<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p><i><font size="+1"><b>October 26, 2020</b></font></i></p>
[top concern]<br>
<b>As Colorado wildfires burn, fears that climate change is causing
"multi-level emergency" mount</b><br>
Heat, aridity, mega-fires and smoke are intensifying faster than
projected...<br>
- -<br>
The record-breaking forest fires burning in Colorado even as winter
sets in are the latest sign climate warming is hitting the West
hard, causing scientists to up their rhetoric and warn it is past
time to move beyond planning and start aggressively acting...<br>
- - <br>
Colorado and the West face more hot days and temperatures will shoot
higher, scientists say. The rising heat is depleting water and
drying soil across the Colorado River Basin and other river basins.
Last week, federal authorities classified 97% of Colorado in severe
to exceptional drought...<br>
- -<br>
Dry conditions also set the stage for bigger, hotter wildfires.
Eight of Colorado's 20 largest recorded fires hit after 2018 and all
occurred in the last two decades. And the three largest burned in
the last three months...<br>
- -<br>
"We-re clearly seeing the number of fires and the size of fires
continuing to go up. It will continue to go up," Morgan said. "And
now this fire problem is everybody's problem with more smoke coming
into metro areas. We cannot ignore what is happening. We all have to
chip in and do our part to reduce these impacts."..<br>
- - <br>
Lawmakers have ordered cuts below 2005 levels -- 30% by 2025, 50% by
2030 and 90% by 2050. Colorado-s emerging strategy would meet those
goals by requiring a faster shift away from gas-power to
zero-emission vehicles; closing coal-fired power plants; reducing
methane pollution by the oil and gas industry; and making the
heating and cooling of buildings more efficient.<br>
<br>
"We need to move fast, but we need to move right and we need to move
carefully. We cannot impair the reliability of the electric grid,"
CDPHE environment programs director John Putnam said. "If we blow
the grid, nobody's going to follow our model. I would love to say
let-s get off fossil fuels now, but it just doesn't work that way in
the real world."<br>
<br>
But officials last week acknowledged growing pressure to prepare for
and adapt to immediate escalating threats. Putnam referred to "a
multi-level emergency" as wildfires blew up.<br>
<br>
"I understand the impatience," he said. "I suffer from asthma."<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.denverpost.com/2020/10/25/colorado-wildfires-climate-change/">https://www.denverpost.com/2020/10/25/colorado-wildfires-climate-change/</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
[Ooops - best laid plans]<br>
<b>North Pole ice cap too thin for testing Russia-s giant icebreaker</b><br>
The Arktika icebreaker will have to undergo a second test-voyage to
prove its capabilities to crush thick and hard sea-ice...<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://thebarentsobserver.com/en/arctic/2020/10/north-pole-ice-cap-too-thin-testing-russias-giant-icebreaker">https://thebarentsobserver.com/en/arctic/2020/10/north-pole-ice-cap-too-thin-testing-russias-giant-icebreaker</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
[Opinion from the National Catholic Reporter]<br>
<b>Editorial: Barrett-s moral relativism is cause for rejection from
the bench</b><br>
Oct 21, 2020<br>
by NCR Editorial Staff <br>
<br>
The United States Senate should reject the nomination of Judge Amy
Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court.<br>
<br>
We believed it was wrong for the Senate to consider this nomination
in the first place given the precedent set four years ago when
Justice Antonin Scalia died in February, nine months before the
election. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell refused to even
hold hearings on the nomination of Judge Merrick Garland, saying
repeatedly that the American people should have a say in the matter.
This year, when the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg created a
vacancy less than nine weeks before Election Day, McConnell has seen
fit to ram through the nomination.<br>
<br>
The hypocrisy is rank, and it is impossible to see how rushing this
nomination will be good for our democracy. The enmity caused by the
Republicans' shameful double standard will not soon dissipate, not
when lifetime appointments are at stake.<br>
<br>
Barrett is not responsible for McConnell's behavior, but she has
allowed herself to be a vehicle for his agenda and that of President
Donald Trump. She could have phoned the White House and asked not to
be considered for the nomination: Barrett is only 48 years old and
there will be other vacancies.<br>
<br>
"Many on the faculty are strongly opposed to the process by which
Judge Barrett is being pushed through by the president and the GOP,
especially on the eve of this presidential election," stated an open
letter signed by over 100 faculty at the University of Notre Dame,
where Barrett attended and taught at the law school.<br>
<br>
Her willingness to become a collaborator, complete with the required
adoring look at the president at the super-spreader event at which
she was nominated, is not enough to justify a negative vote, but it
set the table.<br>
<br>
What disqualifies Barrett is the extreme moral relativism she
displayed in her confirmation hearing. Not so long ago, moral
relativism was the war cry of cultural conservatives, at least since
then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger enounced the "dictatorship of
relativism" at the last Mass before the cardinals entered the
conclave of 2005 from which Ratzinger emerged as Pope Benedict XVI.<br>
<br>
For example, after acknowledging that COVID-19 is contagious and
that smoking causes cancer, she declined to affirm that climate
change is happening, Barrett called the issue of climate change "a
very contentious matter of public debate." Is that true? It is
certainly the case that Trump is not sure what, if anything, he
makes of climate change.<br>
<br>
But let-s be clear: Denying climate change is not that far from
QAnon conspiracy theories. If Barrett really has doubts on the
subject, she is not intellectually qualified to serve on the bench,
and we suspect she knows that. She was simply willing to embrace
moral relativism rather than risk a nasty tweet from the man who
nominated her.<br>
<br>
When Sen. Kamala Harris asked her a direct question -- "Prior to
your nomination, were you aware of President Trump-s statement
committing to nominate judges who will strike down the Affordable
Care Act? And I'd appreciate a yes or no answer" -- Barrett said she
could not recall.<br>
<br>
Really? You would think that in the days leading up to her
nomination, Barrett would have followed closely, or been briefed
upon, what the president did and did not say about his criteria in
selecting a judge.<br>
<br>
Sen. Amy Klobuchar asked Barrett if she thought it was against the
law to intimidate voters at the polls and, even more strangely,
Barrett refused to affirm that it was. Originalists like to claim
that their method of interpreting the Constitution is the only
method that genuinely honors democracy, but how is that possible if
intimidation of voters is permitted?<br>
<br>
This leads to the most repugnant realization about Barrett-s
relativism: In her commitment to originalism and textualism, she
claims not to be interpreting the law or the Constitution at all. In
her worldview, the Constitution is virtually a self-interpreting
text. If that were so, why would we need judges?<br>
<br>
In fact, in claiming that the meaning of the Constitution is fixed,
and she can discern it, Barrett is actually doing exactly what she
said she would never do. "As I said before, it is not the law of
Amy, it is the law of the American people," she said.<br>
<br>
But, unlike the brilliant scholar Barrett will replace when
confirmed, who accepted other ways of interpreting the Constitution,
the logic of Barrett's originalism is that Ginsburg's legal theories
were not just different but were illegitimate. Barrett-s relativism,
like the man who nominated her, is on steroids.<br>
<br>
We are glad that most commentators and virtually every question in
the formal hearing avoided discussing Barrett-s religion, even if
her membership in a patriarchal covenanted community raises some
legitimate concerns.<br>
<br>
We at NCR do not like the prospect of five of the six conservative
justices being Catholic and worry what that says about our church.
In America, however, there are no religious tests for office and no
senator should oppose Barrett on account of her religion.<br>
<br>
It is her bad faith in discussing the law that warrants
disqualifying her. About the evils of climate change, access to
health care and voter intimidation, Americans deserve better than a
relativist dressed in originalist drag. The Senate should vote no on
the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett.<br>
<br>
A version of this story appeared in the Oct 30-Nov 12, 2020 print
issue under the headline: Barrett's nomination should be rejected .<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.ncronline.org/news/opinion/editorial-barretts-moral-relativism-cause-rejection-bench">https://www.ncronline.org/news/opinion/editorial-barretts-moral-relativism-cause-rejection-bench</a><br>
<br>
<p><br>
</p>
[worse that thought]<br>
<b>Coastal permafrost more susceptible to climate change than
previously thought</b><br>
by University of Texas at Austin<br>
If you flew from the sea towards the land in the north slope of
Alaska, you would cross from the water, over a narrow beach, and
then to the tundra. From the air, that tundra would look like a
landscape of room-sized polygonal shapes. Those shapes are the
surface manifestations of the ice in the frozen ground below, a
solidified earth known as permafrost...<br>
- -<br>
Permafrost studies have almost exclusively focused on the region
beneath the tundra. Because it-s not easy to work in such remote
locations and under harsh weather conditions, the transition from
sea to shore has been largely ignored...<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://phys.org/news/2020-10-coastal-permafrost-susceptible-climate-previously.html">https://phys.org/news/2020-10-coastal-permafrost-susceptible-climate-previously.html</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
[Biden trending]<br>
<b>Aggressive push to 100% renewable energy could save Americans
billions – study</b><br>
As much as $321bn could be saved with complete switch to clean
energy sources, Rewiring America analysis finds...<br>
- -<br>
But it appears that American voters are broadly in favor of bolder
action to address global heating in the wake of a brutal year of
wildfires and hurricanes that scientists say are being fueled by the
climate crisis. A New York Times and Siena College poll this week
found that two-thirds of voters approve of Biden's plan, with
overwhelming support for the policies among younger voters.<br>
<br>
Snyder said the Biden plan is "probably the most ambitious yet
plausible plan I've seen" on the climate crisis.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/oct/22/us-renewable-energy-costs-savings-study-report">https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/oct/22/us-renewable-energy-costs-savings-study-report</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
[first examine the cost and value]<br>
<b>Solar Panels for Home - Still Worth it 2 Years Later?</b><br>
Oct 20, 2020<br>
Undecided with Matt Ferrell<br>
Head to <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.squarespace.com/mattferrell">https://www.squarespace.com/mattferrell</a> to save 10% off your
first purchase of a website or domain using code MATTFERRELL.
Exploring Solar Panels for Home - Still Worth it 2 Years Later
Review. It-s been two years since I installed solar panels on my
home in the Boston area. How's it been going? Let's take a look at
how much it cost, how much it's saved, how it-s been holding up and
what type of maintenance it's taken.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jgdjRADbVDo">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jgdjRADbVDo</a><br>
<p>- -</p>
[see the cost]<br>
<b>Get competing solar quotes online</b><br>
2020 is the last year to get 26% back on your solar panel
installation<br>
The average solar shopper saves at least $5,000 thanks to the solar
tax credit. In 2021, the tax credit drops to 22%, before expiring in
2022.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.energysage.com/">https://www.energysage.com/</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
[opinion of outrage]<br>
<b>Geology-s human footprint is enough to spur rage</b><br>
October 21st, 2020, by Tim Radford<br>
Once again science has presented evidence that a new geological
epoch is here. This human footprint is all our own work.<br>
<br>
LONDON, 21 October, 2020 - The human footprint has left its mark on
Earth, in every sense. The United States alone is scarred by 500,000
abandoned mines and quarries.<br>
<br>
Right now, worldwide, there are more than 500,000 active quarries
and pits, employing 4 million people, excavating the sand and gravel
needed for new roads, new homes and new megacities.<br>
<br>
Humans have not simply pitted the face of the Earth, they have paved
it. In 1904, beyond the cities, the US had just 225 km of sealed
highway. Now it has 4.3m km of asphalt or concrete roadway,
consuming more than 20 billion tonnes of sand and gravel.<br>
<br>
By comparison, the Great Wall of China, the biggest and most
enduring construction in early human history, contains just 0.4bn
tonnes of stone.<br>
<br>
Humans have changed the face of the waters. In 1950, trawlers,
long-liners and purse seiners fished just 1% of the high seas beyond
territorial waters. No fish species of any kind was considered
over-exploited or depleted.<br>
<br>
<b>Extinction threat widens</b><br>
Less than one human lifetime on, fishing fleets roam 63% of the high
seas and 87% of fish species are exploited, over-exploited or in a
state of collapse. Meanwhile somewhere between 5m and almost 13
million tons of discarded plastics flow each year into the sea.<br>
<br>
Humans and human livestock now far outweigh all other mammalian
life. At least 96% of the mass of all mammals is represented by
humans and their domesticated animals. Domestic poultry makes up 70%
of the mass of all living birds. The natural world is now
endangered, with a million species at risk of extinction.<br>
<br>
And humans have left an almost indelible radiant signature over the
entire global surface: between 1950 and 1980, nations detonated more
than 500 thermonuclear weapons to smear the air and surface of the
planet with radioactive materials: one of these, plutonium-239, will
be detectable for the next 100,000 years.<br>
<br>
The catalogue of planetary devastation that is the human footprint
is assembled in a new study by US and European scientists in the
journal Nature Communications: Earth and Environment. It is part of
a fresh attempt to settle a seemingly academic question of
geological bureaucracy, the naming of ages.<br>
<b><br>
</b><b>"We humans collectively got ourselves into this mess, we need
to work together to reverse these environmental trends and dig
ourselves out of it"</b><br>
<br>
The 11,000-year interval since the end of the last Ice Age and the
dawn of agriculture, metal smelting, and the first cities, cultures
and empires is still formally identified as the Holocene. The latest
study of the human legacy is just another salvo in the campaign to
announce and confirm the launch of an entirely new epoch, to be
called the Anthropocene.<br>
<br>
In fact, environmental campaigners, biologists and geophysicists
have for years been informally calling the last six or seven decades
the Anthropocene. But the authority with the last word on
internationally-agreed geological labels - the International
Commission on Stratigraphy - has yet to confirm the launch of the
new geological epoch.<br>
<br>
To help confirm the case for change, researchers have once again
assembled the evidence and identified at least 16 ways in which
humans have dramatically altered the planet since 1950, and the
beginning of what is sometimes called The Great Acceleration.<br>
<br>
For instance, humans have doubled the quantity of fixed nitrogen in
the biosphere, created an alarming hole in the stratospheric ozone
layer, released enough gases to raise the planetary temperature and
precipitate global climate change, fashioned or forged perhaps
180,000 kinds of mineral (by comparison, only about 5,300 occur
naturally) and - with dams, drains, wells, irrigation, and hydraulic
engineering - effectively replumbed the world-s river systems.<br>
<br>
<b>Ineradicable scar</b><br>
By forging metals and building structures, humans have become the
greatest earth-moving force on the planet, and left a mark that will
endure for aeons.<br>
<br>
Altogether, humans have altered the world's rivers, lakes,
coastlines, vegetation, soils, chemistry and climate. The study
makes grim reading.<br>
<br>
"This is the first time that humans have documented humanity-s
geological footprint on such a comprehensive scale in a single
publication," said Jaia Syvitski, of the University of Colorado,
Boulder, who led the research team that assembled the evidence.<br>
<br>
"We humans collectively got ourselves into this mess, we need to
work together to reverse these environmental trends and dig
ourselves out of it.<br>
<br>
"Society shouldn't feel complacent. Few people who read the
manuscript should come away without emotions bubbling up, like rage,
grief and even fear." - Climate News Network<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://climatenewsnetwork.net/geologys-human-footprint-is-enough-to-inspire-rage/">https://climatenewsnetwork.net/geologys-human-footprint-is-enough-to-inspire-rage/</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<br>
[classic documents- Dr James Hansen-s earliest presentation]<br>
<font size="+1"><b>On this day in the history of global warming -
October 26, 2004 </b></font><br>
October 26, 2004: <br>
<br>
NASA climate scientist James Hansen delivers a speech at the
University of Iowa on the hazards of human-caused climate change.
Angered by the speech, the Bush administration increases its efforts
to prevent Hansen from speaking publicly about climate change.<br>
<br>
<b>October: Dangerous Anthropogenic Interference: A Discussion of
Humanity-s Faustian Climate Bargain and the Payments Coming Due. </b>Presentation
given at the Distinguished Public Lecture Series at the Department
of Physics and Astronomy, University of Iowa, on Oct. 26.<br>
Download PDF (4.3 MB)
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/2004/dai_complete_20041026.pdf">http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/2004/dai_complete_20041026.pdf</a><br>
<blockquote>
<p><b>Dangerous Anthropogenic Interference</b><br>
A Discussion of Humanity's Faustian Climate Bargain and the
Payments Coming Due<br>
James E. Hansen<br>
Kintnersville, Pennsylvania<br>
October 26, 2004</p>
<p>I have been told by a high government official that I should
not talk about "dangerous<br>
anthropogenic interference" with climate, because we do not know
how much humans are<br>
changing the Earth's climate or how much change is "dangerous".
Actually, we know quite a<br>
lot. Natural regional climate fluctuations remain larger today
than human-made effects such as<br>
global warming. But data show that we are at a point where human
effects are competing with<br>
nature and the balance is shifting.</p>
<p>Ominously, the data show that human effects have been minimized
by a Faustian bargain:<br>
global warming effects have been mitigated by air pollutants
that reduce the amount of sunlight<br>
reaching the Earth's surface. This Faustian bargain has a time
limit, and the payment is now<br>
coming due.</p>
<p>Actions that would alleviate human distortions of nature are
not only feasible but make<br>
sense for other reasons, including our economic well-being and
national security. However, our<br>
present plan in the United States is to wait another decade
before re-examining the climate<br>
change matter. Delay of another decade, I argue, is a colossal
risk...</p>
<p>more at -
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/2004/dai_complete_20041026.pdf">http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/2004/dai_complete_20041026.pdf</a><br>
</p>
</blockquote>
<p>From the NYTimes two years later</p>
<blockquote>
<p><b>Climate Expert Says NASA Tried to Silence Him</b><br>
By Andrew C. Revkin - Jan. 29, 2006<br>
<br>
The top climate scientist at NASA says the Bush administration
has tried to stop him from speaking out since he gave a lecture
last month calling for prompt reductions in emissions of
greenhouse gases linked to global warming.<br>
<br>
The scientist, James E. Hansen, longtime director of the
agency's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, said in an
interview that officials at NASA headquarters had ordered the
public affairs staff to review his coming lectures, papers,
postings on the Goddard Web site and requests for interviews
from journalists.<br>
<br>
Dr. Hansen said he would ignore the restrictions. "They feel
their job is to be this censor of information going out to the
public," he said.<br>
<br>
Dean Acosta, deputy assistant administrator for public affairs
at the space agency, said there was no effort to silence Dr.
Hansen. "That's not the way we operate here at NASA," Mr. Acosta
said. "We promote openness and we speak with the facts."<br>
<br>
He said the restrictions on Dr. Hansen applied to all National
Aeronautics and Space Administration personnel. He added that
government scientists were free to discuss scientific findings,
but that policy statements should be left to policy makers and
appointed spokesmen.<br>
<br>
Mr. Acosta said other reasons for requiring press officers to
review interview requests were to have an orderly flow of
information out of a sprawling agency and to avoid surprises.
"This is not about any individual or any issue like global
warming," he said. "It's about coordination."<br>
<br>
Dr. Hansen strongly disagreed with this characterization, saying
such procedures had already prevented the public from fully
grasping recent findings about climate change that point to
risks ahead.<br>
<br>
"Communicating with the public seems to be essential," he said,
"because public concern is probably the only thing capable of
overcoming the special interests that have obfuscated the
topic."<br>
<br>
Dr. Hansen, 63, a physicist who joined the space agency in 1967,
directs efforts to simulate the global climate on computers at
the Goddard Institute in Morningside Heights in Manhattan.<br>
<br>
Since 1988, he has been issuing public warnings about the
long-term threat from heat-trapping emissions, dominated by
carbon dioxide, that are an unavoidable byproduct of burning
coal, oil and other fossil fuels. He has had run-ins with
politicians or their appointees in various administrations,
including budget watchers in the first Bush administration and
Vice President Al Gore.<br>
<br>
In 2001, Dr. Hansen was invited twice to brief Vice President
Dick Cheney and other cabinet members on climate change. White
House officials were interested in his findings showing that
cleaning up soot, which also warms the atmosphere, was an
effective and far easier first step than curbing carbon dioxide.<br>
<br>
He fell out of favor with the White House in 2004 after giving a
speech at the University of Iowa before the presidential
election, in which he complained that government climate
scientists were being muzzled and said he planned to vote for
Senator John Kerry.<br>
<br>
But Dr. Hansen said that nothing in 30 years equaled the push
made since early December to keep him from publicly discussing
what he says are clear-cut dangers from further delay in curbing
carbon dioxide.<br>
<br>
In several interviews with The New York Times in recent days,
Dr. Hansen said it would be irresponsible not to speak out,
particularly because NASA-s mission statement includes the
phrase "to understand and protect our home planet."<br>
<br>
He said he was particularly incensed that the directives had
come through telephone conversations and not through formal
channels, leaving no significant trails of documents.<br>
<br>
Dr. Hansen-s supervisor, Franco Einaudi, said there had been no
official "order or pressure to say shut Jim up." But Dr. Einaudi
added, "That doesn't mean I like this kind of pressure being
applied."<br>
<br>
The fresh efforts to quiet him, Dr. Hansen said, began in a
series of calls after a lecture he gave on Dec. 6 at the annual
meeting of the American Geophysical Union in San Francisco. In
the talk, he said that significant emission cuts could be
achieved with existing technologies, particularly in the case of
motor vehicles, and that without leadership by the United
States, climate change would eventually leave the earth "a
different planet."<br>
<br>
The administration's policy is to use voluntary measures to
slow, but not reverse, the growth of emissions.<br>
<br>
After that speech and the release of data by Dr. Hansen on Dec.
15 showing that 2005 was probably the warmest year in at least a
century, officials at the headquarters of the space agency
repeatedly phoned public affairs officers, who relayed the
warning to Dr. Hansen that there would be "dire consequences" if
such statements continued, those officers and Dr. Hansen said in
interviews.<br>
<br>
Among the restrictions, according to Dr. Hansen and an internal
draft memorandum he provided to The Times, was that his
supervisors could stand in for him in any news media interviews.<br>
<br>
Mr. Acosta said the calls and meetings with Goddard press
officers were not to introduce restrictions, but to review
existing rules. He said Dr. Hansen had continued to speak
frequently with the news media.<br>
<br>
But Dr. Hansen and some of his colleagues said interviews were
canceled as a result.<br>
<br>
In one call, George Deutsch, a recently appointed public affairs
officer at NASA headquarters, rejected a request from a producer
at National Public Radio to interview Dr. Hansen, said Leslie
McCarthy, a public affairs officer responsible for the Goddard
Institute.<br>
<br>
Citing handwritten notes taken during the conversation, Ms.
McCarthy said Mr. Deutsch called N.P.R. "the most liberal" media
outlet in the country. She said that in that call and others,
Mr. Deutsch said his job was "to make the president look good"
and that as a White House appointee that might be Mr. Deutsch's
priority.<br>
<br>
But she added: "I'm a career civil servant and Jim Hansen is a
scientist. That's not our job. That's not our mission. The
inference was that Hansen was disloyal."<br>
<br>
Normally, Ms. McCarthy would not be free to describe such
conversations to the news media, but she agreed to an interview
after Mr. Acosta, at NASA headquarters, told The Times that she
would not face any retribution for doing so.<br>
<br>
Mr. Acosta, Mr. Deutsch's supervisor, said that when Mr. Deutsch
was asked about the conversations, he flatly denied saying
anything of the sort. Mr. Deutsch referred all interview
requests to Mr. Acosta.<br>
<br>
Ms. McCarthy, when told of the response, said: "Why am I going
to go out of my way to make this up and back up Jim Hansen? I
don't have a dog in this race. And what does Hansen have to
gain?"<br>
<br>
Mr. Acosta said that for the moment he had no way of judging who
was telling the truth. Several colleagues of both Ms. McCarthy
and Dr. Hansen said Ms. McCarthy's statements were consistent
with what she told them when the conversations occurred.<br>
<br>
"He's not trying to create a war over this," said Larry D.
Travis, an astronomer who is Dr. Hansen's deputy at Goddard,
"but really feels very strongly that this is an obligation we
have as federal scientists, to inform the public."<br>
<br>
Dr. Travis said he walked into Ms. McCarthy's office in
mid-December at the end of one of the calls from Mr. Deutsch
demanding that Dr. Hansen be better controlled.<br>
<br>
In an interview on Friday, Ralph J. Cicerone, an atmospheric
chemist and the president of the National Academy of Sciences,
the nation-s leading independent scientific body, praised Dr.
Hansen's scientific contributions and said he had always seemed
to describe his public statements clearly as his personal views.<br>
<br>
"He really is one of the most productive and creative scientists
in the world," Dr. Cicerone said. "I've heard Hansen speak many
times and I-ve read many of his papers, starting in the late
70-s. Every single time, in writing or when I've heard him
speak, he's always clear that he's speaking for himself, not for
NASA or the administration, whichever administration it's been."<br>
<br>
The fight between Dr. Hansen and administration officials echoes
other recent disputes. At climate laboratories of the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, for example, many
scientists who routinely took calls from reporters five years
ago can now do so only if the interview is approved by
administration officials in Washington, and then only if a
public affairs officer is present or on the phone.<br>
<br>
Where scientists- points of view on climate policy align with
those of the administration, however, there are few signs of
restrictions on extracurricular lectures or writing.<br>
<br>
One example is Indur M. Goklany, assistant director of science
and technology policy in the policy office of the Interior
Department. For years, Dr. Goklany, an electrical engineer by
training, has written in papers and books that it may be better
not to force cuts in greenhouse gases because the added
prosperity from unfettered economic activity would allow
countries to exploit benefits of warming and adapt to problems.<br>
<br>
In an e-mail exchange on Friday, Dr. Goklany said that in the
Clinton administration he was shifted to nonclimate-related
work, but added that he had never had to stop his outside
writing, as long as he identified the views as his own.<br>
<br>
"One reason why I still continue to do the extracurricular
stuff," he wrote, "is because one doesn't have to get clearance
for what I plan on saying or writing."<br>
</p>
</blockquote>
<p><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/29/science/earth/climate-expert-says-nasa-tried-to-silence-him.html">https://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/29/science/earth/climate-expert-says-nasa-tried-to-silence-him.html</a><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
/-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------/<br>
<br>
/Archive of Daily Global Warming News <a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote/2017-October/date.html"><https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote/2017-October/date.html></a>
/<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote">https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote</a><br>
<br>
/To receive daily mailings - click to Subscribe <a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:subscribe@theClimate.Vote?subject=Click%20SEND%20to%20process%20your%20request"><mailto:subscribe@theClimate.Vote?subject=Click%20SEND%20to%20process%20your%20request></a>
to news digest./<br>
<br>
*** Privacy and Security:*This mailing is text-only. It does not
carry images or attachments which may originate from remote
servers. A text-only message can provide greater privacy to the
receiver and sender.<br>
By regulation, the .VOTE top-level domain must be used for
democratic and election purposes and cannot be used for commercial
purposes. Messages have no tracking software.<br>
To subscribe, email: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:contact@theclimate.vote">contact@theclimate.vote</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:contact@theclimate.vote"><mailto:contact@theclimate.vote></a>
with subject subscribe, To Unsubscribe, subject: unsubscribe<br>
Also you may subscribe/unsubscribe at <a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/theclimate.vote">https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/theclimate.vote</a><br>
Links and headlines assembled and curated by Richard Pauli for <a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://TheClimate.Vote">http://TheClimate.Vote</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://TheClimate.Vote/"><http://TheClimate.Vote/></a>
delivering succinct information for citizens and responsible
governments of all levels. List membership is confidential and
records are scrupulously restricted to this mailing list.<br>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>