Recently ABC News’ Don Harris did a hit piece equating so-called skeptical climate scientist (I thought all scientists were supposed to be skeptical) with white supremacists. To get a view from the non-warmist side Harris included about a 10 second clip of Marc Morano, founder of Climate Depot.com, in his report. This article over at the Medial Research Center’s News Busters site provides the entire transcript of the interview with Morano. The part that wasn’t fit for Harris’ one sided climate alarmist reporting. Morano’s insight is great. This exchange on the “consensus” is spot-on:

HARRIS: When you attack the consensus, that’s where I get a
little confused because you can say what you want about the U.N., but
you can also add in to their — you know, NASA, NOAA, the American
Academy of Sciences, the American Association for the Advancement of
Science, the American Geophysical Union, the American Meteorological
Society, the National Academy of Sciences in pretty much every
developed nation on the planet.

How can you construct a consensus this broad on a hoax?

MORANO: …What you just said there were
political arguments. You’re insulting the intelligence of ABC News by
using that as proof of a consensus….all those
groups you’ve mentioned – the National Academy of Sciences, the
American Meteorological Society, the American Advancement [of Science],
the American Chemical Society – they’ve all had two dozen or so
governing board members vote on a statement that is vaguely similar to
what the United Nations says about global warming. Science groups don’t
take direct votes of their member scientists. Most of the members we
find out aren’t even aware these statements are issued at the time
they’re issued. But what’s happened since is massive blowback. The
American Chemical Society was shocked at the number of dissenting
scientists upset at their stand. The National Academy of Sciences is
having a big blowback. The American Physical Society is having a big
blowback of member scientists. When you get away from that political
governing board, the American Meteorological Society, it has been
documented, has been staffed by former [Vice President Al] Gore
staffers in their bureaucracy.

…Look at the actual scientific
conferences. In Norway, in 2008 – I can send you the documentation.
There was a scientific conference held only every four years – the
Geological Congress. It’s called the Olympic event of scientists.
Two-thirds of the scientists were estimated to be skeptical, hostile
and dismissive of UN IPCC scientists. In Canada, 50,000 earth
scientists canvassed – remember the member scientists, not the
politically connected [20] board members – 67 percent rejected a
consensus on manmade global warming….

I
had scientist join the Senate list of 700 dissenting scientists simply
because the head of the U.N. compared them to flat-earthers. They say
things like we can remain silent no longer. We’re not going to be
demonized like this. So, the idea of broad consensus is now laughable.
Even the ClimateGate scientists don’t have a consensus when they’re
talking about the U.N. and my favorite quote – it was Kevin Trenberth,
I believe, who said “We can’t do geo-engineering because we don’t
understand the climate system well enough to know what impact it will
have.”

That’s your consensus, Dan? I think you can do better than that.