Climate realist Professor Hans von Storch on the list of Top 100 Influential Germans. (Photo credit: Helmholtz Center)
The latest press release from the Helmholtz Institute, in Geestacht, Germany features Professor Hans von Storch and reports that he has been placed on the List Of The Top 100 Influential Germans by FOCUS magazine, who have dubbed him “The Climate Realist”.
Again, for the 2nd time this week, kudos to FOCUS.
Hans von Storch is a warmist (in name only?), and says man is having an impact on the climate. But unlike his paranoid colleagues at the Potsdam Institute For Climate Impact Research, whose neurotic science foresees only doom, gloom and catastrophe unless global society immediately suspends democracy and implements a radical and massive wealth redistribution scheme, von Storch prefers to stay within the realms of science and reason – both in practice and in function. Here’s what the Helmholtz press release says (excerpt, translated in English):
Hans von Storch, 61, The Climate Realist — apocalyptic bluster is foreign to him. Smart adaptation to change is Hans von Storch’s credo. The climate scientist from the University of Hamburg is not one of the skeptics, but is convinced like the majority of his expert colleagues, that global warming is taking place. And because over the last years many exaggerations in climate scenarios have become known, his solid scientific argumentation is gaining more attention.”
‘Climate research is always a project involving many colleagues whose mutual findings can yield a certain amount of influence. Still, I’m pleased to be named because it demonstrates that a realistic approach with climate knowledge is gaining acceptance in the media,’ says Hans von Storch, Director of the Institute for Coastal Research at the Helmholtz Center in Geesthacht and Professor at the Meteorological Institute of the University of Hamburg.
The bit above about “not being one of the skeptics” is just standard CYA stuff. Who hasn’t been convinced that the earth has warmed? The question is: “Over which timescale?”
Personally, I’m been both pleased, and annoyed by von Storch. On one hand he is not an alarmist, and you can be sure he bases that on scientific data. Although I haven’t done a thorough review of his writings, he tends to produce results that fall into the sceptics column (he was one of the first to confirm McIntyre’s demolition of Mann’s hockey stick – which he called Quatsch – which means “nonsense” in English. He’s a skeptic of catastrophic scenarios – that’s pretty clear. He’s been attacked by a hot-headed Rahmstorf a number of times.
Yet, on the other hand, I find him making enough warmist comments without presenting data. It’s not for nothing he calls himself “the honest broker” at his Klimazwiebel blog,…i.e. someone who takes a position in the middle, on the fence, and often acts to try to resolve opposing differences. One has to remember that in Germany being a skeptic is the same as committing career suicide. The only alternative is to move to the middle.
Give FOCUS credit for putting him on the list. I don’t know if any of the dark knights of climate science horrors from PIK , i.e. Schellnhuber, Rahmstorf or Edenhofer are on the list. I guess we’ll find out Monday when the new issue of FOCUS is available at news stands.
HvS website: http://coast.hzg.de/staff/storch/
Blogsite: http://klimazwiebel.blogspot.com/
“Joint work with social scientists allowed Hans von Storch to embed the practice of climate science and its interaction with public, media and politics into concepts such as “post-normal science”. This has significant practical implications, such as the insight that even if reduction of emissions may be morally superior but the exclusive focus on it would be misleading when the unavoidable need for early planning of adaptive measures is at the same time neglected.”
http://coast.hzg.de/staff/storch/storch.htm#achievements
Just another post-normalist.
Von Storch won’t get you anywhere. (EU precautionary principle)
It says that if there even is the slightest risk we are going to act.
I think the EU is threatening our freedom and our civilization.
Let’s apply the precautionary principle on the EU, the UN and all the other scaremongers who want to see us in Green Shackles ?
Remember what George Bush said, You’re with us or you’re against us.
Von Storch is not “with us”.
At best he will be a broker of a compromise and a compromise on the subject of carbon reduction measures, useless but extremely expensive “clean” energies, carbon fuel rationing and taxation is
NOT ACCEPTABLE.
Beggars can’t be choosers.
O/T Russian design studio enters the competition for the sustainable green floating eco hotel of the future in a flooded world.
English article:
http://www.gizmag.com/ark-hotel-concept/17395/
A German post:
http://www.forumromanum.de/member/forum/entry.user_82391.2.1111263078.russland_ein_oekohotel_als_arche_noah-verkuender_des_lichts.html?onsearch=1
google search terms: remizow remistudio ark
Hans von Storch wants to be a mediator. But neither we nor the warmists have an interest in mediation. The warmists want the full-blown Great Transformation of society; overcome capitalism and national democracies and enter the utopia of worldwide “governance”. With windmills, solar panels, electric cars, meat-free mondays and whatever else they deem necessary; pushed through worldwide by “global governance” (UN/EU-autocratic force).
We want to stop them; we want to see them lose; we will not give way. The last thing we need is a compromise with these types.
Post normalism is a tool to evade scientific logic.
P Gosselin
15. Januar 2011 at 15:34 | Permalink | Reply
Beggars can’t be choosers.
That’s a totally wrong attitude Pierre.
The entire AGW science sucks.
We have nothing to beg for and we have to stay on track fighting the fallacy.
No deal is done and no policy is accepted as long as the science issue has not been resolved.
That’s my view and I think it is the only view.
No place for luke warmists in this picture because they pose a more dangerous threat to our case than you can imagine.
This is how a real scientist defends his scientific claims.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/01/15/unequivocal-equivocation/#more-31727