NASA's Hansen urges Copenhagen 'collapse'

The UK Guardian's Suzanne Goldberg posts a report that should initially capture the attention of any manmade global warming skeptic:

The scientist who convinced the world to take notice of the looming danger of global warming says it would be better for the planet and for future generations if next week's Copenhagen climate change summit ended in collapse.

In an interview with the Guardian, James Hansen, the world's pre-eminent climate scientist, said any agreement likely to emerge from the negotiations would be so deeply flawed that it would be better to start again from scratch.

"I would rather it not happen if people accept that as being the right track because it's a disaster track," said Hansen, who heads the Nasa Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York.

"The whole approach is so fundamentally wrong that it is better to reassess the situation. If it is going to be the Kyoto-type thing then [people] will spend years trying to determine exactly what that means."

Hold on just a minute.  Isn’t this the same James Hansen that led the fight to convince U.S. politicians that manmade global warming was real and dangerous? Isn’t this the same James Hansen who has slammed manmade global warming skeptics time and time again?  Even the Guardian takes note of this man’s history by referring to his long crusade to prod politicians into action.

So, it seems Hansen is still a believer.  He just favors even more draconian measures than legislation like Cap and Trade.  He acknowledges the recent disclosure of scientific fraud may present problems, but it doesn’t change his outlook.

The article concludes:

For all Hansen's pessimism, he insists there is still hope. "It may be that we have already committed to a future sea level rise of a metre or even more but that doesn't mean that you give up.

"Because if you give up you could be talking about tens of metres. So I find it screwy that people say you passed a tipping point so it's too late. In that case what are you thinking:   that we are going to abandon the planet? You want to minimise the damage."

The fog settles in.  If anyone can follow this man’s convoluted logic about what should be done, go for it.

The UK Guardian's Suzanne Goldberg posts a report that should initially capture the attention of any manmade global warming skeptic:

The scientist who convinced the world to take notice of the looming danger of global warming says it would be better for the planet and for future generations if next week's Copenhagen climate change summit ended in collapse.

In an interview with the Guardian, James Hansen, the world's pre-eminent climate scientist, said any agreement likely to emerge from the negotiations would be so deeply flawed that it would be better to start again from scratch.

"I would rather it not happen if people accept that as being the right track because it's a disaster track," said Hansen, who heads the Nasa Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York.

"The whole approach is so fundamentally wrong that it is better to reassess the situation. If it is going to be the Kyoto-type thing then [people] will spend years trying to determine exactly what that means."

Hold on just a minute.  Isn’t this the same James Hansen that led the fight to convince U.S. politicians that manmade global warming was real and dangerous? Isn’t this the same James Hansen who has slammed manmade global warming skeptics time and time again?  Even the Guardian takes note of this man’s history by referring to his long crusade to prod politicians into action.

So, it seems Hansen is still a believer.  He just favors even more draconian measures than legislation like Cap and Trade.  He acknowledges the recent disclosure of scientific fraud may present problems, but it doesn’t change his outlook.

The article concludes:

For all Hansen's pessimism, he insists there is still hope. "It may be that we have already committed to a future sea level rise of a metre or even more but that doesn't mean that you give up.

"Because if you give up you could be talking about tens of metres. So I find it screwy that people say you passed a tipping point so it's too late. In that case what are you thinking:   that we are going to abandon the planet? You want to minimise the damage."

The fog settles in.  If anyone can follow this man’s convoluted logic about what should be done, go for it.

RECENT VIDEOS