Part of the A Rundown of the Skeptics & Deniers series

Pat Michaels' testified in front of Congress about climate change. In reference to that testimony climate blogger Coby Beck claims Pat Michaels "lied by omission". Professor Tim Lambert prefers to use stronger words "fraud, pure and simple" on his blog. Michaels received well over a hundred thousand dollars from oil and coal interests before 1995. Find out why so many call this man a fraud by reading his profile at our main website.






2 comments:
Michaels has claimed that "overwhelmingly most of my funding comes from public sources. It would be interesting to know
if this refers to peer reviewed grants from such public institutions as the National Science Foundation or simply to his salary from the University of Virginia. I think it must be possible to determine how much funding he receives from governmental agencies and other nonprofit foundations and compare that with the amounts (harder to be sure of) from private sources. This would make a more accurate (and possibly more telling) criticism of his potential bias. The fact that he has not fleshed out his claim with more details suggests that he might be counting his salary as the "vast majority" of his funding.
It seems that Mr Michaels used Hansen's graph to illustrate that we have not achieved the drastic conditions forewarned. How is this fraud. The other two scenarios demonstrate mild trends. If it were to be shown Congress would conclude the reality. The massive warming has not taken place.I do not see in any of Mr. Hansen's graphs the current drop of .6 C., Nor the stasis we have seen over the past 5 years. Indeed, the Hockey Stick affair was beyond fraud. Having had lunch with Marcel Tok, the Dutch journalist that broke the story, I must say it is a rather despicable event in the history of science. As for funding, Mr. Hansen seems to have a fondness for the Heinz-Kerry foundation. Unlike Mr. Michaels, Hansen has the world's policy ears and much government funding.
Post a Comment