Bush on Kyoto

[Orwell]

Look, I don't care. He's just one scientist, the hurricane stuff mentioned here is just one of the possible negative effects of global warming, and there are many other climate scientists who share the guy's position on global warming (the great majority, actually). Also, maybe he has an "agenda", but that doesn't mean he's wrong. I mean, everyone has an "agenda"! You try to denigrate the guy because you have an "agenda", Chris Landsea wrote his letter because he has an "agenda", Zig puts up links doubting global warming because he has an "agenda", I defend the reality of global warming because, hey, I also happen to have an "agenda".

It is impossible to figure out every single reason why people do what they do. Good things are often done for bad reasons, and bad things are often done for good reasons. Because of this, I believe that it's not the "agenda" that matters, it's the arguments and the evidence used to support the "agenda" that are important.

 

[CapelDodger]

Here's some of what one of the world experts on hurricanes had to say in an open letter about his resignation from IPCC earlier this year.

Chris Landsea letter
My bold.
Sounds to me like Trenberth is promoting is own agenda rather than what the record says, and what IPCC actually concluded.

Sounds to me like Chris Landsea is promoting his own agenda. This

Dr. Trenberth participated in a press conference organized by scientists at Harvard on the topic "Experts to warn global warming likely to continue spurring more outbreaks of intense hurricane activity" along with other media interviews on the topic.

is a little difficult to decipher. "Experts to warn..."? That sounds like journalese to me, not anything from a scientist. Do press conferences have such titles? Aren't they more likely to be on a topic rather than a prediction of what they're going to say?

During last year's hurricanes I read a lot of commentary from climate scientists specifically dismissing a connection between the high activity and global warming. Instead they drew attention to an apparent 20-year cycle in activity, which is currently hitting a peak. Attention was also drawn to increased coastal development during the quiet period which makes the impact greater now. This Landsea character - did anybody else feel the necessity to resign at the time? - seems to have heard what he wanted to. Perhaps he was finding the IPCC too unsettling, being so close to the mounting evidence of warming-related effects.