Skip to comments.Koch-funded climate change skeptic reverses course
Posted on 07/30/2012 4:50:45 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
WASHINGTON The verdict is in: Global warming is occurring and emissions of greenhouse gases caused by human activity are the main cause.
This, according to Richard A. Muller, professor of physics at UC Berkeley, MacArthur Fellow and co-founder of the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project.....
....Benjamin D. Santer, a climate researcher at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and a lead author of the 1995 U.N. climate report, said he welcomed the involvement of another research group into detection and attribution of climate change and its causes. But he also said he found it troubling that Muller claimed such definitive results without his work undergoing peer-review.....
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
From UC Berkeley
In 1.4 billion years, the stellar luminosity of Sol will have increased to the point that no liquid water will remain on Earth. Earth will be a dead rock, apart from possibly xerophile bacteria below the surface.
Somebody’s bank account is getting low. Hey Doc, how about doing your own research for a change? Call Burt Rutan, he is retired now and can give you a few quick insights.
I was just going to say “Berekely”. LOL
"October 7, 2008, Grist interview of Richard A. Muller:
(Q: ) Do you consider yourself an environmentalist?
(A:) Oh yes. [Laughs.] In fact, back in the early 80s, I resigned from the Sierra Club over the issue of global warming. At that time, they were opposing nuclear power. What I wrote them in my letter of resignation was that, if you oppose nuclear power, the U.S. will become much more heavily dependent on fossil fuels, and that this is a pollutant to the atmosphere that is very likely to lead to global warming."
Among other relatively recent pronouncement showing less than a skeptical belief.
A life time Berzker from Bezerkley.
Muller in 2008: “The bottom line is that there is a consensus the [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] and the president needs to know what the IPCC says. Second, they say that most of the warming of the last 50 years is probably due to humans. You need to know that this is from carbon dioxide, and you need to understand which technologies can reduce this and which cant.”
Muller went from believing in AGW to believing AGW is an eminent threat. That's no conversion.
Link to Powerline article:
His opinion changed or facts to back it up have been published?
LOL, that's the idiot who wants to punch out skeptics.
BULLSH!T! There are no normal humans at bezerkley... only America hating communist fags of the left.
Wasn't this the main problem with the original mankind-is-killing-the-planet theory?
There’s a reason why he “reversed course”...
Follow the money?
So here’s a couple of questions...
If true that he was funded by the Koch brothers, and if also true that he never was much of a climate change skeptic, then WHY was he funded by the Koch brothers??
Yep. I was going to say . . . somebody’s funding source has recently changed—or tenure threatened.
He make a good pitch?
"Donors First Phase
The Lee and Juliet Folger Fund ($20,000)
William K. Bowes, Jr. Foundation ($100,000)
Fund for Innovative Climate and Energy Research (created by Bill Gates) ($100,000)
Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation ($150,000)
The Ann & Gordon Getty Foundation ($50,000)
We also received funding from a number of private individuals, totaling $14,500 as of June 2011.
William K. Bowes, Jr. Foundation ($100,000)
The Ann & Gordon Getty Foundation ($50,000)
Anonymous Foundation ($250,000)????
All donations were provided as unrestricted educational grants, which means the donor organizations have no say over how we conduct the research or what we publish. All of our work and results are presented with full transparency."
A con artist.
Too bad the Kochs went for it.
So an ***anonymous*** foundation gave $250,000??
Here is the money quote from the article;
“... Muller claimed such definitive results without his work undergoing peer-review.
If you go into the public arena and claim to have generated evidence that is stronger than the IPCC, where is the detailed, scientific evidence? Has he used fundamental new data sets? Santer said. Publish the science and report on it after its done.
"[Three] months ago, James Lovelock, the godfather of global warming, gave a startling interview to msnbc.com in which he acknowledged he had been unduly alarmist about climate change. The implications were extraordinary.
Lovelock is a world-renowned scientist and environmentalist whose Gaia Theory that the Earth operates as a single, living organism has had a profound impact on the development of global warming theory.
Having observed that global temperatures since the turn of the millennium have not gone up in the way computer-based climate models predicted, Lovelock acknowledged, the problem is we dont know what the climate is doing. We thought we knew 20 years ago. Now, Lovelock has given a follow-up interview to the UKs Guardian newspaper in which he delivers more bombshells sure to anger the global green movement, which for years worshipped his Gaia theory and apocalyptic predictions that billions would die from man-made climate change by the end of this century."
It’s the best research money can buy.
Ted Kaczynski - the Unabombre taught at UC Berkeley too...
Lewis' letter of resignation to Curtis G. Callan Jr, Princeton University, President of the American Physical Society.
"Anthony Watts describes it thus:
This is an important moment in science history. I would describe it as a letter on the scale of Martin Luther, nailing his 95 theses to the Wittenburg church door. It is worthy of repeating this letter in entirety on every blog that discusses science.
It's so utterly damning that I'm going to run it in full without further comment. US physics professor: 'Global warming is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life'
Another letter from Hal Lewis to the American Physical Society "When on October 6 I sent you my letter of resignation from APS , I of course expected the Empire to strike back in one way or another. It pleased me however, when I read your response, to find a very minimum of ad hominem attacks, confined mostly to apparently irresistible eruptions of Lewis is a liar. (His statements are all false is the equivalent.) So I thank you for that courtesy.
What took me by surprise was the pusillanimous, almost puerile, tone of the comment, which reads more like an ad for a used-car lot than as a declaration of a great scientific society. All our products have passed a complete inspection by our factory-trained mechanics. Were making no money on this, take it and be thankful. Etc. Not a single major issue confronted in any substantive way. Yet everyone knows about the sloppy handling of the 2007 statement; everyone knows about the financial investments of many of the major players; there is plenty of dirt in the public domain, yet you continue to pretend it is all in a different universe.
Curt, you cannot have written such a shabby document.
Roger Cohen has written an incisive deconstruction of your response, and I can add little, so let me turn to the repair options. For the record, though my resignation from APS gives me no standing, my objective here is to help slow the APS rush toward the cliff. This is what I think must be done at the proximate meeting of the Council.".........
"...the pusillanimous, almost puerile,.."purposeful professional purveyors of pure propaganda.
from one of my earlier comments:
Amen to that!
Watch the videos of his (Burt Rutan’s) engineering critique of AGW.
Burt Rutan Global Warming 1 of 6
Burt Rutans comprehensive report on Global Warming science fraud:
Version 4.3 dated January, 2011
This report includes many all-new data presentations and focuses on presenting climate data to Inform, rather than to Scare. Not a climate science reference, but a unique perspective - An engineering critique of the activist climate scientists and their process of data gathering, processing and presentation. It also has sections on climate adaptation and scientific consensus. No author approvals are required for distribution, please feel free to copy or distribute any part of this report.
Adobe pdf version - 6.7 megabytes
Powerpoint version - 13.9 megabytes
Burt Rutans Oshkosh 2010 talks:
An Engineers Critique of Global Warming Science - 3.3 megabytes
Note that it's not $$$$ directly from the Cokes, but from (one of?) their foundation(s). Note that many rich fams have lost control of the old man's foundation (e.g. the Ford Foundation).