Toch wel eigenaardig, maar de persoon die je aanhaalt is precies het toonbeeld van ... het tegendeel. Ze hebben hem onder de regering Bush jarenlang willen wegpesten, censureren, ... Had de spreuk bij hem waarheid gehad ontkende Hanssen vlakaf het broeikaseffect en kreeg ie direct veel geld, wees daar maar zeker van. Vanop wikipedia:
Censorship controversy
In 2005 and 2006, Hansen stated in interviews with ABC News, The Washington Post, and The New York Times that NASA administrators have tried to influence his public statements about the causes of climate change.[17][18][19] Hansen claims that NASA public relations staff were ordered to review his public statements and interviews after a December 2005 lecture at the American Geophysical Union in San Francisco.
James Hansen has also appeared on 60 Minutes stating that the White House edited climate-related press releases reported by federal agencies to make global warming seem less threatening.[20] He claimed that he was unable to speak "freely", without the backlash of other government officials. "In my more than three decades in the government I've never witnessed such restrictions on the ability of scientists to communicate with the public."[20]
Hansen’s claims of censorship by NASA attracted the attention not only of the United States Congress and various media outlets, but also of several legal defense organizations. The 2006 George Soros Foundations Network Report detailed the work of the Open Society Institute (OSI) in conducting a “campaign on Hansen's behalf” run by “the Government Accountability Project (GAP), a whistleblower protection organization and OSI grantee.” The report indicated this campaign had “resulted in a decision by NASA to revisit its media policy .” The report further stated this campaign was prompted by the experience of Hansen who “protested attempts to silence him after officials at NASA ordered him to refer press inquiries to the public affairs office and required the presence of a public affairs representative at any interview”.[21] Hansen addressed this specific issue publicly and in writing, saying he did “accept pro bono legal advice for a while” from GAP but did not receive any direct funds.[22]
Congressman Darrell Issa questioned Hansen's motivations in criticizing the Bush administration, noting that Hansen supported 2004 Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry and also received a $250,000 Heinz Environment Award from the Heinz Foundation, run by Kerry's wife, in 2001.[23] Hansen, who describes his political views as "middle-of-the-road conservative", stated in a 2004 speech at the University of Iowa that he would have preferred to vote for Republican John McCain had McCain been on the ballot, but settled for Kerry because of Kerry's stance on the climate change issue.[24]
Hansen has said that a global tipping point will be reached by 2016 if the human population is unable to reduce greenhouse gases.[25] Hansen has said that IPCC scenarios for future sea level rise do not take into account ice sheet disintegration, which could cause several meters of sea level rise during the next century with unchanged climate forcings.[26]
There is a short clip in the 2006 documentary An Inconvenient Truth that shows Hansen being questioned by Al Gore on May 8, 1989, at what appears to be a Congress meeting. Gore criticizes Hansen for apparently contradicting himself in a written testimony on global warming. At that point, Hansen reveals that the last paragraph in the testimony was not written by him, but added by someone else.
Two years after James E. Hansen and other agency employees described a pattern of distortion and suppression of climate science by political appointees, the agency’s inspector general report said "our investigation found that during the fall of 2004 through early 2006, the NASA Headquarters Office of Public Affairs managed the topic of climate change in a manner that reduced, marginalized or mischaracterized climate change science made available to the general public.”[27]
For a detailed examination of the Hansen censorship controversy, see Censoring Science: Inside the Political Attack on Dr. James Hansen and the Truth of Global Warming, by Mark Bowen.
Maar ja, aangezien Seppie graag mensen beschuldigt terwijl die zich niet kunnen verdedigen hier en de beroepseer, eerlijkheid en ernst van vele klimatologen in twijfel wilt trekken lanceer ik dan maar de volgende stelling: Seppie wordt betaald om dit te doen. Ik heb geen enkel bewijs en het is heel waarschijnlijk niet waar en misschien zelfs in tegenspraak met de feiten, maar dat is voor Seppie toch geen probleem. Zelfs al komt Seppie nu met bewijzen die dit volledig tegenspreken dan nog blijft mijn beschuldiging staan, want bewijzen die van Seppie komen kunnen niet waar zijn, want er zal wel een fout in de datavergaring gebeurt zijn.
Wouter
PS. GISS geeft inderdaad een fout gemaakt: ze heeft die toegegeven, ze heeft die hersteld, ik wil het van velen hier op 't forum nog wel eens zien.
Quote selectie