Turns Out That Manhattan Really Is Underwater

TRENTON — Three Rutgers University scientists came to Trenton today to give Gov. Chris Christie a message: climate change is real, and it’s man-made.

“I’ve heard over 100 different arguments about why we shouldn’t accept global warming. They’re all fallacious and I’d be happy to point out the errors in any of them,” said Rutgers professor Alan Robock, a meteorologist.

Paul Falkowski, director of the Rutgers University Energy Institute, said global warming doubts are based on politics and personal beliefs, not science.

“There is no honest argument against human climate change. The issues now rely primarily on political dialogue on how we’re going to move this country forward,” he said.


About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

47 Responses to Turns Out That Manhattan Really Is Underwater

  1. sunsettommy says:

    “Paul Falkowski, director of the Rutgers University Energy Institute, said global warming doubts are based on politics and personal beliefs, not science.”

    The lies that flow long and deep.

  2. suyts says:

    lol, funny when the whole CAGW argument is based on politics and belief systems wrapped in fallacious logic. We could start with how we know warming is bad, when all historical evidence shows us that mankind thrives better in warmer climates…………wait, wait, I know this one! Because the experts say so and we should believe what the experts say, even when they’re shown to be wrong.

  3. NoMoreGore says:

    Time to end tenure at Rutgers.

  4. Tony Duncan says:

    Steve are you still REALLY holding on to that 2nd hand private quote of Hansen?

    • Are you still accusing the Salon author of lying?

      • Tony Duncan says:

        No I am accusing you of presenting an utterance said in private with no context as being a public prediction when it is totally inconsistent with every public comment he has made and totally inconsistent with any papers he has published and totally inconsistent with any other public comment or published paper by any climate scientist.

        • When you get interviewed by a reporter you might expect it to be printed. That is why they interview people.

          Why are you accusing the reporter of lying? Do you have any evidence to back it up?

      • Tony Duncan needs no evidence. He is omniscient. It is impossible to argue his knowledge of everything. He knows all. We all are but Lilliputians in his presence. Even Lindzen, Zichichi, and Dyson are no match for him. He is undaunted by fact.

    • suyts says:

      2nd hand private quote? A thought iterated during an interview? Whatever.

      • peterhodges says:

        it only counts if it is peer reviewed and no one reads it.

        if it is in an interview repeated ad naseum in 1000’s headlines around the world then it does not count and you are exaggerating.

    • Tony Duncan says:


      if you go back over the 5 or six times we have discussed this. I have never accused the writer of lying. I have just said that it is meaningless, because he was not making a prediction. without context I assume he was venting frustration at the lack of concern and just exaggerated. Since the quote has no connection to anything he has ever written or said publicly there is absolutely no value in you constantly citing it as proof of the absurdity of scientists claims.

      • Right……..

        “If what you’re saying about the greenhouse effect is true, is anything going to look different down there in 20 years?” He looked for a while and was quiet and didn’t say anything for a couple seconds. Then he said, “Well, there will be more traffic.” I, of course, didn’t think he heard the question right. Then he explained, “The West Side Highway [which runs along the Hudson River] will be under water. And there will be tape across the windows across the street because of high winds. And the same birds won’t be there. The trees in the median strip will change.” Then he said, “There will be more police cars.” Why? “Well, you know what happens to crime when the heat goes up.”

      • peterhodges says:

        let’s see, a cursory search yields 189,000 hits for hansens little known prediction

      • Tony Duncan says:

        How many papers has he written that say anything like that.
        how many public statements has he repeated this? How many other scientists have written papers that say this, or said something like this in public where it is directly coming from them without any need for context?
        None. really? Why not? if he believed it why didn’t HE say it in public? If he is so worried about climate change why didn’t he say that to congress?
        Again I don’t doubt he said it, I consider it totally irrelevant to anything except that he gets frustrated and exaggerates in private.

        • When did he say this will happen?

          Within 20 or 30 years. And remember we had this conversation in 1988 or 1989.

          Does he still believe these things?

          Yes, he still believes everything. I talked to him a few months ago and he said he wouldn’t change anything that he said then.

      • Tony Duncan says:

        then WHY doesn’t Hansen say this to ANYONE else, or show it in his writings or publicize it in anyone else’s writings?
        Why does he ONLY tell these outright lies to this one journalist. Why does he keep hiding it from congress and the rest of the press or his colleagues. WHY ONLY this guy?
        Maybe Hansen is gay and the journalist is very pretty, so he is trying to impress him with how bad things will get?

      • Mike Davis says:

        I would guess that Tony did not read Hansen’s testimony before congress in 1988.

      • Tony Duncan says:


        what did Hansen say on that TV show? This is the first you or anyone else has brought up another instance. Why did you make me wait so long assuming this was the only thing you had on him. That is just mean-spirited Steve.

        And how often do I need to repeat that the reporter isn’t a liar for you to stop accusing me of that? I have assumed that is the only outrageous thing you have Hansen saying since I can’t imagine you not wanting to make him look bad.

        But I forget that you have never said anything that was an exaggeration in your life, so you can’t comprehend anyone else doing so

      • Go, Tony, go, go go.

        Did you ever stop to consider it is your argument about what Hansen said that is irrelevant? Steven is right, if you think the Salon reporter is making it up then you better contact them with your knowledge of what really happened. You can tell them you weren’t there that day but you know anyway what really happened that day. Let’s see what their reply to you would be. Until you do this you should stop assuming you know anything about the interview. What you are doing now is making something up and repeating it over and over. That is called spamming.

      • Tony Duncan says:

        Somehow I missed the “manhattan underwater” by 2010 in his 1988 testimony.
        And I just read that testimony, and missed it AGAIN. Actually point out ANY alarmist thing he says in his testimony. Could it be that he states that the effects of GHG’s are now larger than the noise of normal variability. I guess everyone who heard knew he REALLY meant that Manhattan would be underwater by 2010

      • Tony Duncan says:


        I want you to try to pass the Amarillo test I posted.
        How many times do I have to say I do NOT QUESTION WHAT THE AUTHOR SAYS HANSEN SAID.

        Please try to read at least a few words on my comments before accusing me of spamming.
        Why should I contact Salon, when the worst case is that they say, the reporter was telling the truth, and I say, Oh, so my not questioning that he was telling the truth is still an acceptable position to start from?

    • Tony Duncan says:

      I would be HAPPY to be daunted by fact if someone would supply me with one relevant to anything I post!

      Steve apparently has a fact he has been holding out on me where Hansen makes the claim (or a similar one) that Manhattan will be underwater by 2010 on national TV.
      And Mike has pointed out similar claims in Hansen’s testimony before congress in 1988, but those were all strangely removed and no longer in the transcript.

      but as to this specific question of needing evidence. I don’t know how to respond, since I am implicitly accepting the authors assertions about what Hansen said. And I have doen so every single time the issue has come up. Why would I need evidence to prove something that I am in no way contesting.
      is that a trick?
      Maybe that is why Mike rambles on about Peyote. If I ate a couple of buttons I would be able to follow the logic of these bizarre threads. I doubt I would enjoy them as much though. I would probably get distracted by the wood grain of my kitchen table.
      Or maybe this is a Von Neuman test and you are all just incredibly advanced automatons, but I am too stupid to see that the bizarre irrelevance of some of the answers here shows you aren’t actually human.

      I will now test my hypothesis.
      How is maple jersey coconut congizant of cuted Amarillo’s?
      If I get a response to that I will know the responder is NOT human.

      Amino, you do know that Dyson, (in that same interview that I didn’t lie about) says that the military is just as corrupt as climate scientists. That all the money and weapons and fear of imagined enemies are part of a conspiracy by military contractors to make them rich! While he is not an expert in military matters he is a genius, so he must be right about that.

      And I would be willing to bet you that all of the scientists you mention are in fact smarter than me. I have repeatedly said that I listen and respect both Dyson and Lindzen. One because he is a brilliant scientist, the other because he is a brilliant climate scientist. if there were not so many other brilliant people who disagree with them, I would probably accept their word on authority alone. I just have this unusual stubborness of not believing someone just because they say it is true.

      • peterhodges says:

        That all the money and weapons and fear of imagined enemies are part of a conspiracy by military contractors to make them rich!

        you forgot bankers and politicians.

        interesting. eisenhower said the same thing. i did not know dyson said that.

  5. maguro says:

    “There is no honest argument against human climate change. The issues now rely primarily on political dialogue on how we’re going to move this country forward,” he said.

    Shut up, he explained.

  6. Al Gored says:

    Did they delete the end of this?

    “Three Rutgers University scientists came to Trenton today to give Gov. Chris Christie a message: climate change is real, and it’s man-made, [and we want our funding back!!!… for the children of course].”

  7. Andy Weiss says:

    I just looked at the 18Z GFS model and they are showing such wild US weather over the weekend and next week that it is hard to comprehend-widespread blizzards, extreme wind and extreme cold. Also a severe freeze in Florida, by far the worst the last 20 years.

    These models can bomb, but the evolution does look logical. By this time next week, all this global warming nonsense should look very hollow.

  8. peterhodges says:

    except for the den of believers out here on the west coast, where i believe we will not be unusually cold

    but the rest of you enjoy your punishment

    • Tony Duncan says:

      It just started going below freezing at night here in VT, the warmest summer and fall I have ever experienced here. No snow at all and it is already dec 7.

      • A full 0.1 warmer than 1953, after 2010 was adjusted upwards by 0.6 degrees.


      • Tony Duncan says:

        That cannot possibly be true for where I live. It was in the 50’s much of the month during the day and we have not had one snowfall. I don’t live in the entire state, and after 10 years here have never been in the second week of December thinking, Hey it is finally starting to get cold here!

      • peterhodges says:


        yah tony those ncdc guys are making it all up 😉

        FWIW november was record breaking cold here…records from 2004!

        definitely getting warmer!

      • Tony Duncan says:
        December 8, 2010 at 3:09 am

        after 10 years here

        Steven Goddard brought up 1953. The was 57 years ago. You brought up 10 years ago. You were not there 57 years ago. Do you see how flawed your argument is?

      • Tony Duncan says:
        December 8, 2010 at 3:09 am

        in the second week of December thinking, Hey it is finally starting to get cold here!

        So what you felt in December proves global warming? You data set is very short.

        Should we believe your opinion when it’s obvious your opinion is biased?

      • peterhodges says:
        December 8, 2010 at 3:40 am

        FWIW november was record breaking cold here…records from 2004!

        Tony Duncan said it was warm until the first week of December where he lives. So that means global warming is happening. Nothing else matters. There is nothing else going on in the world except what Tony Duncan is experiencing.

      • Tony Duncan says:

        Well, they are making up ACC, why wouldn’t they purposefully screw up the records for just to make me look bad?
        But, they may actually be right. and I will state again, since I don’t live in THE ENTIRE state, my actual memory might still be more accurate for my local part of the state. I can’t find the values for Brattleboro, VT, but if you can and show that it has not been warmer than average this fall, with unusually little snow (that being none so far) I will actually admit to being wrong.
        That will be the second time on this blog I have done so. Which will make the score
        Tony – 2
        entire rest of Steve Goddard Blog – 0

      • Tony Duncan says:


        get a grip. I can’t keep up with all your totally extraneous comments.
        PLEASE PLEASE try to read what I actually write.
        and try not to project what you want me to be saying. I know it is hard (and I am assuming you pass the Amarillo test. all bets are off if you don’t).

        I said “IN MY EXPERIENCE.” that is the last ten years. I made no reference to anything else, did not infer anything else, and i was making no argument. Just stating what i thought was an objective fact. and and I am willing to admit I am wrong, if Steve will show me the data.

        Please show me where I said that it being warmer where I live proves anything about climate change. I have never, am not now, and will never make any statement like that. It is utterly foolish to make statements about individual weather events proving anything, especially when it is well within the normal range, and compare that to climate.
        if you can show me where I said anything to that effect. I will apologize and admit ANOTHER mistake.
        When I offer no opinion, I do indeed expect you not to consider that non-opinion as unbiased. Call me arrogant. maybe you can get Dyson to explain how one can have a biased non-opinion. THAT would be in has range of speciality, as it sounds like quantum physics to me!

        My goodness I momentarily caught up with this blizzard (oops I mean tropical hurricane) of comments.
        and once again an amazing comment thread with no substance! I feel a bit like one of the knights of NI!

      • peterhodges says:

        oh knights who say, “ick ick icky achhhh….who until so recently said NI!”

        “what kind of shrubbery would you like, sir?”

      • PhilJourdan says:

        We got our first snow in Virginia BEFORE december 1st, which is extremely rare (although not unheard of). Perhaps it is just all the hot air you apparently are spouting that is preventing your temperatures from going down?

        Hint: When you lose an argument, the best thing to do is be gracious. The next best thing is to slink off silently,. The worst is to continue to try to bluff when your hole card is exposed.

      • Tony Duncan says:

        I would be happy to be gracious in losing an argument.
        I cannot find the details on where I live, so I am waiting for Steve to show them to me so I don’t know that I have lost any argument yet.. I do remember 6 snows before thanksgiving when I first moved up here, and -20°f new years eve. Nothing like that the last few years though. All of which is irrelevant as far as ACC is concerned.

    • Tony Duncan says:


      I ask again. and ONLY this. Don’t respond to any other comment I have made.
      If you do other than that I will stick grape jelly in your logic board.

      “How is maple jersey coconut congizant of cuted Amarillo’s?”

  9. Andy Weiss says:

    No, it shouldn’t be bad at all on the West Coast, but the Midwest, South and East Coast should not be very pleasant.

  10. Andy Weiss says:

    Also looks like more blizzards and extreme cold in the pipeline for Europe as well.

  11. sunsettommy says:

    Tony if it make you feel better.

    After a two week spell of global warming in the northwest,with a lot of snow and record cold.It going to warm up fast starting tomorrow.That is when Global Cooling arrives to usher in above freezing temperatures for the next week.

    With the cooling trend coming,the snow is beating a hasty retreat into the grass.

  12. Tony Duncan says:

    Steve ,

    Some great news. It looks like your geology friends have a place that will answer your questions. Blog hosts are considered media, so go to town!


    No need to thank me.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s