Climate Change. Yes the science is settled.

by mavie 137 Replies latest social current

• 

  mavie

  Some of the 'science' refuting climate change. I stopped reading the EPW Senate Minority site after this graph.
  
  http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Images.View&File_id=75d62e6f-802a-23ad-47ac-e995a95082c7&ImageGallery_id=04bf1b76-802a-23ad-438b-dec552db7c92
• 

  hillary_step

  mrk...

  You may have noticed that your opinions mean nothing to me, and I suspect given their general content not very much to anyone else. Who cares where you think 'flame wars' should be dealt with, I certainly do not.

  However, just for the record :

  27-Dec-07 18:07	mkr32208	my apologies
  27-Dec-07 18:06	mkr32208	I just saw...
  27-Dec-07 18:04	mkr32208	I just saw...
  27-Dec-07 18:04	mkr32208	I just saw...
  27-Dec-07 17:42	mkr32208	Stupid fuck...

  Five emails received from you. I accept your apologies in advance for suggesting that I am a liar.

  Now, you think I am a "stupid f***" and I know you are a dolt, so let us just leave it at that shall we. :)

  HS
• 

  BurnTheShips

  I prefer to get my climate science from climatologists.

  So are you telling me that scientific disciplines like physics or geology do not overlap with climatology or meteorology? Really? Thats incredible!

  Legendary inventor Ray Kurzweil, described as "an inventor whose work in artificial intelligence has dazzled technological sophisticates for four decades"
  
  LOL! Is this for real? "Legendary" in a Senate report?

  ROFL! Do you even know who Kurzweil is?

  Burn
• 

  BurnTheShips

  I think you live for this Hillery. ;-)
• 

  BurnTheShips

  Some of the 'science' refuting climate change. I stopped reading the EPW Senate Minority site after this graph.

  Nonsense. You only read the report in order to discredit it. That it is politically motivated I do not doubt but so was the IPCC report. The issues that this report raises are valid.

  Burn
• 

  BurnTheShips

  This will happen when hell freezes over, but if it should happen the world would suddenly see the USA as the threat it is and unite against it; finally.

  5GO. I would like to donate the funds for a one way ticket out of the US for you. You treasonous insect.
• 

  coffee_black

  Sorry Maive, but the science is NOT settled. The MIT scientist from the article below is far more qualified than anyone on this forum to comment on this.

  **********************************************************************************************************************************************************

  Meteorologist Likens Fear of Global Warming to 'Religious Belief' By Marc Morano
  CNSNews.com Senior Staff Writer
  December 02, 2004
  
  Washington (CNSNews.com) - An MIT meteorologist Wednesday dismissed alarmist fears about human induced global warming as nothing more than 'religious beliefs.'
  
  "Do you believe in global warming? That is a religious question. So is the second part: Are you a skeptic or a believer?" said Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor Richard Lindzen, in a speech to about 100 people at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C.
  
  "Essentially if whatever you are told is alleged to be supported by 'all scientists,' you don't have to understand [the issue] anymore. You simply go back to treating it as a matter of religious belief," Lindzen said. His speech was titled, "Climate Alarmism: The Misuse of 'Science'" and was sponsored by the free market George C. Marshall Institute. Lindzen is a professor at MIT's Department of Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Sciences.
  Once a person becomes a believer of global warming, "you never have to defend this belief except to claim that you are supported by all scientists -- except for a handful of corrupted heretics," Lindzen added.
  
  According to Lindzen, climate "alarmists" have been trying to push the idea that there is scientific consensus on dire climate change.
  
  "With respect to science, the assumption behind the [alarmist] consensus is science is the source of authority and that authority increases with the number of scientists [who agree.] But science is not primarily a source of authority. It is a particularly effective approach of inquiry and analysis. Skepticism is essential to science -- consensus is foreign," Lindzen said.
  
  Alarmist predictions of more hurricanes, the catastrophic rise in sea levels, the melting of the global poles and even the plunge into another ice age are not scientifically supported, Lindzen said.
  
  "It leads to a situation where advocates want us to be afraid, when there is no basis for alarm. In response to the fear, they want us to do what they want," Lindzen said.
  
  Recent reports of a melting polar ice cap were dismissed by Lindzen as an example of the media taking advantage of the public's "scientific illiteracy."
  
  "The thing you have to remember about the Arctic is that it is an extremely variable part of the world," Lindzen said. "Although there is melting going [on] now, there has been a lot of melting that went on in the [19]30s and then there was freezing. So by isolating a section ... they are essentially taking people's ignorance of the past," he added.
  
  'Repetition makes people believe'
  The climate change debate has become corrupted by politics, the media and money, according to Lindzen.
  
  "It's a sad story, where you have scientists making meaningless or ambiguous statements [about climate change]. They are then taken by advocates to the media who translate the statements into alarmist declarations. You then have politicians who respond to all of this by giving scientists more money," Lindzen said.
  
  "Agreement on anything is taken to infer agreement on everything. So if you make a statement that you agree that CO2 (carbon dioxide) is a greenhouse gas, you agree that the world is coming to an end," he added.
  
  "There can be little doubt that the language used to convey alarm has been sloppy at best," Lindzen said, citing Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbles and his famous observation that even a lie will be believed if enough people repeat it. "There is little question that repetition makes people believe things [for] which there may be no basis," Lindzen said.
  
  He believes the key to improving the science of climate change lies in altering the way scientists are funded. 'Alarm is the aim'
  
  "The research and support for research depends on the alarm," Lindzen told CNSNews.com following his speech. "The research itself often is very good, but by the time it gets through the filter of environmental advocates and the press innocent things begin to sound just as though they are the end of the world.
  
  "The argument is no longer what models are correct -- they are not -- but rather whether their results are at all possible. One can rarely prove something to be impossible," he explained.
  
  Lindzen said scientists must be allowed to conclude that 'we don't have a problem." And if the answer turns out to be 'we don't have a problem,' we have to figure out a better reward than cutting off people's funding. It's as simple as that," he said.
  
  The only consensus that Lindzen said exists on the issue of climate change is the impact of the Kyoto Protocol, the international treaty to limit greenhouse gases, which the U.S. does not support.
  
  Kyoto itself will have no discernible effect on global warming regardless of what one believes about climate change," Lindzen said.
  
  "Claims to the contrary generally assume Kyoto is only the beginning of an ever more restrictive regime. However this is hardly ever mentioned," he added.
  
  The Kyoto Protocol, which Russia recently ratified, aims to reduce the emission of greenhouse gases to 1990 levels by the year 2010. But Lindzen claims global warming proponents ultimately want to see a 60 to 80 percent reduction in greenhouse gasses from the 1990 levels. Such reductions would be economically disastrous, he said.
  
  "If you are hearing Kyoto will cost billions and trillions," then a further reduction will ultimately result in "a shutdown" of the economy, Lindzen said.

  *******************************************************************************

  We were all in a cult before...we should all be able to recognize the red flags... don't you think?

  Coffee
• 

  BurnTheShips

  Part of me almost thinks this is a massive conspiracy to wreck the US economy and cut it down to size. I believe 5GO would find the concept agreeable.
• 

  coffee_black

  I've noticed the same thing BTS.... We came from a background where Armageddon was a hearbeat away.... I think some need the doom and gloom, seige mentality in their lives... They're constantly looking for a catastrophe to latch onto or government to hate (like we once hated the Catholic church). There's even a kind of sick joy in it...like when we were dubs and looked forward to all the non dubs being destroyed at the big A...

  Personally, I'm happy to have escaped that kind of mindset. Not looking to replace one cultic ideology with another.

  Coffee
• 

  mavie

  Yes BTS, physics and geology majors are not climatologists. There might be some overlap but that is irrelevant. One needs to consult to specialists in a field.
  
  Yes, I know who 'legendary' Kurzweil is. He is a futurist. Labeling him as legendary in a Senate report smacks of desperation.
  
  I read the report because I have an open mind, not to discredit it.