By Andrew Bolt
James Hansen is perhaps the most radical and high-profile warmist scientist. He advises Al Gore and is head of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, one of the four main bodies (and the most controversial) which calculate global temperatures.
His building, incidentally, is above the cafe shown in Seinfeld as the hang-out for Jerry and his friends. And Bishop Hill now reveals that one of Hansen’s own colleagues thinks the chapter of the IPCC 2007 report than blames man for recent warming is just another show about nothing.
While perusing some of the review comments to the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report, I came across the contributions of Andrew Lacis, a colleague of James Hansen’s at GISS. Lacis’s is not a name I’ve come across before but some of what he has to say about Chapter 9 of the IPCC’s report is simply breathtaking…
Remember, this guy is mainstream, not a sceptic, and you may need to remind yourself of that fact several times as you read through his comment on the executive summary of the chapter:
There is no scientific merit to be found in the Executive Summary. The presentation sounds like something put together by Greenpeace activists and their legal department. The points being made are made arbitrarily with legal sounding caveats without having established any foundation or basis in fact. The Executive Summary seems to be a political statement that is only designed to annoy greenhouse skeptics. Wasn’t the IPCC Assessment Report intended to be a scientific document that would merit solid backing from the climate science community – instead of forcing many climate scientists into having to agree with greenhouse skeptic criticisms that this is indeed a report with a clear and obvious political agenda. Attribution can not happen until understanding has been clearly demonstrated. Once the facts of climate change have been established and understood, attribution will become self-evident to all. The Executive Summary as it stands is beyond redemption and should simply be deleted.
I do not think “consensus” means what the warmists say it means.
UPDATE
Pick how many of these 10 captions on a News Ltd slideshow to illustrate “climate change” are actually false or deceptive. And nominate the most deceptive of the lot. (I exclude caption 10 because confusing CO2 and water vapor with “smoke” is just a gimme.)
Andrew Bolt is a journalist and columnist writing for The Herald Sun in Melbourne Victoria Australia.
Read more excellent articles from Andrew Bolt’s Blog
Filed under: America (USA), Blundering Bureaucrats, Climate Alarmists, Climate Change, Environment, Environmental activists, Fanatics, Fear-mongering, Fraud/Waste, Global Warming, Liberals, Lily-Livered Liberals, Limp-Wrist Liberals, NASA, Politics, Power Hungry, Propaganda, Public Opinion Tagged: Andrew Bolt, Climate Change Fraud, Climate Change Religion, Climategate, Dr. James Hansen (NASA), Global Warming Alarmism, Global Warming Hype, Tony, UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 
