It seems to me, that now the climate change activists are the deniers, temperatures are not rising, in fact it looks like they could be starting to cool, we dont have extreme sea level rise as predicted.(UN general assembly said we would have 50 million climate refugees by 2010).
So why cant they admit that perhaps CO2 is not as dangerous as predicted.
<
..
MORANO: Absolutely not true. I wish we (skeptics) had the money the environmentalists had. We don't have anything near the money the big green environmentalists have.>>
This is total BS.
Morano makes a bold statement, without providing any proof whatsoever, about green environmental organizations having more money to spend then his yet at the same time his organization (Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow or CFACT) does not disclose who funds them and, above all, to what extend.
And it turns out that in 2010 alone, roughly 45% of CFACT's funding came from the secretive Donors Trust organization (which allows donors to remain largely anonymous while donations can still be earmarked). And it should be no surprise really that industries and groups (the latter primarily über-conservative) which traditionally have objected to climate change now use Donors Trust to secretly fund a wide array of climate change denial outfits, among them Marc Morano's.
Morano, who has no (climate) scientific expertise whatsoever yet knows lots about 'communications' (aka propaganda) is the Director of Communications of the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT), in which capacity he owns more ($150,004) than that outfits' President (David Rothbard; $108,608) and Executive Director (Craig Rucker: $106,895) which stresses that to these organizations it is all about Communications, NOT about the Science.
Donors Trust is quite popular among those who secretly wish to fund climate change denial and the Koch Brothers use it extensively: http://www.prwatch.org/news/2012/10/1181...
Yawn, new year same old horse manure from deniers, not really sure who cares who wins a debate between a political hack like Morano, and either of the people you list neither of whom are qualified in any field related to climate. Debates and petitions seem very convincing to deniers, anything I guess to try and avoid the painful facts of the science from real scientists.
http://climate.nasa.gov/key_indicators
Real scientists at Nasa and many other agencies and scientific organisations have explained the lies Morano tells repeatedly the data shows whats really happening, I've seen Morano perform live and his only debating talent is to try and shout louder than the other guy.
Morano also makes some empty claims about info in papers in Nature, this is a peer reviewed journal, this is the same Morano who has claimed the peer review process is flawed, yet he now wants to use single papers to make claims (he was careful not to name the papers or authors)
Morano claims are ridiculous for flooding, it is well documented that the last decade has seen many long standing records broken.
In just the last few weeks Queensland in Australia had it's third year in a row with major floods.
http://www.radioaustralia.net.au/interna...
Indonesia had record floods just a week ago
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/1...
Not sure where you got your text, but this
"MORANO: And CO2 is nothing to be -- it's pure fearmongering."
Is not in the link you posted
I note you also left out Morano reference to 70's cooling, where he tried the old denier claim that scientists supported that, this is one of the lamer denier excuses and all they ever present for it is the same couple of media reports, they avoid mentioning the well documented papers and meetings where scientists did not support the idea. Scientists said they didn't have enough data to say, at the time. This was the position of NAS (National Academy of Science) in the late 70's, that cooling was a widely and well held view in the science community is a fiction deniers try to peddle and one that quite easy to show as a lie, it is however a good guide to the tactic deniers are prepared to use, perhaps why you left out the reference here.
"Sure, well, actually I don't want to waste any time on this. The science is settled."
I'm not sure if this is the best way to kick off a debate. But hey, I'd rather talk about Gringo.
_______________________________________...
@Gringo: "This is total BS.
Morano makes a bold statement, without providing any proof whatsoever, about green environmental organizations having more money to spend then his yet at the same time his organization (Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow or CFACT) does not disclose who funds them and, above all, to what extend."
The Sierra Club accepted $25M over three years from fossil fuel companies: http://science.time.com/2012/02/02/exclu...
However, being the good greenies they are, they turned down a further $30M. One can infer their financial situation if they can afford to turn away from $30M.
Also note that Brune said: "He runs a website that's financed by Chevron and Exxon." That's climatedepot.com not CFACT. Where is the proof of his website funding sources?
But hey, let's stick with CFACT anyways. And I know you love sourcewatch: http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Com...
I see some funding from oil companies in the 90s. I don't see any numbers that come close to $25M. I do see this though: "He said the Sierra Club had just approved the organization’s largest annual budget ever, about $100 million for 2012" http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/1...
It's generally unwise to accuse others of BS when you're full of it yourself.
Marc Morano is a wingnut propagandist and global warming denier. He kicked off his career by learning the tricks of the trade as a producer on Rush Limbaugh's show in the early '90s. He then went on to work for L. Brent Bozell's Media Research Center. In 2004, he was one of the first "reporters" to hype the John Kerry swiftboating story. In 2006, preeminent denier and wingnut Jim Inhofe hired Morano to be his Bullshitter-in-Chief "Director of Communications." Morano's position got him into a number of climate conferences and policy hearings. He also put out a bogus report about 700+ number of scientists who "disagreed" with the consensus. Some scientists called for his resignation due to the number of distortions and lies about their work he promulgated. In 2009, Morano left Inhofe and became the proprietor of the website Denial Depot Climate Depot.
Follow the money.....
ClimateDepot.com is being financed by the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow, a nonprofit in Washington that advocates for free-market solutions to environmental issues. Public tax filings for 2003-7 (the last five years for which documents are available) show that the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow received hundreds of thousands of dollars from the ExxonMobil Foundation and foundations associated with the billionaire Richard Mellon Scaife, a longtime financier of conservative causes, including being the primary source of money used to fund attacks against Bill Clinton during the Whitewater and Monica Lewinsky eras of his presidency . According to a report issued by the Union of Concerned Scientists, from 1998-2005, approximately 23% of the total ExxonMobil funding for the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow was directed by ExxonMobil for climate change activities. In fairness ExxonMobil claims they no longer funds CFACT and CFACT is quiet about where they receive their funding from.
They get all the attention they deserve ......
During the COP15 conference in Copenhagen, CFACT hosted an outside side event in Copenhagen called the Copenhagen Climate Challenge. COP15 attracted 33,200 delegates, the side event was attended by 60 people (15 journalists, 18 speakers, 27 audience) and was well attended for a side event. According to Lenore Taylor of The Australian, Professor Ian Plimer was "a star attraction of the two-day event" which also featured Dr. Fred Singer, sea level expert Dr. Nils Axel Morner and others.
Morano is correct....no doubt!
Sadly, many Warming Activists are worried about their jobs and their fabricated sense of self-importance to admit they are wrong.
Too many scientists have been lured by the All-Mighty $$Dollar!
The greenies pull every dirty trick to stifle honest debate, and still lose.
Morano, by a long shot.
Kano. They will never admit that they are wrong. Climate scientists were actually caught emailing each other hoping for warmer temperatures. They were wishing for hotter temperatures, which they believe will kill us all, rather than to be seen as wrong.
My bet is that Morano is wrong.
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2013/01/24/pmt-climate-change-marc-morano-michael-brune.cnn
Bill Nye 'The Science Guy' backs out of CNN debate with Marc Morano -- Morano was informed Nye would not be debating just 6 minutes before CNN segment began -- Nye's last minute replacement was Sierra Club warmist Michael Brune.
Morano: Warmists are embarrassed by 'flat-lining temperatures. So the whole movement has shifted to extreme storm' claims.
MICHAEL BRUNE, THE SIERRA CLUB: Sure, well, actually I don't want to waste any time on this. The science is settled. We noticed that last year we had record numbers of wildfires throughout the Mountain West, as you cited; 61 percent of the country suffered a crippling drought. We had Superstorm Sandy with 1,000-mile diameter storm hitting the east coast, flooded my parents house, caused billions of dollars worth of damage.
The reality is that extreme weather is here. Our climate has begun to be destabilized. The good news is that we can do something about it. We have solutions to the cause of climate change. And those solutions will both help keep our families safe and help our economy grow at the same time.
MORGAN: OK. Marc, there you have it. What do you say to that?
MARC MORANO, CLIMATEDEPOT.COM: I say you look at the peer reviewed literature. We now know a study in journal "Nature" show that there's 60 years, no trend in droughts. In fact, there was a decline in droughts in the U.S., except the most recent one in 2012, which wasn't even as big as the one in the 1950s or the 1930s.
In terms of flood, 80 to 117 [correction 127] years, there's no trend in floods. Big tornadoes are down dramatically since the 1950s -- F3 or larger. And hurricanes, eight years now -- the longest period without a major land falling category 3 or larger hurricane. Eight years, the longest stetch since 1900. So if you start looking at these measures --
MORGAN: Answer me this point. You wouldn't dispute there's been increased acceleration in CO2, right?
MORANO: No, CO2 is rising. Global temperature has now stalled for 15 or 16 years. And that is -- now James Hanson of NASA has admitted at least decade of no warming, or as he said flat lining temperatures. This is an embarrassment right now.
So the whole movement has shifted to extreme storms. That's what they're trying to focus on now. Evidence is everywhere when you look for extremes. But the bottom line is we have always had extreme weather. In the 1970s, the CIA report and "Newsweek" and all the people worried about a coming Ice Age blamed extreme weather, droughts and bad weather and crop failure on global cooling. Now they have reversed and they are blaming the same phenomenon on global warming. It's very convenient.
(CROSS TALK)
MORGAN: Michael, over to you?
BRUNE: Yes, Piers, I haven't met Marc. I'm sure he's a nice guy. He's not a climate scientist. He runs a website that's financed by Chevron and Exxon.
(CROSS TALK)
MORANO: Absolutely not true. I wish we (skeptics) had the money the environmentalists had. We don't have anything near the money the big green environmentalists have.
BRUNE: Why don't I make my point. The peer reviewed science is in. Climate scientists around the world agree in overwhelming numbers that climate change is real. It's here. It's happening. And extreme weather is the new normal.
What is also true is that the United States has begun to fight this. Our CO2 levels have now reached 20 year lows. We're back now to where 1992 was.
MORANO: Due to fracking.
BRUNE: As we get off dirty fuels, as we reject dirty pipelines from the tar sands, for example, or as we replace dirty coal plants with clean energy, we create more jobs; we support the local tax base; we grow the economy; we clean up our air, clean up our water, and we stabilize our climate.
The only folks who are against that are the oil companies, gas companies and coal companies that routinely fund the climate skeptics and climate deniers that you have on your show here tonight.
MORGAN: I have got to leave it there, sadly. I'm sure the debate will run. But my view remains why take the risk. I want my kids and their kids to live in a healthy planet.
MORANO: And CO2 is nothing to be -- it's pure fearmongering.
