.jpg)
Battle of the climate scientists - William Gray versus
James Hansen. Learn more about them and the other
players in the global warming debate in our slideshow.
Certainly the debate over manmade climate change and global warming can get heated at times (pun intended). Today that went to a new level pitting William (Bill) Gray, Professor Emeritus of Colorado State University who is best known for his hurricane forecasts against James Hansen of NASA's GISS division and devout climate change advocate.
Bill Gray has long been warning that the threat of manmade climate change is not real. In his own words, “I am of the opinion that this is one of the greatest hoaxes ever perpetrated on the American people. I've been in meteorology over 50 years. I've worked damn hard, and I've been around. My feeling is some of us older guys who've been around have not been asked about this. It's sort of a baby boomer, yuppie thing.”
On the other side James Hansen has become Al Gore's best friend thanks to his sometimes outlandish claims about the effects of global warming. He recently warned that President Obama has 'four years to save the world' and was quoted as saying, “We cannot afford to put off change any longer. We have to get on a new path within this new administration. We have only four years left for Obama to set an example to the rest of the world. America must take the lead.”
The latest battle is over the decision of the American Meteorological Society (AMS) to grant its highest award, the Rossby Research Medal, to Hansen. In a seven page letter to the AMS titled “On The Hijacking of the American Meteorological Society,” Mr. Hansen no longer seems willing to be outshouted in the debate over global warming. The first two paragraphs of the letter pretty much sum up his thoughts:
I am appalled at the selection of James Hansen as this year’s recipient of the AMS’s highest award – the Rossby Research Medal. James Hansen has not been trained as a meteorologist. His formal education has been in astronomy. His long records of faulty global climate predictions and alarmist public pronouncements have become increasingly hollow and at odds with reality. Hansen has exploited the general public’s lack of knowledge of how the globe’s climate system functions for his own benefit. His global warming predictions, going back to 1988 are not being verified. Why have we allowed him go on for all these years with his faulty and alarmist prognostications? And why would the AMS give him its highest award?
By presenting Hansen with its highest award, the AMS implies it agrees with his faulty global temperature projections and irresponsible alarmist rhetoric. This award, in combination with other recent AMS awards going to known CO2 warming advocates, is an insult to a large number of AMS members who do not believe that humans are causing a significant amount of the global temperature increase. These awards diminish the AMS’s sterling reputation for scientific objectivity.
The letter goes on to highlight why Gray believes Hansen's studies are faulty, rails against the mainstream media, and in general lays it all on the line. It is great reading to say the least. We will discuss this more next week but I wanted to throw it out there right away.
What do you think about this latest development and William Gray's letter? Where do you stand on the debate about global warming and manmade climate change? Leave a comment below!
The rest in this series:
Battle of the climate scientists and the 'Hijacking of the American Meteorological Society' - Part 1
Battle of the climate scientists - Gray vs Hansen part 2; Gray believes Hansen is unqualified
For reference:
Original letter from Dr. William Gray to the AMS
Appendix part A of letter from Dr. William Gray
Appendix part B of letter from Dr. William Gray
Comments
We mere mortals owe a great debt to the Bill Grays of the world who have the intellect, qualifications, and courage to challenge the charlatans who dominate the science, policy, and politics of AGW and who lead the public and politicians to equate association and causation.
Carbon dating claims, give or take a 1000 years, that there was an ice bridge at the Bering Straits about 11,000 years ago that humans likely walked across. Thousands of years ago it was covered with sea water from climate change before the industrial revolution or a huge population of humans on planet Earth. Climate changes and cycles but, not from CO2 or by man made means.
I'm really tired of hearing from those with opinions, and those wanting to turn the science of global warming into a debate. It's not. It's real results from peer reviewed scientific studies. NASA is part of those reproducible studies, Bill Gray is not.
I think in many ways William Gray is right in that the debate has never taken place. Any theory must withstand competing theories and without an open and honest debate, how are we to know that manmade climate change is a fact? The IPCC stifled any dissenting opinions in any of its actions so we have no way to know.
If one accepts Dr. Gray's premise that we are entering a "period of modest global cooling", this is no reason to be adamantly opposed to renewable energy as Dr. Gray appears to be.
Jim (Feb 8, 3:13PM). There are no reproducible studies by the proponents of AGW. If so name them. What real results have the proponents got. A big fat zero! The reason being is that the basic physics of CO2 Greenhouse hypothesis is wrong anyway. It fails due to a number of reasons namely by 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. Science is about testing hypothesis with valid collected data and reproducibility. Debates are most welcome in Science w.r.t to hypotheses, methods of testing and validation. AGW is junkscience and basically a religion.
I am not a professional meteorologist and lack the standing and expertise to comment on how the American Meteorological Society decided to make its award. Accordingly, I assume that the directors of the AMS probably know more about what they are doing than those of us who are non-members, and I imagine they chose to recognize Dr. Hansen for a good reason.
As an amateur with some science background who has followed the issue of global climate change, I have to admire Dr. Gray for the good work he has done on hurricane tracking and hurricane forecasting, as science writer Chris Mooney has pointed out in his recent book "Stormworld." But today Dr. Gray eems almost petulant on the subject of climate change and bitterly resentful of the mainstream researchers in the field, in part because of the grant money they receive to operate their big simulation models. Dr. Gray also seems to be acting in an increasingly unprofessional manner by attributing bad motives and intellectual corruption to other scientists whose main sin seems to be that they disagree with him. As a scientific amateur who lacks the climate-tracking experience of either Dr. Gray or Dr. Hansen, I get the feeling that Dr. Gray is completely honest in his views, but also without the ability to listen to anyone else's views.
I concur with HH. If you believe there are reproducible studies proving Global Warming you are living a fantasy. That is the exact reason there IS a debate. Have you heard about the debate over Newton's laws of motion? Neither have I. That's because they can BE PROVEN.
I am a physicist, and as HH points out, even the greenhouse effect is flawed both in premise and practice, and our atmosphere doesn't work like a greenhouse anyway. It's all bunk. Sold to you packaged complete with policies and taxes. Science works nothing like this. Sorry so many are so naieve.
And Richard, I am adamantly opposed to alternative energies. The reason is that they are inefficient and incapable of meeting our demand. A COOLING world should judge them more harshly. Their failure spells our doom. And the facts state clearly that they will fail.
These feeble men trying to be gods and "recreate" the most intricate and complex systems that one could ever even possibly fathom are truly blinded by their own hubris. If scientific history has taught us anything, it is that we do NOT know EVERYTHING and to claim to be able to "simulate" and "forecast" is naive and premature. Our technology and current knowledge is clearly unable to produce CONSISTENT and RECOGNIZABLY ACCURATE results, only coincidental incidences that offer false hope to those aforementioned. Good luck humanity.
Yes the earth is warming and it is warming from the last Great Ice Age that ended 10,000 years ago. Mans view of time is sadly distorted as our planet is 4.5 billion years old and these frauds such as Al Gore and Dr Hansen, the big media along with the democratic party are simply in perpertrating this hoax on a gulible public for the power and money and the distruction of capitalism. Sorry but anyone who believes in man made global warming is a fool!
Dr Gray knows more about weather than all of the scientists at Goddard Space Institute combined. I have read his new paper and find it compelling.
Noteworthy is the following:
"In November '08 President-elect Barack Obama said, "storms (i.e. hurricanes) are growing stronger with each passing season."
"In his inaugural address on 20 January, President Obama said, "we will roll back the specter of a warming planet" and "we will harness the sun and winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories."
"All three of these statements are either untrue or impossible to accomplish without severe (and unacceptable) economic penalties."
. . .
"The economic crisis that has suddenly come upon us is quite sobering. Let us hope it will justify a postponement of plans for any significant reduction of CO2 gases for the nest few years. Postponement of action on CO2 reductions would allow more time for deeper and more objective analysis of the AGW question. And if the current lack of global warming (since 1999) and/or the weak global cooling since 2001 continues for a few more years, it may be possible to convince enough of the American public, the Obama administration, and our congressional leaders to alter their AGW views. The science just isn't there to justify action on large reductions of CO2 at this time. Our best policy now should be to "do nothing."
Like all competent scientists, Dr Gray's analysis of the Obama administration's policy and plan to alter the global climate, is discretely understated.
John Fernbach,
I agree that Dr. Gray is not acting in the most professional manner. However, please grant him some leniency in such a matter. After all, Mr. Hansen has suggested a "cleansing" of those who do not agree with his conclusions as well as putting executives on trial for crimes against humanity.
Many scientific bodies are seriously divided on this matter. There have been significant quarrels in the National Academy of Science and other arenas. Unfortunately, those in charge of both the NAS and the AMS did not allow for debate before making official pronouncements on behalf of their organizations, promting angry responses such as this.
Please understand, the AMS is supposed to speak for all meteorologists. They putting words in Dr Gray's mouth, so to speak.
Ben Stein exposed what government controlled science, and its supporters are like in his movie "Expelled". Gore, Hansen, and their ilk are ridiculous, but they have the propoganda machine on their side. The thing I hate most is that all will be quiet and all will be forgiven when time proves them wrong. I think what they are really after is a global reduction in energy consumption and a move away from fossil fuel. If that is indeed correct, say it for crying out loud. They will tax to make it happen using the excuse of global warming. Typical leftist hidden agenda.
Great discussion and it is all very enlightening! After reading this posting, be sure to view part 2 in this series where we take a look at Dr. Gray's assertion that Dr. Hansen is an unqualified spokesman for anthropogenic global warming.
There is a link above or you can cut and paste this into your browser:
www.examiner.com/x-219-Denver-Weather-Examiner~y2009m2d10-Battle-of-the-climate-scientists--Gray-versus-Hansen-part-2
The Earth has been cooling for the last 10yrs and does not match Hansen's video game simulations of the Earth heating up:
//icecap.us/images/uploads/BUSHTEMPS.jpg
The Ocean's heat content has not increased either:
//climatesci.org/2009/02/09/update-on-a-comparison-of-upper-ocean-heat-content-changes-with-the-giss-model-predictions/
Gentlemen, gentlemen...
"We have met the enemy...and they is us!" -Pogo
I fear the conservation of fossil fuels has taken a back seat while we bicker over CO2 content of the atmosphere.The efficiency of the combustion of gasoline ( very low ) should be addressed, yet I have found no audience. India & China are going to overwhelm the rest of us. CHEMbustion has found a way to greatly increase this low efficiency...cheaply and simply. Who will help counter these market forces?
Have we not recorded base temps rising since man could measure temperature? Are we not currently warming from the last ice age? I need more research. Great article.
Well, even I notice about weatherazition. I used to live in Honolulu and every week, hurricane after hurricane past by the hot spot islands. Do you really need a Ph.D in cosmology in order for an individual to receive the highest award?
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!