U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-18-2014, 01:50 AM
 
Location: Old Bellevue, WA
18,794 posts, read 14,223,537 times
Reputation: 7950

Advertisements

Science as McCarthyism | National Review Online

As always, I try to stay out of the global warming debate, being admittedly ignorant on the topic. But the above link is not really about the scientific debate, but about the debate tactics.

A respected Swedish meteorologist named Lennart Bengtsson joined "the avowedly skeptical Global Warming Policy Foundation think tank" about three weeks ago. Four days ago he announced that he would resign. He wrote:

Quote:
I have been put under such an enormous group pressure in recent days from all over the world that has become virtually unbearable to me. If this is going to continue I will be unable to conduct my normal work and will even start to worry about my health and safety. . . . Colleagues are withdrawing their support, other colleagues are withdrawing from joint authorship etc. I see no limit and end to what will happen. It is a situation that reminds me about the time of McCarthy.
His skepticism seems pretty reasonable. Much of the science of global warming rests on computer models, but the models did not predict the slowdown in warming of the past few years. He just wants more empirical work. This is a normal part of the process of the scientific method. Even I took enough science in school to know that.

The writer concludes: "There is something rotten in the state of climate science." Seems tough to argue otherwise.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-18-2014, 08:14 AM
 
Location: Ohio
19,695 posts, read 14,151,738 times
Reputation: 15872
Quote:
Originally Posted by wutitiz View Post
His skepticism seems pretty reasonable. Much of the science of global warming rests on computer models, but the models did not predict the slowdown in warming of the past few years. He just wants more empirical work. This is a normal part of the process of the scientific method. Even I took enough science in school to know that.

The writer concludes: "There is something rotten in the state of climate science." Seems tough to argue otherwise.
Okay.

Computer models designed by people wanting man-made global warming to be real.

Demanding more empirical work is science, not blasphemy as the AGW supporters would have you believe.

One reason meteorologists are either skeptical or out-right dismissive of AGW, is because they use the IPCC climate model everyday....it's what's used to predict weather...and the model doesn't work.

Everyone should be suspicious of the fact that the IPCC cannot explain why the Earth enters a pre-Glacial period; why the pre-Glacial period leads to 100,000 yeas of glaciation; why there's a post-Glacial period; and why there is an Inter-Glacial Period.

What happened to cause the Earth to warm and melt all of the 1+ mile thick glaciers covering a good chunk of Earth?

They don't know.

And they can't explain why it continues to remain warm.

They can't explain the mini-Ice Ages.

The climate is a lot like your scholastic history......the fact that you got an "F" on one paper way back in the 9th Grade or the 5th Grade doesn't make you an "F" student......even less so when your GPA is 4.0.

Modelling...

Mircea
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-18-2014, 11:07 AM
 
2,778 posts, read 1,420,728 times
Reputation: 2418
This has already been covered in a different thread.

His article was rejected from a journal and he's upset.
That's the whole story.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-18-2014, 11:10 AM
 
Location: San Diego, CA
10,583 posts, read 8,259,094 times
Reputation: 4158
Climates frequently change.

Sometimes the climate gets warmer.

And sometimes it gets colder.

That's been going on for as long as the planet has been orbiting the Sun. Or, as long as it's had a climate, at least.

And man has never had the slightest influence on it.

Even the leftist loons who scream about how we have to use government to change everything, go back to the stone age, etc., to prevent some unknown catastrophe, have never been able to come up with even ONE study or example that backs up their claims.

What's funny is that, when they do name some study, it invariably turns out to be nothing but a bunch of long-winded claims which, finally, refer to some other "study" for proof. And what is in that other "study"? You guessed it - more long-winded claims, and eventually a reference to yet another study. And you can guess what is in that one, too.

The leftist global-whatever loons have been insisting on impending doom, and the urgent need to give government massive powers to change every bit of our lives to "avoid" that doom, for at least 40 years by my count. Literally billions of dollars have changed hands - usually into their hands - all over the world. And they still haven't come up with one shred of proof that man has had the least bit of influence on the climate changes that happen regularly around us. Nor is there any proof that man can do anything to change it.

***40 YEARS*** of screaming, caterwauling, and doomsaying. All without the slightest proof. Just references to references to references, ad infinitum. And demands that they be given complete power over all of us, and that we send more and more of our resources to them, to change what they cannot change.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-18-2014, 11:22 AM
 
Location: New Jersey
11,027 posts, read 6,456,644 times
Reputation: 10671
Science has become too political, especially in this area. Every study that shows humans are not the cause of climate change threatens funding for climate scientist. That's why you hear that nonsense about 95 or 97 (or whatever the made-up number is today) percent of "scientist" believe in human made change. And by "scientist" they mean climate scientist who are paid by various sources to study how humans impact climate change. Many real scientist, including the head of physics at Princeton, don't believe in this nonsense.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-18-2014, 11:34 AM
 
Location: 125 Years Too Late...
10,860 posts, read 10,527,907 times
Reputation: 9517
Not surprising at all.

If a priest were to suddenly begin questioning the existence of God, would it be surprising to anyone if the inquisition were to become involved?

At this point, if I were him, I'd be in fear for my life and my family's lives. He needs to "disappear" before he has a mysterious accident.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-18-2014, 12:45 PM
 
2,778 posts, read 1,420,728 times
Reputation: 2418
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little-Acorn View Post
Climates frequently change.

Sometimes the climate gets warmer.

And sometimes it gets colder.

That's been going on for as long as the planet has been orbiting the Sun. Or, as long as it's had a climate, at least.

And man has never had the slightest influence on it.
How many times are the deniers going to hammer this home?
Natural climate change isn't the issue.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-18-2014, 01:09 PM
 
Location: Oklahoma
6,717 posts, read 6,125,680 times
Reputation: 5985
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJJersey View Post
Science has become too political, especially in this area. Every study that shows humans are not the cause of climate change threatens funding for climate scientist. That's why you hear that nonsense about 95 or 97 (or whatever the made-up number is today) percent of "scientist" believe in human made change. And by "scientist" they mean climate scientist who are paid by various sources to study how humans impact climate change. Many real scientist, including the head of physics at Princeton, don't believe in this nonsense.


This guy is the chairman of the George Marshall Institute which is a big anti climate change outfit. How is that any different?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-18-2014, 01:15 PM
 
Location: Stasis
15,839 posts, read 9,998,674 times
Reputation: 8545
"Murdoch-owned media hypes lone metereologist's climate junk science
Absurd anti-science faux journalism flares up again
Murdoch-owned media hypes lone metereologist's climate junk science | theguardian.com

"I asked Prof Bengtsson to substantiate his allegations by clarifying the number of scientists who had allegedly been pressurising him to the point that he feared for his safety. I also requested to see the full text of the reports of the scientists who had peer-reviewed his rejected study due its scientific "errors." He did not respond to my request for comment
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-18-2014, 01:18 PM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,054 posts, read 29,425,983 times
Reputation: 7829
Quote:
Originally Posted by Odo View Post
This has already been covered in a different thread.

His article was rejected from a journal and he's upset.
That's the whole story.
Pretty much, not sure why anyone would be bothering to pay attention to someone having a hissy fit because his research was rejected due to errors in his work.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top