climate change

[The Barbarian]

Evolutionists love discussing a man's qualifications instead of his ideas.

Notice that he didn't present any ideas. "As a journalist who started a TV show, you can trust me when I tell you climate change is wrong."

After all, scientists trust all those petunias that continue to bloom earlier and farther north every year. And this guy is surely smarter than a petunia.

Isn't he?

On the other hand, if your guy is willing to come out of the bunker and make some testable assertions instead of "trust me, I'm a journalist", we can look at those and talk about them.

Not likely. He might not be a genius, but I doubt if he's that dumb.

 

[bybee]

Notice that he didn't present any ideas. "As a journalist who started a TV show, you can trust me when I tell you climate change is wrong."

After all, scientists trust all those petunias that continue to bloom earlier and farther north every year. And this guy is surely smarter than a petunia.

Isn't he?

What about the man who is the head of The Weather Channel"? He has stated that global warming is not happening.
I don't quite know what to believe.

 

[The Barbarian]

What about the man who is the head of The Weather Channel"?

His degree is in journalism. That's why he didn't advance any testable claims about climate, just said "Hey, trust me, I'm the head of the weather channel on TV."

Deniers love to argue by credentials, and then whine when someone points out how shaky the credentials are.

 

[One Ugly Christian]

His degree is in journalism. That's why he didn't advance any testable claims about climate, just said "Hey, trust me, I'm the head of the weather channel on TV."

Deniers love to argue by credentials, and then whine when someone points out how shaky the credentials are.

OH, gee, what about the 31,000 scientists who signed the Oregon Petition---what is it, 18,000 of them with doctorates in physical sciences. And do a quick google search and it's easy to find hundreds if not thousands of others who not only don't believe man made global warming is significant but many who believe that we've entered a cooling period. But I suppose, as you say, these are all "shaky credentials."

 

[gcthomas]

OH, gee, what about the 31,000 scientists who signed the Oregon Petition---what is it, 18,000 of them with doctorates in physical sciences. And do a quick google search and it's easy to find hundreds if not thousands of others who not only don't believe man made global warming is significant but many who believe that we've entered a cooling period. But I suppose, as you say, these are all "shaky credentials."

The NSF says there are over ten million scientists and engineers in the US, so your Oregon Petition has been signed by 0.3% of them, leaving 99.7% of those who were qualified to sign it but did not.

 

[The Barbarian]

OH, gee, what about the 31,000 scientists who signed the Oregon Petition---what is it, 18,000 of them with doctorates in physical sciences.

How many climatologists? A chemist or physicist is less competent than I am to evaluate climate. At least I've done some graduate work in it.

The bandwagon argument is a very bad one for climate deniers. Climatologists are overwhelmingly in agreement on warming. And it's mostly because the models have accurately predicted climate change.

And do a quick google search and it's easy to find hundreds if not thousands of others who not only don't believe man made global warming is significant but many who believe that we've entered a cooling period.

Bummer for them that this year is on track to be the hottest on record. Unless November and December have record cold snaps, we have a new hottest year.

But I suppose, as you say, these are all "shaky credentials."

Hard to say. Let's see how many of those guys actually have some credentials in climate science. Let us know.

Last time I took a look at that, it included philosophers, "safety administration" and so on. If you have a link to the current list, I'd be pleased to look at i

 

[tetelestai]

Climatologists are overwhelmingly in agreement on warming.

How many climatologists work in the private sector?

The vast majority of climatologists work for the government, or universities.

The climatologists who work for the government and/or universities have to support man made global warming, or they won't get paid.

If I tell you I'm going to give you a $500,000 grant from the government to show that dogs can tell the difference between a Ford and Chevrolet, you would produce "evidence" that they could.

Basically, that's what climatologists are doing.

 

[The Barbarian]

Science 10 August 2007:
Vol. 317 no. 5839 pp. 796-799
DOI: 10.1126/science.1139540

Improved Surface Temperature Prediction for the Coming Decade from a Global Climate Model

Doug M. Smith*,
Stephen Cusack,
Andrew W. Colman,
Chris K. Folland,
Glen R. Harris,
James M. Murphy

Abstract
Previous climate model projections of climate change accounted for external forcing from natural and anthropogenic sources but did not attempt to predict internally generated natural variability. We present a new modeling system that predicts both internal variability and externally forced changes and hence forecasts surface temperature with substantially improved skill throughout a decade, both globally and in many regions. Our system predicts that internal variability will partially offset the anthropogenic global warming signal for the next few years. However, climate will continue to warm, with at least half of the years after 2009 predicted to exceed the warmest year currently on record.

So, a testable prediction. Let's see how they did...

They missed by 0.5 degrees C. At the end of 2014, only two of five will be hotter than the hottest record previous to 2009. Not too shabby, considering they had to factor in a cooling trend in oceans that greatly reduced the rate of heating during that period.

As they predicted, the cooling factors seem to be coming to an end; and the rate of heating will again accelerate as it did this year.

 

[tetelestai]

from a Global Climate Model

I stopped reading as soon as I got to "from a Global Climate Model"

Anything afterwards means nothing.

Their models are wrong more often than Joe Biden says another gaffe.

 

[rocketman]

The rocket was launched from Wallops Flight Facility.

Wallops Flight Facility is operated by the Goddard Space Flight Center.

Goddard Space Flight Center is part of NASA.

Goddard Space Flight Center developed and maintains the satellite systems for National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)

NOAA are the people who perpetuate the global warming myth.

Like I said, NASA should worry more about rockets, and less about the global warming myth.

Listen Tet, you are uninformed about space launch it seems. The U.S. Air Force, NASA, amongst other customers also fly on the rockets my company flies but, they are not built, tested, or flown by the customer (U.S. Air Force, NASA, etc) they are simply that, just a customer that buys the launch. In a simple sense we, the launch contractor is nothing more than a trucking company delivering payloads to space. NASA was not to blame for last night's mishap. Just sayin....

 

[tetelestai]

NASA was not to blame for last night's mishap. Just sayin....

So, NASA had nothing to do with it?

If so, then why did Rachel Kraft the NASA public affairs officer, and Bill Wrobel the director of NASA's Wallops Flight Facility, hold a press conference immediately following the explosion?

I stand by my original comment: NASA should spend more time worrying about rockets, and less time worrying about alleged man made global warming.

 

[rocketman]

So, NASA had nothing to do with it?

Nope, that would be correct. Orbital is just a contractor carrying a NASA payload.

If so, then why did Rachel Kraft the NASA public affairs officer, and Bill Wrobel the director of NASA's Wallops Flight Facility, hold a press conference immediately following the explosion?

It was NASA's payload that was lost so it makes sense that they would comment being they have skin in the game but, they had no hand in the mishap other than what was on the pointy end.

I stand by my original comment: NASA should spend more time worrying about rockets, and less time worrying about alleged man made global warming.

Kinda testy are we? I was simply trying to inform you what happened & who the responsibility falls upon and it is not NASA it was their contractor Orbital Sciences Corp. Stay ignorant if you wish...

 

[The Barbarian]

Barbarian observes:
Climatologists are overwhelmingly in agreement on warming.

How many climatologists work in the private sector?

Hard to say. The number in private industry, where they would be vulnerable to pressure from corporations and money is less than for some other fields.

The climatologists who work for the government and/or universities have to support man made global warming, or they won't get paid.

You've been suckered on that story. There aren't many deniers among climatologists, but there are some. They seem to be all working. That's the way corporations act with employees, but not universities.

If I tell you I'm going to give you a cushy job and a high salary to say "maybe the facts don't show warming", and I'll find someone else to do your job, if you don't, that's a pretty strong incentive, um?

Look to the money:

Scientists and economists have been offered $10,000 each by a lobby group funded by one of the world's largest oil companies to undermine a major climate change report due to be published today.

Letters sent by the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), an ExxonMobil-funded thinktank with close links to the Bush administration, offered the payments for articles that emphasise the shortcomings of a report from the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

Travel expenses and additional payments were also offered.
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2007/feb/02/frontpagenews.climatechange

Basically, that's what corporations are doing.

 

[The Barbarian]

(Barbarian cites evidence that climate models accurately predict climate)

I stopped reading as soon as I got to "from a Global Climate Model"

Yep, you've been immunized against facts. You've become a true believer, completely immune to reality.

They have you right where they want you.

 

[Saved.One.by.Grace]

Climate Change = Weather

Man cannot change the weather and does a poor job of predicting it, although they are improving. Changing the wording of Global Warming to Climate Change is like what former president Clinton did in changing Higher Taxes to Involuntary Governmental Contributions. More double-speak to the less informed liberal masses.

 

[rocketman]

Yep, you've been immunized against facts. You've become a true believer, completely immune to reality.

Same could be said for you...a mind numbed robot assisting in the proliferation of a lie, a hoax, a myth, being swayed by agenda driven junk science, and as time rolls on the lie becomes more apparent to the world yet the robots march on. :juggle:

They have you right where they want you.

Seems they have you in the same position, a useful idiot proliferating the lie.

 

[gcthomas]

Climate Change = Weather

Man cannot change the weather and does a poor job of predicting it, although they are improving. Changing the wording of Global Warming to Climate Change is like what former president Clinton did in changing Higher Taxes to Involuntary Governmental Contributions. More double-speak to the less informed liberal masses.

That is a myth: "a Google Scholar search reveals that the term 'climate change' was in use before the term 'global warming', and has always been the more commonly-used term in scientific literature:"

 

[tetelestai]

Yep, you've been immunized against facts.

Models are NOT facts.

If they were, they wouldn't be wrong the majority of the time like they always are.

 

[gcthomas]

Models are NOT facts.

If they were, they wouldn't be wrong the majority of the time like they always are.

Models are how you understand the world: no model, no understanding.
That even applies to climate change deniers - all they are saying is that they don't like the specific model, not that they don't agree with models per se.

 

[Saved.One.by.Grace]

That is a myth: "a Google Scholar search reveals that the term 'climate change' was in use before the term 'global warming', and has always been the more commonly-used term in scientific literature:"

Google scholar? They give degrees for that?