the professional work of a myriad of career researchers and instead is attaching his wagon to an amateur climate dilettante of odious reputation, one well known for delivering unwarranted insults to various scientists.

    It's all sort of like watching Captain Smith order the Titanic to plunge full speed ahead into the night. If you'd asked me a year ago if this was possible I'd have flatly rejected the possibility. Huh.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.