The Seattle Times reporter had a chance to ask the former vice president, and current climate change guru, a few questions, and this is all Welch came up with. It would be unfair, but not terribly unfair, to sum up that brief interview by saying that Welch asked Gore how news organizations can help sell Gore's message.
What questions could Welch have asked instead? He could have asked about Gore's immense personal carbon footprint. (And if he were feeling a little snarky, he could have asked Gore to compare his home to Bush's home in Crawford.) He could have asked about conflicts of interest; Gore's message coincides with his investments in ways that bother some people. He could have asked about the decade-long pause in global warming. He could have asked about the temperature of the interior of the earth. He could have asked why carbon dioxide emissions rose so sharply during the Clinton-Gore administration, but rose less during the Bush-Cheney administration. He could have asked why Gore opposes nuclear power. He could have asked why Gore refuses to participate in debates on climate change. He could even have asked about the Gore effect.
But to have asked such questions, Welch would have had to acted as a reporter, rather than an acolyte. And to ask them he would have had to know more about the climate change debate than he would have learned from reading the Seattle Times.
Cross posted at Jim Miller on Politics.
(As usual when I discuss climate change, I suggest that you read my disclaimer, if you have not already done so.)
Posted by Jim Miller at November 20, 2009 06:09 AM | Email Thishttp://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100017393/climategate-the-final-nail-in-the-coffin-of-anthropogenic-global-warming/
Der Speigel is also asking today what happened to global warming, while Al Gore assures us that the interior of the earth is millions of degrees. Hell, we're going to become a star any minute!
They global warming scientists at Hadley worked at "hiding the decline" with "tricks", and rejoiced over the death of a leading skeptic, and wished to beat the hell out of another.
This whole scam is almost over.
Posted by: Gary on November 20, 2009 06:52 AM"It definitely is, and it's a relatively new one. People think about geothermal energy -- when they think about it at all -- in terms of the hot water bubbling up in some places, but two kilometers or so down in most places there are these incredibly hot rocks, 'cause the interior of the earth is extremely hot, several million degrees, and the crust of the earth is hot ..."
Unfortunately for Al, the science is in on the earth's core and it's more like 12K degrees, not several million degrees.If you're one of the global warming sheep that still believe what Al Gore has to spew on the subject, well, I can't help you.
Posted by: Rick D. on November 20, 2009 06:52 AMThat's the one I would have most liked his answer on!
Posted by: Duffman on November 20, 2009 06:55 AM
"The Climate Conference in Copenhagen is another step forward towards the global management of our planet... "
No thanks.
Posted by: Gary on November 20, 2009 07:43 AMAlas, no. "News"week pimped Gore as the Thinking Man's Thinking Man, but that's only because Meacham, et al., didn't have the stones to tell the inconvenient truth: Gore is the thinking man's con man.
Believe it or not, the Jayson Blair Times started to blow the whistle about Gore being the Soros of offsets/credits arbitrage. If even the NYT can climb out of the septic tank long enough to start connecting dots, why can't Craig? Why can't Conan? Why can't Evan Thomas, Norman Thomas's neo-socialist grandson? Why can't Congress and the UN?
Answer: Gore is where the money is. No way is his gravy-train scam going to be allowed to derail.
Word on the street is that Copenhagen won't be able to cope, but fear not. Congress can be depended on to finish its cap'n'whack scam just as soon as it kills us with health care.
And if, by some miracle, the Senate doesn't give Gore a blank check? EPA is drooling and slobbering at the pleasant prospect of shutting down America by regulating, as a pollutant, the CO2 we exhale. That's why Big Business is backing the Congress plan; they know that EPA fanatics will gleefully destroy us while Congress can be persuaded by bribery.
So exhale to the chief, Weird Al Gore. He's a complete idiot who flunked out of law school and dropped out of God school, but he's the smartest con who never did hard time.
Posted by: Gorebasm on November 20, 2009 08:13 AM"It's important that those who consume the products being made all around the world to the benefit of America and it's our own consumption activity that's causing the emission of greenhouse gases, then quite frankly Americans need to pay for that," - Gary Locke
Will there ever be an and to these looneys?
Posted by: Jack on November 20, 2009 08:33 AM"We Just Have to Slow Down Our Economy"
Posted by: Gary on November 20, 2009 08:46 AMLOL. Yeah, and I'll just bet Bill Clinton lies awake every night fraught with guilt over poisoning the atmosphere with all that weed he never inhaled.
On the whole, reading the Q & A, the questions were entirely softball - and even for global warming believers - unenlightening. There was no new "news" there, unless you count the Times getting to celebrity hump Gore as news.
Posted by: Don Ward on November 20, 2009 10:11 AM1) How come you have a fleet of SUV's?
2) How come President George W Bush and Michele from Soundpolitics had geothermal heat pumps before you ever did?
Posted by: Michele on November 20, 2009 10:16 AMHe's on a book tour, not running for political office. And you know what? He's not a scientist, he's an advocate. Scientific bodies have answered your questions with data and models, and your side chooses to ignore science, Mr. Miller.
Posted by: John Jensen on November 20, 2009 10:36 AMNo, they haven't. Der Speigel wants to know where the warming went too. In fact, Kenneth Trenberth, a BIG AGW scientist wants the same answer. He says the data doesn't match the model, therefore the data must be wrong.
It's a quarter to midnight on this boondoggle.
The dolt has made himself the face of this cult called global warming, so he's made himself, rightly so, a lightning rod for criticism. Is he actually that vacuous that he believes that the "interior of the earth is extremely hot, several million degrees, and the crust of the earth is hot"? Not only does this guy talk like Forrest Gump, he's also got a brain like a box of chocolates in the hot Alabama sun.
Posted by: Rick D. on November 20, 2009 10:44 AM"Professor Michael Mann, director of Pennsylvania State University's Earth System Science Centre and a regular contributor to the popular climate science blog Real Climate, features in many of the email exchanges. He said: "I'm simply not going to comment on the content of illegally obtained emails. However, I will say this: both their theft and, I believe, any reproduction of the emails that were obtained on public websites, etc, constitutes serious criminal activity. I'm hoping that the perpetrators and their facilitators will be tracked down and prosecuted to the fullest extent the law allows.""
-
Yeah, I bet you do.
Posted by: Gary on November 20, 2009 11:07 AMThis show is so liberal that it was forced to come around 360 degrees to bite its own tail for nutrients.
Mind you I love the show. Alec Baldwin's secret girlfriend is Condoleeza Rice.
Then, more importantly there is Craig Welch, a journalist who never found an enivronmental news story he couldn't distort.
I've been following his columns and trying to directly correct his mis-informed reporting for seven years.
As an analyst for both industry and regulators, I have a vantage point from the middle of the battlefield.
Craig Welch is the guy who coined the phrase "Gravel Mine". Presumably to add extra evil to what everyone in the industry has known for two hundred years as simply a "gravel pit".
A mine or a quarry require blasting. My educational efforts have obviously been wasted upon selectively deaf ears.
Craig can also take credit for putting Cantwell in office with his gross mis-characterizations of the proposed Buckhorn Gold Mine in impoverished Okanogan County. Gorton supported it. Cantwell would surely be part of the gold resource utilization via computer edge card connectors vital for her Realnetworks computer company.
Craig Welch authored a special to the Times showing photos of the pristine "Frog Pond" near the Buckhorn.
Anyone who has been to Buckhorn Mountain knows that the "Frog Pond" is at best, a seasonal cattle waller. The road in is a classic study in shacks and rusting car bodies. And the "virgin summit area" is a scraggle of gypo logging lands.
So off goes Cantwell with two school buses full of reporters. The photo op was to the North into a part of Canada with no trees, but broad horizons.
Gorton wouldn't reply to the phony reporting, and I say that's why he lost his bid to keep his Senatorship. Or maybe he was just tired of the fight.
Posted by: Bart Cannon on November 20, 2009 11:49 AMhttp://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/19/not-finding-any-gore-airbrushes-in-hurricanes-for-his-new-book/
Posted by: Paddy on November 20, 2009 11:55 AMI wonder if they are.
Posted by: Gary on November 20, 2009 12:07 PMI think that the point is made, Gore is a stupid man and has the divinity school drop-out and his "D" grade in natural sciences on his record to prove it. The leading lights of the left are usually the bigger tax cheats and dim bulbs in the land and Gore fits the mold. And this is the dope that the left sees as saving the planet. Whooee.
Posted by: G Jiggy on November 20, 2009 12:30 PM"Tim, Chris,
I hope you're not right about the lack of warming lasting till about 2020. I'd rather hoped to see the earlier Met Office press release with Doug's paper that said something like - half the years to 2014 would exceed the warmest year currently on record, 1998! "
-
Why would Phil Jones hope that the projection of no warming until 2020 be wrong? I would think he would be pleased. Right?
Unless of course he's part of a huge scientific/political conspiracy. Then it would make perfect sense. Then, trying to convince people that global warming is happening, when it isn't, makes perfect sense.
These people tried to change the peer review process to lock out skeptics. They rejoiced over the death of a skeptic. They desired to beat one skeptic violently.
It's what tyrants do... even scientists who are employed by tyrants.
Al Gore is their titular head.
Big time crime there.
Posted by: G Jiggy on November 20, 2009 12:54 PM"If what you're saying about the greenhouse effect is true, is anything going to look different down there in 20 years?" (which wold be 2008)
His answer:
"The West Side Highway [which runs along the Hudson River] will be under water."
It isn't under water.
He went on:
"And there will be tape across the windows across the street because of high winds."
There is on tape.
Dr. Hansen is included on many of the leaked emails today where the main cabal is trying to discuss what to do about the *fact* that their warming isn't happening.
Posted by: Gary on November 20, 2009 01:06 PMWhy is that?
Posted by: G Jiggy on November 20, 2009 01:14 PMFor instance, John Jensen, isn't it a relief that the whistle has been blown on these scientific frauds, and that the earth isn't warning un-naturally after all?
Now we wait.
As for the emails from ten years ago, some unethical graph sexing-up but the underlying data was not touched (source). I'm more concerned about the data and scientific consensus than how fearful graphs look.
Look, you guys are on the wrong side of science. You can find a handful of scientists who agree with you. All peer-reviewed studies published in academic journals do not. NASA does not. You explain this science away with liberal conspiracy theories. You want to know why no one answers your questions? Well, they do. Repeatedly. And you ignore the answers because you're not interested in the science.
Posted by: John Jensen on November 20, 2009 02:21 PMSo? I'm just as mad about that as I am anyDemocrat pushing that crap. What's your point?
"As for the emails from ten years ago..."
Uh... and last month.
"The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't. The CERES data published in the August BAMS 09 supplement on 2008 shows there should be even more warming: but the data are surely wrong. Our observing system is inadequate.***"
-
Gee, the data *must* be wrong because their models predicted something else. Sound like he is disappointed in the lack of "even more warming".
Wonder why.
"Mike,
Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4?
Keith will do likewise. He's not in at the moment - minor family crisis.
Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same? I don't have his new email address.
We will be getting Caspar to do likewise.
I see that CA claim they discovered the 1945 problem in the Nature paper!! "
-
Again, CA is "Climate Audit", the guy who busted the hockey stick.
Come on, John. You can't even excuse this. You probably can.
Posted by: Gary on November 20, 2009 02:44 PMOh well, maybe if we pass Cap & Tax it'll bring back the sunspots; at least that's what Algore & these trolls apparently think.....
-
Ever notice how nature can cause the earth to cool, but it can never ever cause it to warm, or so the say the great scientists?
Posted by: Gary on November 20, 2009 03:08 PMhttp://www.jbs.org/freedom-campaign/5670-lord-moncktons-warning-about-a-un-copenhagen-climate-change-treaty-goes-viral
http://www.jbs.org/freedom-campaign/5670-lord-moncktons-warning-about-a-un-copenhagen-climate-change-treaty-goes-viral
Remember what the new EU President said:
"The Climate Conference in Copenhagen is another step forward towards the global management of our planet... "
He is exactly right. That is exactly what it's about. Are you in favor of "global management of our planet", John?
Good for the National Post.
" ...If anything, I would like to see the climate change happen, so the science could be proved right, regardless of the consequences. This isn't being political, it is being selfish.
Cheers, Phil"
What kind of man says a thing like that? How 'bout you, John? Do you want to see the science proved right, regardless of the consequences?
Posted by: Gary on November 20, 2009 05:38 PMAfter taking the class, I was utterly convinced that we would be out of oil in 20 years. I recall going home on break and asking my dad, who was an engineer with the Illinois DOT, "what are we going to do with all these roads and bridges in 20 years when we're out of oil?" He just shrugged.
Plus ca change, plus ca meme chose.
Posted by: travis t on November 21, 2009 03:32 AMAnd yet, Al Gore continues to beat this dead horse. It's amusing and very helpful. Because the facts clearly weigh in against AGW. So as more and more people wake up, and Democrats continue to stay on this train, there will only be more trouble for Democrats.
Simply, it's the Sun, and the water in both the atmosphere and the oceans that control climate. Humans are but a flyspeck.
Posted by: Jeff B. on November 21, 2009 08:31 AMAnyone can do as I have done and go read the hundreds of scientific papers at WUWT, ICECAP, etc. There is plenty of real science that does not fit the alleged consensus. Real science certainly is not about manipulating data to get a result and yet that is exactly what Mann, Briffa and the GCMs do. Real science is about repeatability and open methods and data. It took Steve McIntyre years to get the data from Briffa to verify Briffa's poor attempt at science. And those in control of the GCMs still won't release their code or methods. And that is even as the GCMs don't predict past or present climates.
All that's left is weak talking points reiterate by sheep like Jensen. Anyone who is serious about understanding the science can go read and see that at its absolute best, AGW is an incredibly tenuous hypothesis that has absolute zero justification for any action, and certainly no massive economy wide action.
That's what has the warmers so panicked. The end of their scam is near. With massive debt and deficits, and massive unemployment, and cold temperatures, no one has the patience for yet another bureaucratic mess of taxes that will only raise our energy costs and further damage our economy.
Posted by: Jeff B. on November 21, 2009 10:51 AMJournalism, as practiced by Edward R Murrow, is dead.
Posted by: Rick D. on November 21, 2009 12:25 PMExactly what "science" do the charlatans at the CRU have behind them? They cherry-picked the raw data, and archived it in a way that made it difficult to check. After their "research" was published, they refused to make the underlying data available. And they "sexed up" the graphs.
Yep, that sure sounds like science to me.
Here's a description of their schemes to delete emails:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2009/11/024996.php
Here's an excellent summary of the back story:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2009/11/024995.php
More of the back story, from the post above (fascinating reading):
http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2009/9/29/the-yamal-implosion.html
John, if there's any moving of the goalposts, it's to return them to where they were before the AGW charlatans moved them.
Posted by: ewaggin on November 21, 2009 01:35 PMAdvice for the left. Stick to free healthcare insurance and socialism. You've lost this debate.
Posted by: Jeff B. on November 21, 2009 01:44 PM"In an embarrassing blow to the movement to combat global warming, hackers have posted hundreds of e-mails from a world-renowned British institute that show researchers colluding to exaggerate warming and undermine skeptics."
-
John, that's how the the "science is settled". Aren't you angry about being duped so badly? Or do you want to be useful to them?
Posted by: Gary on November 22, 2009 09:58 AM1. Tried to ensure that only AGW-supporting articles were published, punished editors of journals publishing skeptical items, and did their best to 'discipline' scientists and journalists who published skeptical information;
2. Manipulated data to strengthen items favoring AGW, and suppressed items that questioned it;
3. Cooperated to conceal and deny data from other researchers, and from Freedom of Information requests from the US and UK - despite that the publicly-funded data was public information.
For the source, visit: http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/global-warminggate-what-does-it-mean/
Egg.On.Face.
Posted by: Michele on November 22, 2009 02:23 PM(If you want to have a personal fight with another commenter -- and I can't imagine why you would -- do it somewhere else. )
Posted by: pbj on November 22, 2009 09:33 PMNo, the inconvenient truths about lying lies in the hacked e-mails don't matter. In fact, the NYT refuses to print hacked messages that weren't intended for rabble like us. NYT proudly published stolen and top-secret stuff that could be twisted to damage Nixon or Bush or Bush, but global warming is special. It's sacred and can't be defiled by bad news that's unfit to print. If it had been chimp Bush trying to protect America by keeping tabs on Hasan's chats with his Yemen imam, NYT would have rushed to publish the secret White House eavesdrop memo, and the hacker of the memo would be Time's Whistleblower of the Year. But only if good Moslems like Hasan or his imam weren't embarassed or inconvenienced.
The Hadley hacker isn't a whistleblower hero. This hacker is a hack, a crook. That's the focus KOMO took this weekend, and it's the focus KOMO hacked from the NYT, almost word for word. That's the spin of respectable media that are suddenly getting very tough on crime.
Meanwhile, the real crime rolls on. That's the climate change con. This is the place, conservatives, where we've got to make our last stand with an Alamo line in the sand. We conservatives were right about the Cold War, but that was a long time ago. Since then we've been thrashing.
Standing up to Gore and all the other crooks and liars, including Hadley R.U., is where we've got to focus like laser beams. If we lose to the climate scam, our loss will be devastating. Almost as bad as if we'd lost to the evil empire. And no, despite what they tell you in public school, the evil empire wasn't us.
Posted by: Hadley Gorebasm on November 23, 2009 11:42 AM"Computer hackers have broken into a server ..."
100% opinion by the reporter. How does he know it was a "hacker", and that there was more than one, and how does he know the server was "broken into"?
Posted by: Gary on November 23, 2009 12:11 PMSo be it.
Do you now feel silly for having supported the so-called Cap and Trade Bill now that the e-mails between the various "Climate Change" pimpers have been made public? These e-mails show that this issue has been heavily propagandized for years. The "scientists" have been hiding information, changing or "sexing up" their data, trying to destroy their detractors and trying to discredit publications that publish those who disagree with their findings. This is not science--it is the politicization of science. These so-called scientists bear a striking resemblance to Dr. Floyd Ferris, a character from Ayn Rand's seminal book, Atlas Shrugged. Wikipedia describes Ferris this way: "Ferris is a biologist who works as "co-ordinator" at the State Science Institute. He uses his position there to deride reason and productive achievement. The Institute publishes his book, Why Do You Think You Think?, in which he calls reason "an irrational idea" that is "incapable of dealing with the nature of the universe." Sounds like a good description of these "scientists"!
John, does that count as "consensus"? Was the science "settled" by the Nazis by their sheer number?
Einstein was asked about it and he replied:
"If what they are saying were true, one signature would have been enough."