{"id":10508,"date":"2020-07-24T16:41:57","date_gmt":"2020-07-24T23:41:57","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/gelbspanfiles.com\/?p=10508"},"modified":"2021-03-26T16:00:47","modified_gmt":"2021-03-26T23:00:47","slug":"the-big-ben-santer-problem-pt-2-the-gelbspan-connection","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/gelbspanfiles.com\/?p=10508","title":{"rendered":"The Big Ben Santer Problem, Pt 2: The Gelbspan Connection"},"content":{"rendered":"

Near the middle of my June 17, 2020 Part 1 blog post<\/a> about the Oreskes \/ Santer problem, I showed a screencapture<\/a> of Ross Gelbspan’s connection with the tale concerning atmospheric scientist Ben Santer<\/a>\u2019s questionable alterations of an IPCC report, and then showed featured another screencapture of a different tale in a major in a major national magazine article which had Gelbspan’s favorite ‘leaked memos’ accusation separated only sentences away from the ‘Santer attack.’<\/p>\n

That wasn’t the only major article written at that time in that particular manner<\/em>.<\/p>\n

First for comparison, have a look again at the December 16, 1996 The Nation<\/em> article’s passages about Santer and the “reposition global warming as theory” leaked memo phrase.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

It was published a year before Gelbspan made the phrase internationally famous in his “The Heat is On” book<\/a>, but it was only months after he and the old Ozone Action group magically ‘obtained’ those memos<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Now, compare what was seen at The Nation<\/em> in December 1996 to this August<\/strong> 1996 Physics Today<\/em> “Attacks on IPCC Report Heat Controversy Over Global Warming” article (unfortunately only viewable as photo scans – 1st page here<\/a>, 2nd here<\/a>) which tells the overall story of Ben Santer’s role in altering the IPCC Chapter 8 text and the outcry from critics about that situation. I highlight the relevant connection here (the orange color box is in the original article):<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Basically, the tale boils down to the good guy scientist – Ben Santer – and the bad guys – the Global Climate Coalition (GCC) and its allies in the fossil fuel industry. How do we know the GCC are the bad guys? This Physics Today<\/em> said they attack both the science and its scientists \u2026 “according to an article in last December’s Harper’s Magazine<\/em>.”<\/p>\n

What article is that? It’s “The Heat is On: The Warming of the World\u2019s Climate Sparks a Blaze of Denial<\/a>\u201d by guess who? Ross Gelbspan.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Keep in mind, Gelbspan described in his 1997 “The Heat is On” book how he personally attended<\/a> the 1996 U.S. Global Change Research Program day 2 seminar<\/a> on the Santer \/ IPCC SPM discussion where Ben Santer was harshly questioned about his alteration to the ‘final’ IPCC report by GCC representative William O’Keefe and Donald Pearlman, a rep for “undisclosed coal and oil producers<\/em>.” Gelbspan typo’d the date<\/a> of briefing as being a year earlier than it was in his book’s notes section, but from that error, we now are led to wonder if a quote seen later in Gelbspan’s book<\/a> from Pearlman is also a typo, or did Gelbspan actually speak directly to Pearlman back in early August 1995<\/strong><\/a>?<\/p>\n

Also keep in mind that Ross Gelbspan has stated that he was fully retired from the news media in 1992<\/a>, and within a questionable timeline spanning from just mid-March 1995 to mid-May 1995<\/a>, he switched from being an believer in man-caused global warming to a skeptic and back again to a believer when he was mysteriously alerted about and personally attended a Minnesota Public Utilities hearing where skeptic climate scientists disclosed their funding.<\/p>\n

How does it work out that a private citizen retiree would \u2026<\/p>\n