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.
Regarding the climate, the global warming believers hang their belief on people claiming to be experts - rather than one's own observation.
I'm not a climatologist and have done no research into the field so i am left to believe what those scientists in the field tell us eg;= http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/
The National Centers for Environmental Information contains the instrumental and paleoclimatic records that can precisely define the nature of climatic fluctuations at time scales of a century and longer. Among the diverse kinds of data platforms whose data contribute to NCEI's resources are: Ships, buoys, weather stations, weather balloons, satellites, radar and many climate proxy records such as tree rings and ice cores. The National Oceanographic Data Center contains the subsurface ocean data which reveal the ways that heat is distributed and redistributed over the planet. Knowing how these systems are changing and how they have changed in the past is crucial to understanding how they will change in the future. And, for climate information that extends from hundreds to thousands of years, paleoclimatology data, also available from the National Centers for Environmental Information, helps to provide longer term perspectives.
IMO people who bring this level of study to the issue are more plausible/believable than those few who use only opinion and rogue agendas to refute the findings of the vast majority of the scientific community.
Umm... I hate to be the bearer of common sense here, but they are using a PHYSICIST to pooh pooh on Climate science. That'd be akin to relying on a Chemist to deny the Theory of Evolution, or a Biologist to crap all over the Theory of Relativity.
Disclaimer: I am NOT a climate scientist-just a lowly engineer who has designed and operated a primary standards calibration lab. I am used to very precise measurement of many parameters (inculding temperature). I do know and have worked with a few real climate scientists and they are unbiased, honest and dedicated to their studies. That being said, "they" are not the problem, typically it is the higher ups.
So, is climate change real? Of course-that has always been and always will be the case. Do those that support it as being man-made, have an agenda? Yes-get more grant money. What happens to the research when they don't get anymore financing? Are there any "climate scientists" doing research on their own dime??? Not that I am aware of-it would be prohibitively expensive. Correct me if I am wrong but didn't some of these "esteemed" scientists that currently support it, previously support global cooling??? Were they wrong? Haven't some of these "respected" experts been caught manipulating data? Are they or are they not depending heavily on models (constructed by said scientists)?
I think the subject is certainly worthy of study but at this point in time I am not convinced and believe it to be far from settled. Think about this: How many of the predictions made 20 years ago have come to pass?
This is a really, really complicated issue and to say we have the answers at this time is just plain foolishness.
Umm... I hate to be the bearer of common sense here, but they are using a PHYSICIST to pooh pooh on Climate science. That'd be akin to relying on a Chemist to deny the Theory of Evolution, or a Biologist to crap all over the Theory of Relativity.
The theory behind "Climate Change" is all physics, and nothing but physics, so the use of a physicist is totally appropriate.
With almost all scientists agreeing the Earth is warming as a direct consequence of mans activities combined with headlines around the world proclaiming the highest temperatures on record, i'm inclined to err on the side of caution and agree with the global warming crowd. https://www.google.ca/#safe=active&q=warmest+on+record
Actually its been widely reported by the NYT and other media outlets and confirmed by numerous weather offices including Britains Met Office that the earth hasnt warmed for 16 years or more..
Not one study or scientist can prove that mans activities contributed to the most recent warming trend
Its been significantly warmer and colder in the past than it currently is, so we are not experiencing the highest temperatures on record.
Umm... I hate to be the bearer of common sense here, but they are using a PHYSICIST to pooh pooh on Climate science. That'd be akin to relying on a Chemist to deny the Theory of Evolution, or a Biologist to crap all over the Theory of Relativity.
Thats not common sense. Its a misunderstanding of what a Physicist does. They study matter, energy and time and how it relates. In other words its the basics of how our climate operates. So its more akin to a nuclear physicist explaining how a nuclear reactor works.
Umm... I hate to be the bearer of common sense here, but they are using a PHYSICIST to pooh pooh on Climate science. That'd be akin to relying on a Chemist to deny the Theory of Evolution, or a Biologist to crap all over the Theory of Relativity.
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.
