Interview with James Hansen, NASA

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady

Ah, that James Hansen.

WSJ: Silenced -- 1,400 Times.

Interesting: Credibility of NASA’s Jim Hansen?. Do not draw any conclusions from the title and be sure to read through the comments at the end of the blog entry.

Two blog entries. Aha. Maybe I should start my own blog, too. :hmm:

Let's put a subjective reply beside that, written by the devil himself.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...187255,00.html

If Hansen is really so ridicoulous in his conclusions, then I wonder why it did not succeed to silence him by facts, but official censoring was needed to at least try that.

Hansen also said: "Communicating with the public seems to be essential, because public concern is probably the only thing capable of overcoming the special interests that have obfuscated the topic." (the NYP article). His intense attempt to deliver the message on, as he confirmed, 1400 interviews over recent years just reflects that logic of his. Maybe deniers of global climate change focus for just that reason on him, trying to discredit him and get him under control by his NASA superiors? Because he delivers the message so often, loud, and unintimidated?

Will this become another war of links? Not with me.

I started this thread, and the only thing worth to discuss here is the content of what is said in that interview this thread just linked to.

And has anybody realised that I was linking to this guy here who openly criticises the IPCC reports, and hails Bush for his programs concerning nuclear powerplant research, and methane research...?

[The Avon Lady]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Two blog entries.

Actually, the first link is the Wall Street Journal and it simply brings up the fact that for a guy the mass media claims is being gagged to actually have spoken publicly no less than 1400 times on the subject begs the question of who's hyping here, the media or the blogs.

And had you bothered reading the 2nd link, you would see that the article's author appears to be very subjective based on the information at hand. Same is true for the comments there, including those in the scientific profession.

But go ahead and laugh at blogs.

Aha. Maybe I should start my own blog, too. :hmm:

Why not!

Let's put a subjective reply beside that, written by the devil himself.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...187255,00.html

Time?

Subjective?

Gore?

:rotfl:

:rotfl:

:rotfl:

If Hansen is really so ridicoulous in his conclusions,

Who said that?

[joea]

You know, I'm starting to get fed up with these global warming threads arguments. Next on my list after terror/Islam/Iraq/Bernard/Iran/SH4.

Ok SH4 is fine.

Edit:

2500 I'm an Ocean warrior!!!!!!

[Enigma]

Noone makes ya read em.

Seems like no matter what the topic, someone has a comlaint.

"You know, im really tired of these pink unicorn and he-man collection threads"

Skybird has become chicken little with all this the 'sky is falling' rhetoric.