I posted yesterday about Marc Morano's attacks on a recent American Geophysical Union statement supporting climate change science. Morano, if you recall, is the communications director for James Inhofe's minority senate committee on environment and public works. According to this C-Span page, as a senate committee communications director Morano is likely paid a full-time government salary on the order of at least $65,000. So what do you suppose our tax dollars are paying for today?
As of 8:00 pm Eastern time Jan 25th, Morano had written a total of nine comments in this thread, some very lengthy, attacking not only the AGU, but also the IPCC, the American Meteorological Society, the National Academy of Sciences, Andrew Dessler, Ray Pierrehumbert, realclimate, Rajendra K. Pachauri, and to top it all off, the whole institution of peer review! Entertaining I suppose, but I'm wondering if we should ask for our money back on this one... More details below the fold.
Andy Revkin's Dot Earth blog has been attracting some very interesting and expert comments, from scientists interested in the environment and the climate, frequent topics of discussion there. The recent flurry of comments from Marc Morano really takes the cake though. Morano is communications directory for Senator "climate hoax" Inhofe's EPW committee, i.e. chief propagandist. He's the one behind the claimed list of 400 scientists who supposedly are against the global warming consensus (hint: most of them are either not opposed to the consensus, or not in any way qualified climate scientists with peer reviewed publications to their name). And Morano used to work for Rush Limbaugh, if that gives you the picture. And, as Morano likes to repeat, his EPW minority committee website is now "award-winning"!
Comment #21, January 24th, 2:38 pm: The Award Winning Environment & Public Works Website (the Gold Mouse Award made possible by JFK School of Government At Harvard University and the National Science Foundation [...]) wrote all about the film "Everything’s Cool." Excerpt from January 26, 2007: The Weather Channel’s top climate expert — already under fire for advocating the scientific decertification of global warming skeptics — is one of the stars of a new politically charged global warming documentary that, according to the film’s website, accuses the U.S. government of "criminal neglect" and blames "right-wing think tanks" for helping to "defeat climate-friendly legislation."
"helping to defeat climate-friendly legislation" - hey wait, isn't that what Senator Inhofe's contributors are paying him for?
Morano has no shame about his own background - he's a scientist just like these Nobel prize-winners he's fighting against! He helpfully posted his own bio:
Comment #64 - January 24th, 5:49 pm: For all of you interested, I am a scientist — a POLITICAL scientist. Here is my bio publicly available on the Society of Environmental Journalists Website. [...]
Marc Morano joined the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee as the majority Communications Director in June 2006 after a decade and a half as a working journalist, documentary maker and national television correspondent.
Morano has held both White House and Capitol Hill Press credentials and was a member of the Society of Professional Journalists. He has attended and reported on numerous international climate conferences and the 2002 UN sponsored Earth Summit in Johannesburg South Africa. He was the first reporter in May 2004 to report that the Swift Boat Veterans were organizing to oppose John Kerry.
[...]
Mr. Morano served as the television reporter/producer for the nationally syndicated Rush Limbaugh, the Television Show, during the show’s four year run (1992-1996). Mr. Morano, referred to by Mr. Limbaugh as "Our Man in Washington," had the dubious distinction of being the first journalist in history to have his television camera seized at the Clinton White House, while on assignment with the Limbaugh show. [...]
A resume to be proud of, I'm sure. Anybody know what Morano actually had to say about the swiftboaters, besides giving them free advertising? I hadn't been aware of that link before!
Ok, I can't copy his diatribes in full, they're just too ludicrous. But a few more excerpts, first attacking IPCC:
Comment #76 - January 24th, 6:36 pm: As a UN IPCC member, you must be so proud of the UN’s "scientific" process. You, as a member of the IPCC, are accusing me of being "inexcusably dishonest?" You must be so proud of UN special climate envoy Dr. Gro Harlem Brundtland statement on May 10, 2007 declaring the climate debate "over" and adding "it’s completely immoral, even, to question" the UN’s scientific "consensus." And you must be proud to be a part of the UN IPCC’s when its Executive Secretary Yvo de Boer [sic - de Boer is with the UN FCCC, not IPCC] said it was "criminally irresponsible" to ignore the urgency of global warming on November 12, 2007.
Both of these comments underlie your argument that the IPCC is a scientific process but instead clearly reveal the IPCC to be a fully political entity instead.
[selected quotes from the usual anti-IPCC complainers removed... - note that the people who he quotes almost all agree that with the main consensus that the Earth is warming and humans are the most likely cause, but that's not what he's quoting them for of course!]
Finally, you wrote to me: "Either way, your treatment of the IPCC taints everything you said." I do agree with you one point, "taint" is a good word to describe the UN IPCC process.
Attacking reality, peer review and Andy Dessler (and burning the midnigth - well, 7:00 pm - oil this time!):
Comment #82 - January 24th, 7:07 pm: [...defense of some of his "400"...] Your sole reliance on peer-reviewed science as only criteria leaves much to be desired as well: [...] You seem to believe that unless someone published a study in a publication of your approval, they are not qualified. What about field research, university research, professional papers, advanced degrees, certifications, real world observational data? None of that matters if the scientist does not meet your arbitrary criteria? [...] The Senate report of dissenting scientists has gained a giant foothold in the climate debate. [...] Also note that this report goes way beyond scientists’ dissenting but includes numerous recent peer-reviewed studies debunking rising CO2 fears and Arctic and Greenland melting fears. 2008 is ushering in a truly new era in the climate debate. [...] Finally, I am still waiting for Andrew Dessler to list the two dozen "qualified" skeptical scientists.
I am publicly challenging you Dessler!
List the two dozen scientists you deem "qualified" so we all know who they are.
Wow! He admits he doesn't know which of his "400" actually count as "qualified" according to the normal standards of peer-reviewed publication in the field? Quite an admission there Morano!
Numerous recent studies debunking rising CO2? I'd love to see those! A truly new era in the climate debate? Only if Inhofe loses his election this November, I suspect...
More against peer review here:
Comment #159 - January 25th, 3:18 pm: [...] Alexander Cockburn who writes for The Nation and CounterPunch.org: "I think people have had enough of peer-reviewed science and experts telling them what they can and cannot think and say about climate change. [...] Many people who fall back on peer-reviewed science seem afraid to have out the intellectual argument." End Excerpt.
That is Cockburn essentially answering you for me, Mr. Pierrehumbert, about the few scientists you have selected to highlight from the Senate 400 plus report.
Of course, self-reflection or questioning clearly isn't a virtue for Mr. Morano:
Now Mr. Pierrehumbert, does Cockburn’s quote, "There was a shocking intensity to their self-righteous fury," remind you or Andrew Dessler or Eli Rabett of anyone?
Actually, the shocking intensity of self-righteous fury does describe somebody whose comments I've been reading. Now who would that be?
But, then again, maybe peer review isn't all bad after all:
Now. A very important point here. I am in no way dismissing peer-reviewed research. In fact Senator Inhofe’s award winning Senate website (thanks to JFK School of Government at Harvard U. and the National Science Foundation for making the Gold Mouse award possible) has numerous recent peer-reviewed papers debunking man-made climate fears.
The Senate Report of over 400 (and growing) scientists features a whole section of recent peer-reviewed studies that debunk man-made climate fears.
As an aside, the Alexander Cockburn essay (from a book he has coming out - the essay is something he put out around May last year I believe) is a real piece of work. George Monbiot actually tried to reason with the guy around then - long thread here on the Cockburn/Monbiot debate, but in the end Cockburn just continues quoting his reliably non-peer-reviewed "scientists" oblivious to the nonsense they're spewing. The funniest part for me was his quote of Einstein refusing to publish in the scientific journals where I work because we (even then) subjected all papers to a peer review process - in fact there's a nice story about how one of Einstein's papers was greatly improved by one of our peer reviewers so he avoided publishing something egregiously wrong back in the 1930s.
The point is, when real scientists communicate, they really do manage to find common ground and consensus based in reality. I guess political scientists learn how to "make their own reality". Morano's doing a bang-up job over there, I'm sure he has a nice fossil fuel industry lobbying job all lined up for when he's kicked out of government pay this fall.
But all the more important we make this year a year of real change for our government. We need Democrats both in the presidency and in the house and senate, so this sort of nonsense doesn't go around adding to the huge misinformation out there, and even winning "awards". If the issues weren't so serious, I'd think this was a huge joke. Things aren't all bad - the tide of public opinion is turning, and there have been a very few steps (like the CFL craze and the big market for hybrid cars) that have made a difference already. But we're nowhere near to facing the main challenge ahead of us on climate, and people like Morano are standing in the way. And we're paying his salary!