In A Word – Asinine: Global Warming exists, but some non-democratic donkies still bray against it
Gerald Eisman
July 18, 2006
In A Word – Asinine
Asinine: Utterly stupid or silly: asinine behavior. 2. Of, relating to, or resembling an ass.
The headline that lead into the story found on line and, I expect, in print in the NewsMax publication says; "Eco-Expert" helped Gore and Kerry. That was followed by the lead paragraph that reads as follows.
The scientist touted by CBS News '60 Minutes' as arguably the worlds leading researcher on global warming and spotlighted as a victim of the Bush administration's censorship on the issue, publicly endorsed Democrat John Kerry for president and received a $250,000 grant from the charitable foundation headed by Kerry's wife. Well, duh!
As the headline and lead paragraph would have you believe, as both are written, there are several conclusions to be drawn. First, that to support the Democratic Party and its candidates would immediately erode your ability to pursue your chosen field of endeavor. Secondly, that the scientist received the grant because he supported John Kerry. This work is so misleading by the writer that it is beneath contempt.
The most pertinent fact is that the grant mentioned by the writer was given three years earlier than the endorsement at a time when John Kerry wasn't even a candidate for the presidency and it was bestowed by a committee of the foundation, not Theresa Heinz Kerry.
Scientist James Hansen also admitted he contributed to two recent Democratic presidential campaigns. To complicate matters, Mr. Hansen acted as a consultant to former Vice President Al Gore's slide-show presentations on global warming, a display that Gore has presented around the country.
To place credibility on the overt insinuations couched in the mentioned article would be like accepting the fact that, if Popeye eats spinach before he clobbers Bluto, it must be all right to clobber people after eating spinach.
Scott Pelley, the 60 Minute reporters who interviewed Hansen (all this is in the article written by Marc Morano) made no mention of Hansen's link to Gore and Kerry. It must also be noted that Mr. Moreno did not mention Kerry's wife Teresa, referring to her as one of Hansen's benefactors. How strange that the piece didn't mention the scientists politics. I would assume that was because, like Physics and physical laws, climatology is apolitical.
Pelley's segment, "rewriting the Science" pointed up the fact that the Bush administration was suppressing Hansen's views because it disagreed with his conclusions. The claims made in the March 2006 segment were a repeat of similar remarks made in 1989 when president Bush's father, George Sr. was president and, might I add, for the same reasons. The old adage, "like father, like son" comes to mind.
Hansen admits he utilizes an emphasis on extreme scenarios to drive his audience directly to the issue and make them pay attention, but, once again, Pelley is accused of ignoring the statement.
According to Paul Driessen, writer of the far from 'best seller,' Eco-Imperialism: Green Power – Black Death, said, "Hansen's rants might still garner headlines in the Washington Post and New York Times and raves from CBS – especially if you believe every beetle infestation, forest fire, cold snap, hot flash, dry spell, flood, frog death, and malaria outbreak is due to global warming – but they're complete hogwash." Yet there are reams of papers on record verifying the facts Hansen offers. I see nothing of Driessen's work being quoted, even on papers used to line the bottom of a birdcage.
"Not only are Hansen's predictions not coming true, but more and more countries are beginning to realize that they will destroy their economies just under Kyoto 1. How strange that there were only two countries that refused to sign on to the Kyoto accord; Russia and the United States, but that really has changed. Russia got on board shortly before this writing leaving only the United States as the lone holdout.
Hansen knew that by endorsing John Kerry, the opposition would attack his credibility, but he did so anyway. In a speech delivered on Oct. 26, 2004, Hansen said this: "John Kerry has a far better grasp than President Bush on the important issues that we face." Prophetic words, those. I wonder if Hansen was only referring to science or every facet of government.
George C Deutsch, a Bush appointee who served as spokesman for NASA (he resigned in February 2006 when a false claim that he'd graduated from Texas A & M University appeared on his resume) noted that Hansen and his supporters have a very partisan agenda. He denied the Bush Administration was clamping down on scientific views that differed from the preferred views.
Deutsch insisted, "There is no pressure or mandate from the Bush administration or elsewhere to alter or water down scientific data at NASA, period."
This could go on and on about how Hansen is pro Liberal or Democrat, how he leans toward truth rather than parroting the fictions of the current administration, though how could that be if the U. S. is the lone holdout among the family of nations, and on about his donations to the Democratic cause.
My only two contributions, Hansen wrote, were to Bill Clinton's campaign and to either Gore in 2000 or Kerry in 2004. He didn't remember which.
The arguments offered against global warming are asinine and crushed under the weight of proofs offered by the overwhelming majority of climatologists today. Rather than play "ostrich" and gamble with the lives of billions, it would be better were the officials in the administration stopped and given lessons in remedial seeing, hearing and thinking. That would likely be very beneficial to a few journalists as well.
Asinine: Utterly stupid or silly: asinine behavior. 2. Of, relating to, or resembling an ass.
The headline that lead into the story found on line and, I expect, in print in the NewsMax publication says; "Eco-Expert" helped Gore and Kerry. That was followed by the lead paragraph that reads as follows.
The scientist touted by CBS News '60 Minutes' as arguably the worlds leading researcher on global warming and spotlighted as a victim of the Bush administration's censorship on the issue, publicly endorsed Democrat John Kerry for president and received a $250,000 grant from the charitable foundation headed by Kerry's wife. Well, duh!
As the headline and lead paragraph would have you believe, as both are written, there are several conclusions to be drawn. First, that to support the Democratic Party and its candidates would immediately erode your ability to pursue your chosen field of endeavor. Secondly, that the scientist received the grant because he supported John Kerry. This work is so misleading by the writer that it is beneath contempt.
The most pertinent fact is that the grant mentioned by the writer was given three years earlier than the endorsement at a time when John Kerry wasn't even a candidate for the presidency and it was bestowed by a committee of the foundation, not Theresa Heinz Kerry.
Scientist James Hansen also admitted he contributed to two recent Democratic presidential campaigns. To complicate matters, Mr. Hansen acted as a consultant to former Vice President Al Gore's slide-show presentations on global warming, a display that Gore has presented around the country.
To place credibility on the overt insinuations couched in the mentioned article would be like accepting the fact that, if Popeye eats spinach before he clobbers Bluto, it must be all right to clobber people after eating spinach.
Scott Pelley, the 60 Minute reporters who interviewed Hansen (all this is in the article written by Marc Morano) made no mention of Hansen's link to Gore and Kerry. It must also be noted that Mr. Moreno did not mention Kerry's wife Teresa, referring to her as one of Hansen's benefactors. How strange that the piece didn't mention the scientists politics. I would assume that was because, like Physics and physical laws, climatology is apolitical.
Pelley's segment, "rewriting the Science" pointed up the fact that the Bush administration was suppressing Hansen's views because it disagreed with his conclusions. The claims made in the March 2006 segment were a repeat of similar remarks made in 1989 when president Bush's father, George Sr. was president and, might I add, for the same reasons. The old adage, "like father, like son" comes to mind.
Hansen admits he utilizes an emphasis on extreme scenarios to drive his audience directly to the issue and make them pay attention, but, once again, Pelley is accused of ignoring the statement.
According to Paul Driessen, writer of the far from 'best seller,' Eco-Imperialism: Green Power – Black Death, said, "Hansen's rants might still garner headlines in the Washington Post and New York Times and raves from CBS – especially if you believe every beetle infestation, forest fire, cold snap, hot flash, dry spell, flood, frog death, and malaria outbreak is due to global warming – but they're complete hogwash." Yet there are reams of papers on record verifying the facts Hansen offers. I see nothing of Driessen's work being quoted, even on papers used to line the bottom of a birdcage.
"Not only are Hansen's predictions not coming true, but more and more countries are beginning to realize that they will destroy their economies just under Kyoto 1. How strange that there were only two countries that refused to sign on to the Kyoto accord; Russia and the United States, but that really has changed. Russia got on board shortly before this writing leaving only the United States as the lone holdout.
Hansen knew that by endorsing John Kerry, the opposition would attack his credibility, but he did so anyway. In a speech delivered on Oct. 26, 2004, Hansen said this: "John Kerry has a far better grasp than President Bush on the important issues that we face." Prophetic words, those. I wonder if Hansen was only referring to science or every facet of government.
George C Deutsch, a Bush appointee who served as spokesman for NASA (he resigned in February 2006 when a false claim that he'd graduated from Texas A & M University appeared on his resume) noted that Hansen and his supporters have a very partisan agenda. He denied the Bush Administration was clamping down on scientific views that differed from the preferred views.
Deutsch insisted, "There is no pressure or mandate from the Bush administration or elsewhere to alter or water down scientific data at NASA, period."
This could go on and on about how Hansen is pro Liberal or Democrat, how he leans toward truth rather than parroting the fictions of the current administration, though how could that be if the U. S. is the lone holdout among the family of nations, and on about his donations to the Democratic cause.
My only two contributions, Hansen wrote, were to Bill Clinton's campaign and to either Gore in 2000 or Kerry in 2004. He didn't remember which.
The arguments offered against global warming are asinine and crushed under the weight of proofs offered by the overwhelming majority of climatologists today. Rather than play "ostrich" and gamble with the lives of billions, it would be better were the officials in the administration stopped and given lessons in remedial seeing, hearing and thinking. That would likely be very beneficial to a few journalists as well.
Print
Email
