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.
So now you are raising the dead? What's up with that?
Dr. Joanne Simpson died in 2010. Her full statement here... “There is no doubt that atmospheric greenhouse gases are rising rapidly and little doubt that some warming and bad ecological events are occurring. “What should we as a nation do? Decisions have to be made on incomplete information. In this case, we must act on the recommendations of Gore and the IPCC because if we do not reduce emissions of greenhouse gases and the climate models are right, the planet as we know it will in this century become unsustainable. But as a scientist I remain skeptical.”
Dr. Richard Lindzen ....Speaking of corruption within the climate science community...... Lindzen has published work with the conservative think-tank, the Cato Institute, a think tank that has received $125,000 from ExxonMobil since 1998. Lindzen charged oil and coal organizations $2,500 per day for his consulting services.....Bias by bribery.
Dr. Kiminori Itoh declares himself a “physical chemist familiar with environmental sciences, and not particularly specialized in climate science.”..
Arun D Ahluwalia is an Active Member Association of Petroleum Geologists...Nuff said.
So now you are raising the dead? What's up with that?
Dr. Joanne Simpson died in 2010. Her full statement here... “There is no doubt that atmospheric greenhouse gases are rising rapidly and little doubt that some warming and bad ecological events are occurring. “What should we as a nation do? Decisions have to be made on incomplete information. In this case, we must act on the recommendations of Gore and the IPCC because if we do not reduce emissions of greenhouse gases and the climate models are right, the planet as we know it will in this century become unsustainable. But as a scientist I remain skeptical.”
Dr. Richard Lindzen ....Speaking of corruption within the climate science community...... Lindzen has published work with the conservative think-tank, the Cato Institute, a think tank that has received $125,000 from ExxonMobil since 1998. Lindzen charged oil and coal organizations $2,500 per day for his consulting services.....Bias by bribery.
Dr. Kiminori Itoh declares himself a “physical chemist familiar with environmental sciences, and not particularly specialized in climate science.”..
Arun D Ahluwalia is an Active Member Association of Petroleum Geologists...Nuff said.
You are very good at cutting and pasting from denialist websites. You are very bad at convincing people to take you seriously because you cut and paste from denialist websites. Now go read your tabloids.
This is exactly what the problem is with your side, you dig up and cherry pick dirt and innuendo about any skeptical scientist while you apologize, excuse or ignore any inconvenient truths about the warmist scientists.
You lose all credibility when you do this and essentially prove that you are biased beyond all reason.
In other words, in your view and in the view of the warmists, any scientist who voices ANY skepticism of your dogma MUST be either in bed with big oil or an old testament religious nut who believes it's in God's hands. There is absolutely NO room in your worldview for the possibility that a climate scientist might just be skeptical.
It's a witch hunt! These heretics who dare speak against your righteous dogma must be called out and ostracized!!
Never mind that they may have excellent credentials or might have a POINT, fire up Google to dig up some dirt and then breathe a sigh of relief when you find some because then you never have to question or examine your own beliefs!
I'm quite certain we could fire up Google or Wikipedia and point it at any of the warmist scientists and find dirt and innuendo to smear them with and cast doubt on their intentions as well. It's a pointless exercise. It's a logical fallacy, the Ad Hominem attack. When you can't refute the argument, attack the messenger.
I've seen enough of this that I think there are scientists on BOTH sides of the issue doing honest research to the best of their ability and their is activism, corruption, dogma and greed on BOTH sides of the issue. Where that leaves me is in a place of solid SKEPTICISM.
In other words…
I think there are scientists who legitimately believe in CAGW based on their research and I also believe there are scientists who use fear mongering, activism, dogma and greed to get in the way of conducting unbiased science.
I think there are scientists who are legitimately skeptical of CAGW and the merits of computer models and I also believe that there are scientists corrupted by money from big oil and big business out to diminish CAGW as much as possible.
In the end, the truth is the real casualty here, that and the notion of impartial science.
The mostly leftist, liberal notion that this a battle between selfless scientists out crusading to save the world and conducting nothing but PURE SCIENCE, untainted by activism, policy, dogma or money versus the greedy capitalists and old testament science deniers is beyond ridiculous and naive.
There is good intentions on both sides and there is corruption on both sides.
I think that instead of taking the warmist and the alarmist's views to heart and acting on them, a far BETTER course of action would be to consider all contingencies. What if we are heading into a period of global cooling while we are preparing for global warming? What if this is just a natural cycle that we have no control over? What if our only course of correction is reverting to the pre-industrial age? Throwing BILLIONS and BILLIONS of dollars at politicians and bureaucrats in the hopes that they know what's best seems to me like a colossal waste that does nothing but makes us feel better about this bogeyman we've invented.
So you think big fossil fuel companies are not behind this denialism to protect their massive profits? This is eerily similar to what the tobacco companies did years ago, and as a matter of fact the fossil fuel people are using the same tactics as they did then.
Tell me what do you think is wrong with companies profiting from green technology? In the United States, credible estimates of annual fossil fuel subsidies range from $14 billion to $52 billion annually, while even efforts to remove small portions of those subsidies have been defeated in Congress, as shown in the graphic below.
i have no issue with companies profiting from green energy. in fact i think that is the way we need to go for the future. but understand this, the big tobacco companies didnt lose any money, and they really didny have their tobacco profits cut either. all they did was raise the price of cigarettes and other tobacco products. and if the government starts to add to the cost of oil products, you can bet that the oil companies will do the same thing, raise prices to maintain their profit margins, which by the way is about 4 cents per gallon of gasoline, where as the federal government already gets 18 cents per gallon, as well as a cut of the gross profits the oil companies generate, about $59 billion per year in taxes in the case of exxon.
The owner of the Popular Technology blog emailed a couple of authors (out of 8547 emailed by the study's authors) who preferred to respond to his email request to have a whinge and some self-promotion on an AGW denialist blog, instead of responding to the 2 email requests from the study's authors for them to self-rate their own papers to correct any miscategorizations of their abstracts.
What's even more hilarious is that the study itself said that authors were contacted by 2 emails to self-correct any miscategorizations as part of the study's methodology, yet Andrew tries to make this out to be some big corrupt conspiracy theory. Classic!
I bet he knew just which handful of authors to email too - like Tol, who just LOVES to have a whinge about anyone- yet he accepts AGW.
Andrew from PopTech refused to answer a question about how many authors he emailed or how he selected them.
Check out his "Global Warming Links"- every single one is a denier blog or right wing anti-AGW source.
This 'denier conspiracy website' didn't write this article; they reposted the article from the WSJ.
By Roy Spencer who doesn't accept AGW because of his religious beliefs that God would not let it happen?
Read the Cornwall Alliance Evangelical Declaration on Global Warming. Roy Spencer is one of the main signatories. Roy also denies evolution.
We believe Earth and its ecosystems—created by God’s intelligent design and infinite power and sustained by His faithful providence —are robust, resilient, self-regulating, and self-correcting, admirably suited for human flourishing, and displaying His glory. Earth’s climate system is no exception. Recent global warming is one of many natural cycles of warming and cooling in geologic history.
We deny that Earth and its ecosystems are the fragile and unstable products of chance, and particularly that Earth’s climate system is vulnerable to dangerous alteration because of minuscule changes in atmospheric chemistry.
We call on our fellow Christians to practice creation stewardship out of Biblical conviction, adoration for our Creator, and love for our fellow man—especially the poor.
We call on Christian leaders to understand the truth about climate change and embrace Biblical thinking, sound science, and careful economic analysis in creation stewardship.
The global warming cult members have no concept as to what constitutes valid science, yet claim the exclusive high ground of "science".
The concept of "global warming" ignores the basic cornerstone of the scientific method (refuting the null hypothesis) and villifies any inquiry or information that contradicts the hypothesis. This, of course is THE OPPOSITE OF VALID SCIENCE.
Promoting the premise of "global warming" rejects the basic concepts of science and is more akin to a cult, in which contrary evidence is summarily rejected or villified. It really harkens to times when those opposing the notion of "witches" were condemned and ostracized, or were accused of being witches themselves.
Wake up, cult members.
The author of that article also denies evolution because of his religious beliefs. Do you think that is 'valid science'?
You keep banging on and on with the same mantra about the null hypothesis, yet you ignore all the research which has already disproven the null hypothesis. Your posts sound more like irrational ideological rants. I think you even demanded double-blind randomized studies as if the climate was a new drug to be tested.
Wake up and try reading the published literature instead of denier blogs and infotainment pieces.
Are you serious. I live in New England and we had one of the coldest winters on record.
Do you believe that your refrigerator works on magic? Why is it cold inside? Your refrigerator has a lot of energy going into it where did all that energy go? It had to go somewhere. The Earth's atmosphere and oceans when treated as a thermodynamic system has a lot in common with your refridgerator and in fact operates on exactly the same physics. So like your refridgerator one part can be colder like the inside but another part can be much warmer (place your hand on the condensor/heat sink) . While the Eastern US and Canada were cold, This was the case in Russia which had a unusally warm winter in 2014 which made skiing at the Sochi Olympics mediocre at best. Also heat and droughts were a problem in South America ie. Brazil so the price of coffee is going up, Australia and Southern Africa. Also unusual was the several cat 5 cyclones observed in the Southern Hemisphere one hit Australia and two hit India.
All of this requires thermal energy and guess what the thermal energy when integrated over the entire globe is clearly getting larger so the Earth is warming up and a graph of this energy is a much clearer signal (it matches the growth in CO2 and other trace greenhouse gases very well) than a few scattered temperature readings.
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.
