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.
If you want to know about dinosaur bones you ask a paleontologist.
If you want to know about the speed of light you ask a physicist.
And if you want to know about the Earths overall climate you ask a climate scientist.
The corporate backed Fox news and Rush radio say "global warming is a hoax." They say this because combating global warming would decrease corporate profits. Dealing in Doubt | Greenpeace
This feels like the "debate" over evolution that finally seems to have died down.
Was it only a decade ago when the science denial crowd did their best to make lists of allegedly smart people who denied evolution? "Hey, look at this long list of names (basically none of whom have any expertise in this field, but whatever)! Our view is legitimate!"
It turned out to be easier to make a list of scientists who accept evolution all of whom are named Steve.
I'm curious what the next big science denial cause will be.
If you want to know about dinosaur bones you ask a paleontologist.
If you want to know about the speed of light you ask a physicist.
And if you want to know about the Earths overall climate you ask a climate scientist.
The corporate backed Fox news and Rush radio say "global warming is a hoax." They say this because combating global warming would decrease corporate profits. Dealing in Doubt | Greenpeace
The 97% propaganda myth has been repeatedly been debunked but the leftists will cling to it.
Of course the guy who was the No. 1 NASA chief alarm bell ringer and supporter of the climate change nonsense before he retired, James Hansen, has degrees in physics and mathematics but the 'Warmists' are completely OK with that because he was telling them what they wanted to hear.
The fact the many NASA scientists publicly disagree with the propaganda is also completely ignored.
This fanaticism has nothing to do with science and everything to do with ideology and money.
And Obama and the governing powers have a back ground in climate change?
Yet their leader claims that climate change is the number one threat in the world?
Why do the lemmings accept the doom and gloom claims but reject anything that disputes them?
This has been explained in this thread already.
You do not have to be an expert to report someone else's results. When Obama speaks on the subject, nobody defers to his expertise. Also, since when is he the "leader" of a loosely organized collection of scientists? Since never, that's when. No, he's not a scientist. He's just literate.
You do have to be an expert to make the claim that someone else's carefully researched results are wrong, especially when you make that claim without doing any work yourself.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and the climate change deniers aren't the ones conducting scientific research in the area.
The 97% propaganda myth has been repeatedly been debunked but the leftists will cling to it.
Of course the guy who was the No. 1 NASA chief alarm bell ringer and supporter of the climate change nonsense before he retired, James Hansen, has degrees in physics and mathematics but the 'Warmists' are completely OK with that because he was telling them what they wanted to hear.
The fact the many NASA scientists publicly disagree with the propaganda is also completely ignored.
This fanaticism has nothing to do with science and everything to do with ideology and money.
The 97% figure is misleading in one sense (because the actual number from the paper measures something different than what is reported), but it's not that misleading. It's probably more misleading to insist that it's a myth, because the idea conveyed is still true (and the statistic itself is probably fairly close to right, even though we're looking at it through the proxy of the fraction of papers published). In other words, the statistic does show that the consensus view is that climate change is caused at least in part by human activities. Arguing otherwise is disingenuous, because the popular formulation, though technically not right, is still pretty close, but claiming it's "debunked" is nothing more than an effort to imply something that is not true at all.
When you say it's debunked, you're implying that actual climate scientists still consider this a controversial issue, when they dont'.
Nobody cares what a few engineers, NASA-employed or otherwise, think.
The 97% propaganda myth has been repeatedly been debunked but the leftists will cling to it.
Of course the guy who was the No. 1 NASA chief alarm bell ringer and supporter of the climate change nonsense before he retired, James Hansen, has degrees in physics and mathematics but the 'Warmists' are completely OK with that because he was telling them what they wanted to hear.
The fact the many NASA scientists publicly disagree with the propaganda is also completely ignored.
NASA says "Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree: Climate-warming trends over the past century are very likely due to human activities." http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/
Could you please explain how NASA's above statement has been debunked.
The 97% propaganda myth has been repeatedly been debunked but the leftists will cling to it.
Of course the guy who was the No. 1 NASA chief alarm bell ringer and supporter of the climate change nonsense before he retired, James Hansen, has degrees in physics and mathematics but the 'Warmists' are completely OK with that because he was telling them what they wanted to hear.
The fact the many NASA scientists publicly disagree with the propaganda is also completely ignored.
This fanaticism has nothing to do with science and everything to do with ideology and money.
The difference is that Hansen has been researching and studying climate science for several decades, that's not science not fanaticism. The physicist in question had a background in quantum mechanics, I don't see any specifics regarding why he disagrees with the threat and he doesn't even believe the earth is warming putting aside the cause.
Fine with different opinions of legitimate scientists that disagree with global warming, nice to see someone voice their opinion that is not bought by big oil but he is wrong
NASA says "Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree: Climate-warming trends over the past century are very likely due to human activities." http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/
Could you please explain how NASA's above statement has been debunked.
97% of climate scientists do not support the left's AGW alarmism hypothesis. This is a baseless falsehood spread by warmists such as yourself without thought or reference. In fact there has been no scientific, statistically sound poll that has been conducted that supports this, or that even purports to support this claim.
There is a study that sampled articles on climate change and presented the results of that analysis, which most AGW supporters have adopted as a proxy for what either "all scientists" or "all climate scientists" believe. However, this study does not even purport to support the conclusion that 97% of climate scientists support the left's AGW alarmism hypothesis, as you and the other environmental extremists claim that it does.
But of course if you can produce a scientific, statistically sound poll that has been conducted showing that 97% of either "all scientists" or "all climate scientists" support the AGW alarmism hypothesis, we would all like to see it.
97% of climate scientists do not support the left's AGW alarmism hypothesis. This is a baseless falsehood spread by warmists such as yourself without thought or reference. In fact there has been no scientific, statistically sound poll that has been conducted that supports this, or that even purports to support this claim.
There is a study that sampled articles on climate change and presented the results of that analysis, which most AGW supporters have adopted as a proxy for what either "all scientists" or "all climate scientists" believe. However, this study does not even purport to support the conclusion that 97% of climate scientists support the left's AGW alarmism hypothesis, as you and the other environmental extremists claim that it does.
But of course if you can produce a scientific, statistically sound poll that has been conducted showing that 97% of either "all scientists" or "all climate scientists" support the AGW alarmism hypothesis, we would all like to see it.
Goodnight, it's a cross discipline--and a new one at that. There is no such thing as a "Climate scientist."
They all make contributions from the far reaches of their own highly specialized fields of study in physics, meteorology, oceanography, chemistry, statistics, geology, astrophysics.
Because you've just unwittingly argued that those members of the American Physical Society who endorse AGW theory (and there are at least 160 dissidents even there) also have no business butting their noses into the climate debate.
Last edited by mm4; 07-09-2015 at 11:20 AM..
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.
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.
