Video: Scientist calls climate change skeptic an A-hole on the BBC
posted at 4:20 pm on December 5, 2009 by Allahpundit
Via Newsbusters, a video companion to Steven Hayward’s long but compelling dissection of just how badly the East Anglia crew behaved.
As tempting as it is to indulge in Schadenfreude over the richly deserved travails of a gang that has heaped endless calumny on dissenting scientists (NASA’s James Hansen, for instance, compared MIT’s Richard Lindzen to a tobacco-industry scientist, and Al Gore and countless others liken skeptics to “Holocaust deniers”), the meaning of the CRU documents should not be misconstrued. The emails do not in and of themselves reveal that catastrophic climate change scenarios are a hoax or without any foundation. What they reveal is something problematic for the scientific community as a whole, namely, the tendency of scientists to cross the line from being disinterested investigators after the truth to advocates for a preconceived conclusion about the issues at hand… Perhaps more significant, the email archive also reveals that even inside this small circle of climate scientists–otherwise allied in an effort to whip up a frenzy of international political action to combat global warming–there was considerable disagreement, confusion, doubt, and at times acrimony over the results of their work. In other words, there is far less unanimity or consensus among climate insiders than we have been led to believe.
How to solve this crisis of credibility and ease fears of a “tribalistic” culture having taken over climate change science? Why, with theatrical eye-rolling and a perfunctory dropping of the A-bomb on the skeptic you’re debating on British national television, of course. I’m giving you the full clip so that no context is lost — Morano, the skeptic, does bait him a bit with mocking laughter and by talking over him — but the fireworks come in clip two if you’re pressed for time. Watch, if only to enjoy the nuance of a scientist complaining about “character assassination” mere seconds before indulging in a profane ad hominem.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
Every time the left talks about how they want to restore civility to politics, I just have to laugh.
TheQuestion on December 5, 2009 at 4:23 PM
Poor chap. Seems to feel entitled to his own facts, not just his own opinion.
OhioCoastie on December 5, 2009 at 4:24 PM
As their religion implodes around them, I love to see these leftists unhinged.
elduende on December 5, 2009 at 4:26 PM
So this is the way academics speak when questioned.
d1carter on December 5, 2009 at 4:26 PM
Well, now I’m convinced.
LibTired on December 5, 2009 at 4:26 PM
He must have thought his mike was off and the segment ended. 3 cheers for the American. You call it baiting, I calling mocking the lie.
Spirit of 1776 on December 5, 2009 at 4:27 PM
Me too! The eyeroll did it for me.
AUINSC on December 5, 2009 at 4:28 PM
I like Stephen Hayes, but I wish he’d stop padding it. The emails expose a deliberate attempt to “trick” and “hide the decline.”
John the Libertarian on December 5, 2009 at 4:29 PM
Twit.
HowardRoarke on December 5, 2009 at 4:30 PM
Warming Creationists.
the_nile on December 5, 2009 at 4:30 PM
oops. Steven Hayward
John the Libertarian on December 5, 2009 at 4:30 PM
Must have some tricky, techinical definition?
Wethal on December 5, 2009 at 4:30 PM
OT: There’s finally an Ed fan club on Facebook!
AsianGirlInTights on December 5, 2009 at 4:31 PM
I’ll be banned for that…
AsianGirlInTights on December 5, 2009 at 4:31 PM
You know what does reveal “catastrophic climate change” is a hoax without any foundation?
Thinking.
July 10 on December 5, 2009 at 4:32 PM
These stories on these emails show a need for relabeling.
Climate change is accepted. Anthropological global warming is not. I bet even Inhofe is not a “skeptic of Climate change”.
We need another word then skeptic, and need to focus on agw, not climate change b/c climate change is a sidestep the left used to relabel global warming once that fell through the floor.
Spirit of 1776 on December 5, 2009 at 4:33 PM
This might be more amusing if were not for the fact I know men, personally, who have lost their jobs or been professionally attacked because of this hoax, and a related one in California.
I would wish them a big lump of coal in their stockings for Christmas — and hope they choke on the carbon offsets.
Mutnodjmet on December 5, 2009 at 4:33 PM
So that’s what Drywall looks like.
kingsjester on December 5, 2009 at 4:34 PM
Is this a Monty Python skit?
Metro on December 5, 2009 at 4:35 PM
How come the BBC gets to have cool Star Trek sets? It’s like the Holodeck on that program(me).
jamie gumm on December 5, 2009 at 4:35 PM
So self righteous. arggggggggh.
ctmom on December 5, 2009 at 4:35 PM
The guy looks like Dawkins. I thought it was him because Dawkins believes in another “scientific consensus” himself.
maynila on December 5, 2009 at 4:38 PM
There is an ancient Chinese proverb: “May you live in interesting times.”
And we DO, man, WE DO!!!
We are getting to watch a religion unravel right before our eyes.
manofaiki on December 5, 2009 at 4:38 PM
As a flat earth skeptic I think this climategate affair is the best thing that evah happened to skeptics around the world. What ya gonna believe? The fake’s own words or the fake’s own words?
I still have a Piltdown man skeleton in my closet in case anybody would like it.
*parting shot* I know you are but what am I?
Mojave Mark on December 5, 2009 at 4:38 PM
What is this “Climategate” thing you speak of?
Good Lt on December 5, 2009 at 4:39 PM
Agreed. Also, a rational person can believe that pumping CO2 into the atmosphere may cause some change to the climate of no significant consequence.
But that is a far cry from the abject lunacy of believing that carbon dioxide will be the death of us all. Catastrophic man-made global warming is a ludicrous idea.
July 10 on December 5, 2009 at 4:42 PM
Interesting insight into what these climate thugs think of the rest of us.
Down with climate thugs.
They should all be arrested for crimes against humanity. Their ideas will kill millions, if not billions if they get their way.
Climate criminals.
darwin on December 5, 2009 at 4:42 PM
Professor Watson looks similar to Rush on Stargate Universe. Same kind of egomaniac scientist who doesn’t realize he isn’t that smart.
ray on December 5, 2009 at 4:43 PM
Well, at least these pro-Global Warming folks can argue a point like adults using the proper language and decorum to reinforce their………oh, wait
JoeinTX on December 5, 2009 at 4:43 PM
Fixed.
Del Dolemonte on December 5, 2009 at 4:46 PM
Perhaps the yank is laughing because professor wanker talks about the need for openness, yet there is zero open raw data or calculations to be found. One true statistical analysis of the raw data will show there wasn’t any net warming since the late 1970s.
ray on December 5, 2009 at 4:47 PM
“Assh0le”?
Yea, well you’re a d!ckweed, mofo
blatantblue on December 5, 2009 at 4:49 PM
How worthless do these followers feel?
I build houses and if I thought that each would collapse or be uninhabitable I would be so miserable with a self-value of zero
combine that with being enriched by the process and you have a case for either, grand delusion or suicide.
Sonosam on December 5, 2009 at 4:50 PM
I agree with you on climate change, but that terminology is used synonomously with AGW.
Another thing we need to do is relabel these climate scientists and politicians.
I suggest we start calling them climate thugs and climate criminals.
darwin on December 5, 2009 at 4:51 PM
Screw the dirtbag.
rplat on December 5, 2009 at 4:51 PM
If they all just shut their traps, all that heat wouldn’t escape and the planet would cool a little bit.
blatantblue on December 5, 2009 at 4:54 PM
What a pansie ass, no wonder they’re being colonized by Muslims.
DerKrieger on December 5, 2009 at 4:56 PM
Desperate
SouthernGent on December 5, 2009 at 4:56 PM
Yep those libs sure are open to debate.
/
Crr you’re a joke. I think you know it. One day when you get a job let’s talk.
CWforFreedom on December 5, 2009 at 4:57 PM
As a Brit I feel quite qualified to point out that this flop-haired twat is quite typical of the snobby, pretentious, limp-wristed pansies who comprise much of British academia. And I can tell you that his performance here, embarrassing and paltry as it was, will have had the smug Guardian-reading liberal set of Britain pumping their fists in the air. He “stuck it to that Yank,” you see.
Sharke on December 5, 2009 at 4:57 PM
Steven Hayward’s article was good, but more emphasis needs to be put on the political motivation and the money behind these charlatans…
Seven Percent Solution on December 5, 2009 at 4:58 PM
I know it is. Look at the headline here. But I’m saying we should be specific, because the argument against agw includes the natural climate change and the emails show that.
Now is the time to seize the high ground. agw is a lie. I don’t to give the Gordon Browns of the world dancing room around “climate change”; cap and trade is centered on agw theory, we should make them fight on that hill.
Spirit of 1776 on December 5, 2009 at 4:58 PM
Probably his b@$t@rd brother.
The anchor must have gone to the Bill O’Reilly school of interviewing with her incessant interruptions of the guy she doesn’t want to listen to.
thomasaur on December 5, 2009 at 4:59 PM
Cut from the same cloth as the One…don’t you think…house of cards…Boo!!!
winston on December 5, 2009 at 5:02 PM
Ah, yes! When you’re a liar, what better way to ‘prove’ you’re a victim than to call those who caught you in your lies than to condemn them?
Typical lib!
Are you trolls seeing this?
Liam on December 5, 2009 at 5:04 PM
Why Mr. Watson, you are the a$$h0le!
yoda on December 5, 2009 at 5:05 PM
Every time I hear lib say something is ‘unfair’, I think of a six-year-old who couldn’t pin the tail on the donkey.
Liam on December 5, 2009 at 5:08 PM
Morano 2012!
mankai on December 5, 2009 at 5:11 PM
Exactly.
As I pointed out on another thread, the opposite of “skeptical” is “gullible,” which characterizes the debate perfectly.
warbaby on December 5, 2009 at 5:11 PM
He was right, though. The guy did sound like an a-hole. He was playing the “Sean Hannity game” and asking red herring questions, shoting over the guy, and just generally being a douchebag.
And this is from somebody (me!) who would like to see that side of the argument made convincingly.
DaveS on December 5, 2009 at 5:13 PM
Reminds me of The Black Knight
conservnut on December 5, 2009 at 5:13 PM
Not usually. It happens when they are busted or backed into a corner.
Morano put the heat on him and he had a little flare up.
seven on December 5, 2009 at 5:13 PM
The term ‘skeptic’ is meant to denigrate unlike ‘Truther’ is meant to tell of a higher knowledge, something better than you.
Liam on December 5, 2009 at 5:16 PM
I found out about this over 3 weeks ago. Life was goo for the rag time band of carbon protestors.
The Friday post I wrote that they would explode and claim the e-mails were take out of context.
Lets give context to Prof Watson.
He is a big shot at the CRU misinformation cell.
His gravy train of grants is threatened and may be cut off
He faces extinction
He has reson to know what data was corrupted.
Morano and his side poses the biggest threat he has ever faced. He may get fired.
seven on December 5, 2009 at 5:19 PM
BOOM SHAKALAKA…!
Seven Percent Solution on December 5, 2009 at 5:21 PM
Global warming is regarded by the sheeple as true, by those who can think for themselves as false and by the power mad and money grubbers as … … useful.
- Seneca the Younger paraphrased
What would be the effect of this Global Warming fraud and coercion? To make one half the world fools and the other half hypocrites; to support roguery and error all over the earth. Al Gore and the Global Warming fraudsters and fanatics converted simple changes in the weather into an engine for enslaving mankind to filch wealth and power to themselves. They, in fact, constitute the real Anti-Scientists.
- Thomas Jefferson paraphrased
The church says the earth is flat, but I know that it is round, for I have seen the shadow on the moon, and I have more faith in a shadow than in the church.
- Ferdinand Magellan
If Ferdinand Magellan was alive today he would probably say “The Church of Global Warming says the earth is dangerously heating up, but I know that it is not, for I have seen the snow and ice and have felt their bitter cold, and I have more faith in snow and ice than in the Church of Global Warming, and it’s High Priests.”
MB4 on December 5, 2009 at 5:23 PM
Ah, yes! Lib views are always ‘taken out of context’.
then what the F are they talking about? You’d thing they’d want to make themselves clear, but they never follow up.
What does that tell you?
Liam on December 5, 2009 at 5:24 PM
In general… academics HATE questioning.
Back in the late 80s… when I questioned my Western Civ professor for comparing castrop crossing the Carribean with Washington crossing the Delaware… and when I questioned my Socilogy professor’s definition of Socialism as “A system in which all citizens are equal”… I ended up in the Dean’s office and I got a screeching at by another professor.
I have worked in higher ed for 12 years… academics have an extremely exalted view of themselves. I’m telling you, AGW will not go down easily. This scandal is a non-starter at the research universities. Our university is drenched in AGW newspeak… and the grant money flows.
THAT is where the rubber meets the road… the grant money will need to dry up before academia will even acknowledge the possibility that AGW may be wrong… and unfortunately, the people with the purse strings are generally true believers.
mankai on December 5, 2009 at 5:24 PM
But it does put the burden of proof back on the warmists, where it should have been all along. The emails throw the credibility of the entire theory into question. Maybe now they will subject their theory to the same scrutiny and debate required of every other theory.
If that happens, I’m willing to bet my house that their theory turns out to be the pure crap we all know in our gut it is.
RadClown on December 5, 2009 at 5:26 PM
So that’s the global warming crowd’s defense? “Hide the decline” and “trick” are merely code words that the layperson doesn’t understand?
It freaking snowed here in Houston yesterday!!! On December 4! And it didn’t melt when it hit the ground. We had 2 inches covering our yard. So save your alarmist crap and sell whatever shares you own in “green” companies, cuz the jig is up.
Doughboy on December 5, 2009 at 5:26 PM
Is there any way we can get this Watson 9rick to appear on TV, say with Greta, and surprise him with Lord Monckton !
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v-M8eqmP4A8
Check out the date of this clip
macncheez on December 5, 2009 at 5:27 PM
Oh, yes they do!
If the science was proper, the emails wouldn’t exist in the first place.
Liam on December 5, 2009 at 5:29 PM
It looks like Richard Dawkin’s runt brother is now playing the victim card.
pearson on December 5, 2009 at 5:30 PM
Yeah, and he says it was in an “obscure” journal – Nature – only the leading scientific journal in the UK (and probably the world).
pearson on December 5, 2009 at 5:32 PM
Many apologies for stealing that last paragraph!
July 10 on December 5, 2009 at 5:32 PM
It’s the same here, as you know.
As a Yank with Brit relatives who are Guardianistas, aging Trotskeyite misanthropes I understand what you’re saying.
Their sole purpose and greatest joy in life is supporting NuLabor and then complaining about the taxes and restrictions imposed by their chosen form of government. They are also, like all liberals, hypocrites of the highest order. They despise anyone they believe to belong to a class lower than theirs and restrict themselves to a small social circle of like-minded wankers.
Cody1991 on December 5, 2009 at 5:32 PM
That scientist doesnt do himself any favors by looking like a stereotypical mad scientist from some movie. I bet the minute he appeared on screen most people dismissed him as a crank. Beneficial for us, though.
YehuditTX on December 5, 2009 at 5:33 PM
There is the ‘fudge-factor’ too
macncheez on December 5, 2009 at 5:33 PM
They can call me a Flat Earth Hologram Denying @$$-Hole all they want. After 30 years in Advertising… I know “Bull$#!+ for Profit” when I see it. GoreBull Warming is a critical component to the Left on this planet. They have too much invested in it to just let it go.
ronnyraygun on December 5, 2009 at 5:34 PM
As I watched this video for some reason I had flashes of
professorprofessed wankdummy throwing himself on the ground in a tantrum. Kicking and screaming like a 4 year old child who hasnt been able to get his way.canditaylor68 on December 5, 2009 at 5:35 PM
The elitist condescention with which he called his American cousin an arshole was priceless.
His ‘superiority’ is absolute.
What a tiny man, with fluffballs for cojones.
Schadenfreude on December 5, 2009 at 5:36 PM
Yep, and it’s working. Has anyone changed their mind as a result of Climategate?
Does anyone who used to believe in catastrophic man-made global warming, now disbelieve?
July 10 on December 5, 2009 at 5:37 PM
Monckton is gold here. :)
mankai on December 5, 2009 at 5:37 PM
Actually they do. Would they throw away data that agreed with their hoax? Of course not.
Capitalist Infidel on December 5, 2009 at 5:37 PM
Actually I bet it has had some effect. You need to read the polls. UK and USA residents are becoming flat earthers more and more.
CWforFreedom on December 5, 2009 at 5:42 PM
Classy. He waits until the moment before the cutaway to call him a nasty name. No, I didn’t like Murano’s style but I didn’t care for the British twit, either. Both come off like jerks. I just don’t like sneaky jerks. Advantage: baiting American jerk over sneaky English jerk.
princetrumpet on December 5, 2009 at 5:42 PM
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/environment_energy/americans_skeptical_of_science_behind_global_warming
CWforFreedom on December 5, 2009 at 5:43 PM
Very true, although the academics here, as well as their institutions not only want grant money and to save their jobs, they still also have some of the old-fashioned notions of themselves as a community of scholars, who are on a quest for truth, and go wherever the evidence leads, etc.
The demand for the data and the computer codes, so the results can be verified or falsified can’t be sluffed off for long. Why hide your data? It’s not a trade secret. Once you get public credit for a “discovery,” you are expected to share it in science.
The ridiculous excuses (we threw it away; we need to get confidentiality waivers) are excuses that would not otherwise be tolerated if so much money and so many reputations had gone into this house of cards. Without global warming, how many people outside the UK would know of the University of East Anglia?
Wethal on December 5, 2009 at 5:45 PM
Typical lib response, you racefans: You’re an A-hole if you don’t agree with me in full. Because I’m right, and I said so!
I ought to know, after all. I’m me!
Liam on December 5, 2009 at 5:47 PM
From the article you posted:
If it has had some effect, it has yet to show.
July 10 on December 5, 2009 at 5:51 PM
Al started a hoax. Which started the whole world thinking they were going to be a frying.
But what Al didn’t see was that the joke would be on he.
Oh, no, Al started to cry. Which started the whole world laughing.
Oh, if he’d only seen that the joke would be on he.
Al looked at the skies. Running his hands over his snowed up eyes.
And he fell from his throne. Cracking his head on the ice and choking on things that he’d said.
Till Al’s power finally died. Which started the whole world
livingdrilling.Oh, if he’d only seen that the joke would be on he.
Oh, no, that the joke would be on he.
MB4 on December 5, 2009 at 5:51 PM
Well, yeah, they kinda do, bub.
They clearly reveal a set of scientists not only damaging their scientific credentials, but discussing the *real* data that does put the lie to the claims of AGW.
There is no data/evidence to support the ‘catastrophic climate change scenarios’ – yes, this proves the whole damned thing is a hoax.
Midas on December 5, 2009 at 5:51 PM
Click on ‘more info’ of that youtube video and scroll all the way down
The name looks familiar
macncheez on December 5, 2009 at 5:52 PM
Is it character assassination if it’s mostly self-inflicted?
bbhack on December 5, 2009 at 5:54 PM
The best argument Watson could muster was that “skeptics” were engaging in “character assassination. If “one string” of emails full of damning revelations is not enough to challenge the science of AGW, then how many strings are necessary. I also don’t get that Watson asserts that none of the original data has been destroyed when all reports are to the contrary. My reaction to Watson’s comments was identical to Morano’s which was to laugh out loud when he was talking. I suspect that’s the reaction of many people and when the audience laughs at your arguments, you’ve lost the debate in the eyes of the audience.
stefano1 on December 5, 2009 at 5:54 PM
Just calling another scientist an A-hole is proof the data is questionable.
You know, like libs do: Just the serious of the charge makes the candidate invalid…
Liam on December 5, 2009 at 5:57 PM
Closs war is bäck….
ParisParamus on December 5, 2009 at 5:58 PM
haha, that was gold how he sneaked in “what an asshole” at the end!
thinkagain on December 5, 2009 at 5:58 PM
The biggest lie in this video is by omission: the “research” is that of a few groups to which others have signed on (GLOMMED ON) to get $; it’s an inverted pyramid, where everyone is relying on the same research and “data.”
ParisParamus on December 5, 2009 at 6:07 PM
DO you have any specifics? In regards to both men.
CWforFreedom on December 5, 2009 at 6:08 PM
Of course not! Someone else made him do it, like with Hasan.
If you doubt me, ask any liberal.
Liam on December 5, 2009 at 6:08 PM
And, by the same token, it IS character assassination no matter what.
I’m trying to be a lib like the trolls here. I’m learning doublespeak.
Liam on December 5, 2009 at 6:12 PM
The real scientists have know the answer for at least 45 years. If global warming were real wouldn’t it be… global?
imshocked on December 5, 2009 at 6:21 PM
“Are you in denial?”
“Absolutely not.”
munseym on December 5, 2009 at 6:25 PM
It IS global. I mean, the polar bears are drowning! The main reason they’re drowning instead of going inland to avoid drowning is because of the vast right-wing conspiracy that wants to drown polar bears and kill the air our grandchildren will be to breathe.
On top of that, the VRWC is going to jack the prices on oxygen tanks, all to make a buck.
Liam on December 5, 2009 at 6:26 PM
Given time, the Left will go from ‘Big Oil’ to ‘Big Oxygen’.
Liam on December 5, 2009 at 6:29 PM
When the left says ‘civility’, they really mean Agree with everything we say without question or Shut-up.
To them disagreeing with the left is by definition, Un-civil.
Juno77 on December 5, 2009 at 6:30 PM
It’s a constant battle against these liberal turds.
They’re like cockroaches.
Or cancer.
justltl on December 5, 2009 at 6:31 PM
Francis Bacon warned us about Idols of the Tribe.
Geochelone on December 5, 2009 at 6:32 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »