Climategate Professor to Skeptic on Live BBC TV: ‘What an Assh*le’

[Update: A-Hole Debate Goes Viral! & Morano: ‘Prof. Watson seemed unable to fathom that a civilian would question his self-serving defense of global warming establishment’]

A professor who is accusing global warming skeptics of engaging in “tabloid-style character assassination” of scientists, called an American climate skeptic “an assh*le” on the December 4, 2009 live broadcast of BBC’s Newsnight program.

“What an assh*le!” declared Professor Watson at the end of the contentious debate with Climate Depot’s executive editor Marc Morano. A clearly agitated Watson had earlier shouted to Morano “will you shut up.”

Video of BBC “Asshole” clip is here.

Full one-on-one BBC debate segment between Prof. Watson and Climate Depot’s Morano is here in two parts.

The remark was broadcast live on BBC and prompted an on-air apology to viewers from the BBC later in the program for the offensive language.

Watson (Email: [email protected]) is a professor at the School of Environmental Sciences at the University of East Anglia, which was the source of the disclosed files. Watson’s emails appear in the hacked Climategate files.

During the live debate, Morano challenged Professor Watson for being in “denial” over the importance of Climategate and noted that “you have to feel sorry for Professor Watson.”

“[Watson’s] colleague, [Professor] Mike Hulme at the University of East Anglia is saying this is authoritarian science, he is suggesting the [UN] IPCC should be disbanded based on what Climategate reveals,” Morano said.

“[UK environmentalist] George Monbiot is saying many of his friend in the environmental and the climate fear promoting business — as Professor Watson is part of — are in denial. You have to feel sorry for Professor Watson in many ways here,” Morano explained.

A clearly agitated Watson blurted out “Will you shut up just a second!?”

Morano summed up his views on what ClimateGate reveals during the debate. “It exposes the manufactured consensus. Your fellow colleagues are saying this,” Morano said to Watson.

Morano also noted that President “Obama is probably attending [the UN Conference] because they are circling the wagons because of the magnitude of this scandal.” (See: ‘Welcome to the delayers’: Obama’s ‘half-hearted climate efforts’ welcomed by skeptics – Nov.17, 2009)

“You have UN scientists turning on UN scientists. This is the upper echelon of the UN and it has been exposed as the best science that politics and activism can manufacture. Prof. Watson’s whole argument is ‘trust me, take my word for it,’” Morano added.

Professor Phil Jones, Watson’s colleague, has temporarily stepped down pending an investigation into the Climategate scandal, which many observers say exposes data manipulation, suppression of peer-review process, blacklisting, data destruction, willful violation of Freedom of Information Act requests. [Editor’s Note: Climate Depot’s Morano, who BBC described as “one of America’s leading climate change skeptics,” is also cited in the released Climategate files. On July 23, 2009, AP reporter Seth Borenstein asked the Climategate scientist about a “a paper in JGR (Journal of Geophysical Research) today that Marc Morano is hyping wildly.” Penn State Professor Michael Mann (who is now under investigation) apparently wrote back to Borenstein: “The aptly named Marc ‘Morano’ has fallen for it!”]

Professor Andrew Watson of the University of East Anglia, the University at the center of the Climategate controversy, has come to the defense of his colleagues this week and is claiming that the whole email and data release is much ado about nothing.

But other scientists disagree. One of Watson’s colleagues at the University of East Anglia, Professor Mike Hulme, declared Climategate reveals climate science had become ‘too partisan, too centralized.” Hulme, a climate scientist who was listed as “the 10th most cited author in the world in the field of climate change, does not mince words on the magnitude of the scandal.

Hulme has even suggested that the UN IPCC has run its course. ”

“It is possible that climate science has become too partisan, too centralized. The tribalism that some of the leaked emails display is something more usually associated with social organization within primitive cultures,” Hulme wrote on November 27, 2009.

“It is also possible that the institutional innovation that has been the [UN] I.P.C.C. has run its course. “The I.P.C.C. itself, through its structural tendency to politicize climate change science, has perhaps helped to foster a more authoritarian and exclusive form of knowledge production,” Hulme explained.

Other prominent scientists have weighed in as well.

UN IPCC contributing author Dr. Eduardo Zorita wrote on November 26, 2009 that the three UN scientists at the center of the Climategate storm “should be barred from the IPCC process.”

Michael Mann, Phil Jones and Stefan Rahmstorf should be barred from the IPCC process,” Zorita wrote. “The scientific assessments in which they may take part are not credible anymore.”

“By writing these lines I will just probably achieve that a few of my future studies will, again, not see the light of publication,” Zorita candidly admits, a reference to the ClimateGate emails discussing how to suppress data and scientific studies that do not agree with the UN IPCC views. Also see: Another UN IPCC scientist speaks out: Prof. Aynsley Kellow says colleagues showed ‘willingness to manipulate raw data to suit predetermined results’ – CBS News

Phil Jones, the man at the has left many unanswered questions about his actions. See: Caught in Another Untruth? THEN: UN IPCC’s Phil Jones, Dec 3, 2008: ‘About 2 months ago I deleted loads of emails, so have very little – if anything at all’ – NOW: UN IPCC’s Phil Jones, Nov 24, 2009: ‘We’ve not deleted any emails or data here at CRU’

The media is now starting to investigate the data handling at the center of Climategate. See: BBC: CRU’s programming ‘way below expected standards’

Climategate’s impact is so deep that even the top UN scientists at the heart of the scandal have begun to turn on each other. See: J’accuse! Jones vs. Mann: Climategate’s Phil Jones accused of making error of judgment by his colleague Michael Mann – ‘I in no way endorse what was in that email’…could not ‘justify’

In addition, scientists from around the world are now demanding that the “ClimateGate” scientists be banned from future UN IPCC climate work. See: More ClimateGate Fallout: Prominent German Scientist Declares ‘Compromised’ UN Scientists should be excluded from IPCC and Peer-Review Process – November 24, 2009

The New ‘Deniers’: UK Greenie George Monbiot: ‘Most of the environmentalists I know have gone into denial’ — ‘Pretending the climate email leak isn’t a crisis won’t make it go away’ – Monbiot: ‘There is no helping it; Phil Jones has to go, and the longer he leaves it, the worse it will get’ – UK Daily Mail – Nov. 25, 2009

More Defections! Center for Env. Journalism’s Tom Yulsman: ‘I’m standing with George Monbiot on this’ – Nov. 25, 2009 – ‘I believe the CRU (Climate Research Unit) should agree to an independent examination of what happened…to prevent this kind of thing from ever happening again’

Shock — Et Tu, DeSmogBlog?: Climate Alarmists at DeSmogBlog Call for Phil Jones to Offer his Resignation! – Nov. 25, 2009 – ‘It would be savvy for Jones to at least offer to step aside before someone in authority makes a move to give him a push’

Et tu? Head of UN IPCC Pachauri Now throwing global warming under the bus?! There is a ‘larger problem’ than climate fears?! – Nov. 23, 2009 – Urges ‘time and space to look at the larger problem of unsustainable development, of which climate change is at best a symptom’

Canadian Paper: ‘Scandal shakes foundations of climate science…this has set the climate-change debate back 20 years’

CBC’s Rex Murphy Unloads About ClimateGate: It ‘pulls back the curtain on pettiness, turf protection, manipulation, defiance of FOIA, loss or destroyed data and attempts to blacklist’ – ‘Science has gone to bed with advocacy and both have had a very good time’

Investigations into Climategate scandal have now started around the world. See:

Climategate Prompts UK Met Office to re-examine 160 years of climate data

UN panel to investigate Climategate: ‘This is a serious issue…we certainly don’t want to brush anything under the carpet’

Climategate expands: Penn State Professor Michael Mann also under investigation

‘Cooking the science’: Sen. Inhofe to call for hearing into CRU, U.N. climate change research

Scandal Widens: University of Arizona prof. Malcolm Hughes (cohort of Michael Mann) told not to destroy questioned climate files

Rep. Issa: Obama’s refusal to investigate ‘Climategate’ emails is ‘unconscionable’

Related Links:

Damage Control?! Is this the Scientific Method? UN IPCC: We ‘firmly stands behind’ our report: Global warming conclusions ‘have been approved word by word by the GOVERNMENTS of the world’ – Climate Depot Response: “If the governments all signed off on UN IPCC reports, then they must be impeccable science. No politics involved at all.” For reality check, see report on UN scientists turning on UN here.

Pressure Mounts From Inside: Disband IPCC? Scientist from U. of East Anglia Suggests ‘UN IPCC has run its course…politicizes climate science…authoritarian, exclusive form of knowledge production’ – November 27, 2009 – Excerpt: ClimateGate reveals science has become ‘too partisan, too centralized…more usually associated with social organization within primitive cultures’

Comedy of Errors…this is how they do damage control? ClimateGate scientists attempt to refute idea they are political by appearing with liberal blogger Joe Romm!?

Prof. Pielke Jr. ‘I think we can get past the lie — and it was a lie — that these activist scientists, in the words of’s Gavin Schmidt, are not taking a political stand’

Time Mag.: ‘After Climategate, Global Warming Doubt on Rise’ — ‘Series of troubling indicators that skepticism about global warming is on the rise’ – Shock From Time Mag. Calls for Jones to Resign!? ‘If Jones is found to have actively encouraged his scientists to dodge FOIA requests, which some of the e-mails suggest, he should almost certainly resign from his post’

America’s Moment of Clarity: Poll: 59% say it’s likely scientists ‘falsified research data to support their own beliefs about global warming’ — Only 22% consider the UN ‘a reliable source’- ‘This skepticism does not appear to be the result of the recent disclosure of e-mails confirming data falsification as part of the so-called ‘Climategate’ scandal’

J’accuse! Jones vs. Mann: Climategate’s Phil Jones accused of making error of judgment by his colleague Michael Mann – ‘I in no way endorse what was in that email’…could not ‘justify’