Likely Obama Appointee Includes Climate Change Alarmist John Holdren

by Chris Horner on December 18, 2008 · 21 comments

in Energy, Environment, Global Warming

On the heels of creating a new position for the scandal-plagued and therefore, presumably, unconfirmable Carol Browner to lord over Senate-confirmed cabinet officials in pursuit of the global-warming agenda, the former employer of leading global warming alarmist Dr. John Holdren reports that he “appears to be President-elect Barack Obama’s choice for science adviser.”

At least this will require Senate confirmation. The Senate should consider certain factors, including those detailed in the new book Red Hot Lies: How global Warming alarmists Use Threats, Fraud and Deception to Keep You Misinformed.

Although touted as a member of the prestigious National Academy of Sciences, Holdren was admitted through a back door called the “temporary nominating group”, a process which appears designed and has certainly been exercised to gain entry for large numbers of environmental alarmists who, it is fair to presume from this exception, would not gain election through the normal channel.

Also typically styled as a professor at Harvard, Holdren is primarily employed by the Woods Hole Research Center (an environmental advocacy group, not to be confused with the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution which is a research organization — both discussed [later in the book]). Despite his outside affiliations and activism he typically instead carries the Harvard tag, lending the institution’s academic prestige to his environmentalist advocacy, thereby embodying a growing tactic of environmentalists using credentials from an academic perch where they may not be all that active to push an activist agenda through other, pressure group perches where they are in fact quite busy.

The vocal Holdren predicted in the mid-1980s that climate-related catastrophes might kill as many as one billion people before the year 2020 but now brushes off inquiries about such failed catastrophism while continuing to sound a similar alarm. He is a longtime collaborator with none other than failed prognosticator of doom Paul Ehrlich, with whom he collaborated to hold a “Cassandra Conference” in 1988 (Cassandra is the lass from Greek mythology whose prophecies were always true and always ignored).

As I note in Red Hot Lies, Holdren’s name also pops up in various, largely successful efforts to elevate taxpayer funding of the global warming industry. Finally, note that Holdren’s recent record includes being enlisted by Scientific American in its clumsy effort to smear and otherwise discredit Bjørn Lomborg.

With a Holdren nomination, the President-Elect will have made his intentions unmistakably clear. This will unleash a policy battle royale and, fortunately, likely the ultimate defeat of the alarmist agenda.

Alex December 18, 2008 at 5:36 pm

It's great you guys at the Competitive Enterprise Institute get all that money from Exxon to write this stuff.

Keith December 19, 2008 at 4:29 am

The only thing that's facing imminent defeat is the outrageously unconscionable and unscientific views of fringe global warming contrarians like you, Chris.

Nancyf December 19, 2008 at 8:27 am

I am saddened to inform you that you are starting to sound like a hysterical woman.

Nancyf December 19, 2008 at 8:27 am

And a greedy ignorant one at that….

roger December 19, 2008 at 10:57 pm

I know no scientist in a field other than “self proclaimed climate scientists” who think that man made co2 is changing the climate of the world. In virtually every other field of science, objective reviewers of the facts of the matter discrd the climate change agenda. I suggest those wishing for a more informed viewpoint of what “scientists” think, start here: http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s245105

very simple ideas can not be explained such as what are the magnitude of mans emissions of co2 compared to the earth's natural co2 production? Are they 2 percent of nature or do they overwhelm nature? Why does Mauna Loa Co2 continue to go up with a fixed slope even though mans's emissions often decrease or stay flat for years at a time? What othe co2 source is causing the atmospheric co2 to go up? How can mans emissions of many times more gigatons of co2 since 1950 produce only the same change in atmospheric co2 as the manyfold less co2 emissions from 1750 to 1950? Its like flooding a bathtub with a fire house and having all the water drained away.

why are satillite measures of temperature so much different than the thermometer readings at the Nasa Giss stations? why has it snowed in Bagdhad, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Beunos Aires and New Orleans if man is forcing the temperature to move up constantly?

These questions remain unanswered.

American Me December 20, 2008 at 6:22 am

There is absolutely no proven scientific facts to support global warming, other then so-called scientists who need to keep those grants coming, and Al Bore who needs to add to his millions he`s made of his hoax… GW is big business, and a way for the UN and anti-capitalist loons to try and take control of countries, through the mainstream media… People are being brainwashed, and billions of dollars are being wasted on something that doesn`t exist… The warming and cooling of the planet is a natural cycle, and is controlled by the sun, clouds and water vapor, but by saying the truth, that won`t get you any research money, because it`s boring and it doesn`t scare people… These GW loons are preventing third world countires from developing, like Africa, who has oil and coal, but can`t use it, and are told to use wind and solar instead… That is very expensive, and it`s the most unreliable sources of energy… So basically these GW loons are telling starving, suffering, dying people you can`t develop, and you can`t have basic electricity or heat, and yes it does get cold in Africa… You`ll never hear Al Bore and his GW zombies talk about that, will ya… More and more people are starting to catch on to the global warming hoax, and we will soon have the last laugh, when nothing catastrophic happens, and the planet just goes through it`s normal cycles, like it has for thousands of years.

cordblomquist December 20, 2008 at 6:37 am

CEI receives no funding from ExxonMobile.

DaveS December 20, 2008 at 7:17 am

I suspect he had to pass the political/world view sniff test for belief in man-made global warming, despite the compelling evidence to the contrary. We're in a cooling phase folks, and man-made GW is a political movement! Once the political "stigma" of speech & debate that risks slowing down the AGW grant gravy train begins to ebb due to more and more people speaking out, watch for the trend below to accelerate dramatically.POZNAN, Poland – The UN global warming conference currently underway in Poland is about to face a serious challenge from over 650 dissenting scientists from around the globe who are criticizing the climate claims made by the UN IPCC and former Vice President Al Gore. Set for release this week, a newly updated U.S. Senate Minority Report features the dissenting voices of over 650 international scientists, many current and former UN IPCC scientists, who have now turned against the UN. The report has added about 250 scientists (and growing) in 2008 to the over 400 scientists who spoke out in 2007. The over 650 dissenting scientists are more than 12 times the number of UN scientists (52) who authored the media hyped IPCC 2007 Summary for Policymakers.

PHD Myke December 20, 2008 at 7:52 am

GET THE REAL TRUTH, AND NOT AL GORE AND THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA`S PROPAGANDA AND LIES.http://www.garagetv.be/video-galerij/blancostem…..http://www.guba.com/watch/3000098856

Axel Boldt December 20, 2008 at 9:17 am

Wow, you like the word "alarmist", don't you? Here's my Christmas gift to you: ALARMIST ALARMIST ALARMIST ALARMIST ALARMIST ALARMIST ALARMIST ALARMIST ALARMIST ALARMIST ALARMIST ALARMIST ALARMIST ALARMIST ALARMIST ALARMIST ALARMIST ALARMIST ALARMIST ALARMIST ALARMIST ALARMIST ALARMIST ALARMIST ALARMIST ALARMIST ALARMIST ALARMIST ALARMIST ALARMIST ALARMIST ALARMIST ALARMIST ALARMIST ALARMIST ALARMIST ALARMIST ALARMIST ALARMIST

WJ December 20, 2008 at 11:12 am

The man-made global warming "business" is far bigger than any research money that the oil companies provide via the billions in taxpayer funds. And if you are saying that any researcher who receives money from Exxon is "tainted", then any researcher who receives money from Greenpeace or any other environmental group is therefore tainted as well.

Antony Rigby December 23, 2008 at 6:43 am

I have no faith in the scientific community which rails on about global warming, because, I have not been privy to the evidence which supports it. Oh, I have seen evidence but even the uneducated and untutored could explain it away. In England we are worried about the havoc the banks have caused and will likely pay little heed to a climate change ‘expert’ or a government which sponsors one

Mark December 23, 2008 at 3:15 pm

Oh please. There's plenty of evidence that humans have caused climate change, though whether you want to put in the effort to seek it out it is up to you. Even Arnold Schwarzenegger supports it. Here's a small selection of the many credible scientific organisations that have made public statements supporting the link between human activity and climate change: the US National Academy of Sciences; the American Meteorological Society; American Institute of Physics; European Academy of Sciences and Arts; Europen Science Foundation; UK Royal Meteorological Society.But then, why let something like scientific evidence stand in the way of believing what you want to believe?

DR. A. NONYMOUS December 28, 2008 at 10:31 am

WHILE I AM ON THE DIAMETRICALLY OPPOSED VIEW VERSUS YOURSELF ABOUT GLOBAL WARMING, I HAVE DIRECT PERSONAL EXPERIENCE WITH HOLDREN AT BERKELEY AND HARVARD.(1) HOLDREN MAY HAVE BEEN A PHYSICIST ONCE, BUT ONLY MANY DECADES AGO, AND IN NAME, BUT NOT (CREATIVE) DED ONLY!!!(2) AT BERKELEY IN THE 1980S (A.K.A. UNIVERSITY OF CAULIFLOWERORNIA AT BERZERKELEY-WHERE THE FRUITS AND NUTS GROW INSIDE!!!) HE RAN SOME SORT OF POLICY-WONK OUTFIT THAT HAD LITTLE DIRECT KNOWLEDGE OF THE ENERGY FIELD. HE HAD NEVER WORKED IN IT, WITH NO DIRECT HANDS ON EXPERIENCE WHATSOEVER. HE AND I CLASHED OFTEN ABOUT NUC"EL"AR POWER, WHICH I AM A VETERIN OF AND KNOW THE MASIVE SYSTEMIC FRAUD OF THAT INDUSTRY FIRST HAND FROM LONG AND BITTER EXPERIENCES: WESTIN"KL"OUSE, PSE&G, I.A.E.A., A.B.B.,…(3) AT HAHVAAHD HE IS NOT IN THE PHYSICS DEPARTMENT, BUT THE KENNEDY SCHOOL OF GOVERNMENT, WHICH MOSTLY PRODUCES "TALKING HEADS" FOR FUNDING AND THE MEDIA.SO HE JUST MOVED FROM BERZERKELEY TO HAHVAAHD TO GIVE HIMSELF A WIDER PLATFORM TO B.S. ABOUT ENERGY POLICY, ALMOST TO GROOM HIMSELF FOR THIS NOE POSITION.ON THE POSITIVE SIDE, HIS VIEWS ARE PROBABLY VALID!!!BUT HE IS AND HAS ALWAYS BEEN AT BEST CHARITABLY A BIT PLAYER, A SIDE EVENT TO THE MAIN PLAYERS, ECHOING THEIR ORIGINAL RESEARCH, KISSING THEIR REAR ENDS, COZYING UP TO THEM, POSTURING AND STRUTTING NEXT TO THEM THAT DID AND DO IT ALL IN THE HOPE OF GETTING SOME RESIDUAL CREDIT FOR THEIR ORIGINAL WORK, BASKING IN THEIR GLORY !!!

Alan December 28, 2008 at 6:02 pm

CEI currently receives no such funding. According to an article in the WSJ (11 Jan 07), ExxonMobil decided to accept the reliability of climate science and announced that it has stopped funding climate change skeptics such as CEI.This link might work – but it requires a login:http://users2.wsj.com/lmda/do/checkLogin?mg=wsj…..

Alan December 28, 2008 at 6:18 pm

WJ, CEI is no more a scientific research institution than is the Woods Hole organization that Dr. John Holdren works with. I'm with you on empirical scientific research. But political think tanks very well may be ideological "hired guns" and the sources of their funding is a legitimate, if not definitive, concern.I would like to understand how you figure that the "global warming 'business'" is taking in billions of dollars in taxpayer funds. Are you, for instance, including the global network of remote sensing satellites used for meteorological research in that figure? Or maybe your just out-gassing CO2.

RayG1 December 30, 2008 at 2:57 am

On the subject of global warming, Al Gore predicted that "the north polar cap has a 75% chance of totally melting in five years – last July. Normally that would seem preposterous if it weren't for the fact that he was the Vice President for 8 years and was privy to insider information. What information? http://www.surviving-nibiru.com/ The billions of dollars, soon to be billions of Amero's, siphoned off in the name of global warming, is going to the building of government installations and pumping up HomeLand Security and law enforcement agencies. Off course many scientists have seen through the farce of global warming, they just don't know why the government is doing this.

Comments on this entry are closed.

{ 3 trackbacks }

Previous post:

Next post: