You posted two links about global warming. Are you able to pay attention?
A NOTE ON NASA'S JAMES HANSEN BEING MUZZLED BY NASA I see that we are once again having to hear how NASA's James Hansen was dissuaded from talking to the press on a few of the 1,400 media interviews he was involved in over the years. Well, I had the same pressure as a NASA employee during the Clinton-Gore years, because NASA management and the Clinton/Gore administration knew that I was skeptical that mankind's CO2 emissions were the main cause of global warming. I was even told not to give my views during congressional testimony, and so I purposely dodged a question, under oath, when it arose. But I didn't complain about it like Hansen has. NASA is an executive branch agency and the President was, ultimately, my boss (and is, ultimately, Hansen's boss). So, because of the restrictions on what I could and couldn't do or say, I finally just resigned from NASA and went to work for the university here in Huntsville. There were no hard feelings, and I'm still active in a NASA satellite mission and fully supportive of its Earth observation programs. In stark contrast, Jim Hansen said whatever he wanted, whenever he wanted to the press and congress during that time. He even campaigned for John Kerry, and received a $250,000 award from Theresa Heinz-Kerry's charitable foundation -- two events he maintains are unrelated. If I had done anything like this when I worked at NASA, I would have been crucified under the Hatch Act. Does anyone besides me see a double standard here? -Roy W. Spencer The University of Alabama in Huntsville On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 6:58 PM, Larry C. Lyons <[email protected]> wrote: > > Here's another one by the NASA inspector general. Like this guy has a > left wing agenda right Sam? > > http://oig.nasa.gov/investigations/OI_STI_Summary.pdf > > On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 6:53 PM, Larry C. Lyons <[email protected]> wrote: >> Just for you sam, in case your faulty memory needs some jogging. >> >> Warning this congressional report uses words of more than 3 syllables. >> >> http://www.lpl.arizona.edu/resources/globalwarming/documents/political-interference.pdf >> >> In a nutshell testimony by Bush appointees and staffers show that >> there was active interference with scientific research and reporting >> going well beyond what was reported by your bete-noir Hansen. >> >> On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 9:40 AM, Sam <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> What you call interference I call accountability. >>> >>> The Bush admin didn't influence the science, they demanded it be >>> responsible before putting the government seal of approval on it. >>> James Hansen caused that by pushing his corrupt sudo-science. >>> I can't believe the nutter is still employed. He was in the news >>> yesterday stating he hopes Copenhagen fails. >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 9:15 AM, Larry C. Lyons <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> so you have no problem with political interference with science. Very >>>> interesting. You need to look up something, Lamarkianism >>>> -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamarkism >>>> >>>> Political interference in science that resulted in the deaths of >>>> thousands. Also Eugenics. >>>> >>>> There's a reason why political interference with science is so bad. I >>>> had though that anyone with 3 working brain cells could figure out >>>> why. I see I may have been mistaken. >>>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:309018 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
