They are really on a roll this week.
http://www.agu.org/news/press/pr_archives/2010/2010-37.shtml
Inaccurate news reports misrepresent a climate-science initiative of the American Geophysical Union
AGU Release No. 10–37
8 November 2010
For Immediate Release
WASHINGTON—An article appearing in the Los Angeles Times, and then picked up by media outlets far and wide, misrepresents the American Geophysical Union (AGU) and a climate science project the AGU is about to relaunch. The project, called Climate Q&A Service, aims simply to provide accurate scientific answers to questions from journalists about climate science.
“In contrast to what has been reported in the LA Times and elsewhere, there is no campaign by AGU against climate skeptics or congressional conservatives,” says Christine McEntee, Executive Director and CEO of the American Geophysical Union. “AGU will continue to provide accurate scientific information on Earth and space topics to inform the general public and to support sound public policy development.”
AGU is the world’s largest, not-for-profit, professional society of Earth and space scientists, with more than 58,000 members in over 135 countries.
“AGU is a scientific society, not an advocacy organization,” says climate scientist and AGU President Michael J. McPhaden. “The organization is committed to promoting scientific discovery and to disseminating to the scientific community, policy makers, the media, and the public, peer-reviewed scientific findings across a broad range of Earth and space sciences.”
AGU initiated a climate science Q&A service for the first time in 2009 to provide accurate scientific information for journalists covering the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen. AGU has been working over the past year on how to provide this service once again in association with the upcoming UN Climate Change Conference in Cancun, Mexico.
AGU’s Climate Q&A service addresses scientific questions only. It does not involve any commentary on policy. Journalists are able to submit questions via email, and AGU member-volunteers with Ph.D.s in climate science-related fields provide answers via email.
The relaunch of the Climate Q&A service is pending. When AGU is ready to announce the service, we will notify journalists on our distribution list via a media advisory that the service is once again available for their use.
For additional information about the Q&A service please see a 2 March 2010 article [pdf] about the 2009 Q&A service that was published in AGU’s weekly newspaper Eos, and a blog post about the service on AGU’s science communication blog The Plainspoken Scientist.
The American Geophysical Union was established in 1919, and is headquartered in Washington, D.C. AGU advances the Earth and space sciences through its scholarly publications, meetings and conferences, and outreach programs. For more information, please visit the AGU web site.
h/t to Marc Morano
I guess I’m not sure how to interpret this. A) The L.A. Times got the story completely wrong. B) L.A. Times correctly reported what AGU foot soldiers told them, but AGU brass was not aware and felt they had to correct.
Methinks it the latter. Over 700 ‘Clima-clownologists’ have been on the government dole for decades. Realizing they may face a sudden stop of their gravey train, a few mouthed off, hoping for immediate support. Thus the ‘700’ claim. When only 39 ‘stepped over the line’ the looming masacre was apparent. Noble when Nobel calls, these science wimps now head for the tall grass. No matter. This pit bull for truth will continue to chew non-stop….on the CLIMA-CLOPS. The greatest FRAUD in all human history.
Dr. Roy Spencer says “bring it on!”
http://www.drroyspencer.com/2010/11/climate-scientists-plan-campaign-against-global-warming-skeptics/
I don’t know if you read what Spencer actually wrote, but he clearly says that ACC is a viable theory, and that he thinks that there are other possibilities regarding attribution of the current heating. He berates cliamte scientists for being too sure they know ther answer, NOT that their answer is wrong
So does that mean all the deniers who contend that current ACC theory is a piece of crap and obviously incorrect are all WRONG. Or is Spencer a sly fifth columnist who is undermine the TRUTH that it is all a scam and huge hoax?
He also says :-
“Science advances primarily by searching for new and better explanations (hypotheses) for how nature works. Unfortunately, this basic task of science has been abandoned when it comes to explaining climate change. ”
So lets bring it on.
Tony,
Roy Spencer is a proper scientist who keeps an open mind on all theories and relies on evidence and hard facts. This is what proper scientists do.
He accepts that AGW is a plausible theory but has little evidence so far for it.
He points out that there are many other factors that affect climate that are nowhere near to being understood but goes on to say that supporters of the greenhouse theory just ignore these.
Pingback: For Your Consideration – November 8th « John R. Bolton
The original “UNBIASED”source of the information leaked to the LA times was AGU’s media PR firm Fenton Communications.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3827/is_20090511/ai_n31897713/
Oh shucks!
I was looking forward to the drumming of the brave 700.
So, nothing has changed – the AGW crowd is still afraid to answer tough questions because they can’t. Bury the suckers for they stole billions for nothing.
I still do not understand…did the AGU scramble for the first way out? Did the LA Times make it all up? ?Quien sabe?
Typical Public Relations Stunt. Release a rumor on Friday afternoon after hours and deny on Monday after it has been told all over the world. Keep the rebuttal at a minimum.
Fenton Communications is famous for this type of campaign.
Does anybody know if John Abraham has a book either just published or ready to be published? 8-P
I can see the “clarification” on the LA Times is as terse as telling: “The effort by John Abraham is separate from the Geophysical Union’s.“
John Abraham is a Mechanical Engineer. He is as qualified to discuss Climate as Brother Al and my Granddaughter that is 5 years old.
Pingback: There are TWO climate communication efforts | Climatide
Pingback: Global Warming Hoax Weekly Round-Up, Nov 11th 2010 « The Daily Bayonet