Real News Network: The Climate Crocks Interview

June 12, 2014

I don’t put myself out in front in my videos, because I don’t want to pretend the analysis, facts and data are anything but the perspectives of the scientists  whose work I try to translate.

In this case, Real News Network asked me to step up and comment on recent developments. Who knows? .. might happen again..

30 Responses to “Real News Network: The Climate Crocks Interview”

  1. You go Peter. Yes, get out in public. You have a public role, too. Glad to see you in video. You can be a spokesperson and spread the word and respect the works of the scientists. You are in constant communication with them and you are great at communicating the information. You can see that Sharmini and other media people are eager to receive the benefit of your ability to communicate the knowledge you have gained. I am rooting for you.

    • ubrew12 Says:

      As I’ve become aware of this topic I realize that PhD Climatologists sometimes aren’t the best communicators of EVERY aspect of it: the political aspect, the history, the industry connection, the reason’s major actors act the way they do. So I’m glad to see RNN interview someone like Peter who has a more rounded understanding of what is going on, and can talk reasonably about every aspect, including the Science. For example, when Bill Nye debated Marsha Blackburn on CC a few weeks ago, she was clearly well-versed on the topic. This is not difficult: the Right maintains well-funded think tanks for exactly the purpose of preparing the latest talking points for people like Blackburn, with what to emphasize and what not to emphasize. Someone like Peter or the folks at Skeptical Science, who have been directly fighting those propagandistic talking points for years now, might be a better source to take on such well-funded disinformation.

  2. redskylite Says:

    Very strong, precise and clear interview, applause from me.

  3. dumboldguy Says:

    Good job. You look and sound as good or better than most of the scientists, and you know the stuff well enough to quote them with authority. Nice “mid-western” appearance and voice (but ditch the distracting white earbuds—don’t they come in “clear”?)

    PS How come the video and audio were not quite in sync?

    • greenman3610 Says:

      earbuds required so there wouldn’t be feedback. maybe I can find less visible ones. can’t speak to audio, that’s on their end.
      Oh, and yes, I’m hopelessly midwestern.

      • dumboldguy Says:

        LOL “Corn fed boys and girls…..” (Do you know all the capitals?)

      • Earbuds don’t matter. Everyone can see that you’re in front of a computer. Maybe older people who didn’t grow up with cameras on their computers are more likely to notice though.

        • dumboldguy Says:

          Actually, “older people” are more likely to be able to focus on the face and the message rather than be distracted by irrelevancies like what is by any measure a pretty decent background.

          Now if Peter had been sitting in a strip club and there were pole dancers in the background, that might cause us to lose focus. Mom’s basement we can deal with.

          For those of us who have actual attention spans and mature focusing abilities, the “standout white” ear buds DO matter. I’d rather look at Peter’s “midwestern” face and listen to his message without that distraction.

          • lesliegraham1 Says:

            Backgrounds DO matter.
            Sit a few feet in front of a small library of leather-bound books, wear a white coat and have a couple of computer screens visible somewhere that’s half the battle.
            Best not to be chewing on a straw too.

            Sad? Yes.
            True? Yes.

          • dumboldguy Says:

            Yep, that scenario might even remind people of the ads from way back in which white-coated doctors encouraged people to smoke Camels. Or the present day ads in which William Shatner shills for some ambulance chasing law firm. Nothing like having folks say to themselves “where have I seen this before?” rather than focus on the message.

            If the easily distracted need a background, how about a wall covered with hockey stick graphs?—-CO2, temperature, human population dynamics, increasing cost of weather catastrophes, sea level rise, arctic sea ice melt, resource depletion, etc.

  4. Gingerbaker Says:

    I think you did a good job, Peter, and can only get better with the art form. Do you, or have you thought about, giving public lectures on the topic?

    I might also recommend perhaps using a bookcase or curtain as a background to avoid what I am chagrined to admit was my first reaction:

    “And now, on his computer – live! – from his (Mother’s?) basement is Peter Sinclair…” 😀

  5. It’s nice to put a face with a name. Thanks for sharing!

  6. rayduray Says:

    Do you put yourself out in public expressing concern about climate change? If you do, the Pentagon thinks you might be a terrorist.

    • dumboldguy Says:

      More hyperbole, Ray? From both you and the author of this piece?

      Man has been waging psy-war since before recorded history, and ruling elites and governments (those with any brains, anyway) have kept their eyes and ears open for anything that threatens their dominance, and have made plans to deal with it. Deja vu all over again.

      • rayduray Says:


        Last night I attended a screening of Damnation, the film, along with about 450 others.

        I mention this because I do think that you are a fool when it comes to what is and and what is not hyperbole.

        There is a segment in the film where two intrepid activists decide to run a pair of human-powered sea kayaks down the lower Snake River in Washington State. These dams are the subject of a $35 Million Federal study saying that they should be removed in order to bring back the greatest sockeye salmon run ever ruined by the hubris of man. Perhaps you’ve heard of Loneseome Louie?

        As the two kayakers approached the first dam, they were met, incredulously, by a dam operator demanding that the kayakers back away from the dam works. The kayakers read the relevant section of the Federal regulation stating they had a right to make use of the lock and proceed downstream. The operator said “no, that’s not the law”, then proceeded to bring in reinforcements and the two kayakers filmed the entire sequence as they were declared to be “terrorists” according to Department of Homeland Security standards. They kayakers’ open video equipment was seized and the security guards deleted the contents of the memory. This was recorded surreptitiously by the kayakers with alternative equipment.

        What is important here is that the kayakers were correct. They had every right to use the lock, although no one had ever attempted this before. The operators and the goons with the operators were indecent, disrespectful, ignorant of the law, arrogant and mean-spirited. They were also the powers that be and they got away with being thugs.

        If we don’t keep mentioning these incidents, the police state thugs will take over this country. Do you want that, Marine? Do you want to live in a police state that does not abide by the law? Well, do you?

  7. […] told an interviewer the other day, that climate deniers are “backpedaling”.  President Obama clearly sees the same thing, […]

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your 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

%d bloggers like this: