Global Warming

[Henry Hawk]

OK...I have a degree in Computer Science and I have 25 years experience in the field (no joke.) Some would call me an expert. Computers are used to study climate change so that is a related field.

That makes me just as much an expert in climatology as the vet or the oncologist.

Bo, THAT is an extremely poor analogy.....

did you even read the link, where studies have shown that climatologists from more than 20 nations has revealed scientists are evenly split on whether humans are responsible for changes in global climate?

[Exterminator]

Bo, THAT is an extremely poor analogy.....

It is absolutely analogous to the 'scientists' your ilk presents as authorities.

did you even read the link, where studies have shown that climatologists from more than 20 nations has revealed scientists are evenly split on whether humans are responsible for changes in global climate?

Do you mean the almost four-year-old article presented by an organization whose bias is decidedly pro-industry?  As is typical, I doubt you vetted your source before presenting them as an authority.  From Wikipedia (and verifiable elsewhere):

In April 2008, environmental journalist Richard Littlemore wrote that the Heartland Institute's list of "500 Scientists with Documented Doubts of Man-Made Global Warming Scares" included at least 45 scientists who neither knew of their inclusion as "coauthors" of the article, nor agreed with its claims regarding global warming. Dozens of the scientists asked the Heartland Institute to remove their names from the list; for instance, Gregory Cutter of Old Dominion University wrote, "I have NO doubts... the recent changes in global climate ARE man-induced. I insist that you immediately remove my name from this list since I did not give you permission to put it there." Dr. Robert Whittaker, Professor of Biogeography, University of Oxford wrote "Please remove my name. What you have done is totally unethical!"

In response, the Heartland Institute refused to remove any names from the list, writing that "They [the scientists] have no right—legally or ethically—to demand that their names be removed from a bibliography." The Institute did rename the list from its original title (chosen by its public relations department) to "500 Scientists Whose Research Contradicts Man-Made Global Warming Scares", to clarify that the scientists in question do not doubt global warming. Ultimately, the Heartland Institute concluded that "... the point should be obvious: There is no scientific consensus that global warming is a crisis."

So, you're presenting as a believable authority (as well as part of the basis for your position on global warming) a group of known liars...nice!  I suppose that to you, Heartland Institute's inclusion of executives from companies like GM and ExxonMobil (who's contributed hundreds of thousands of dollars) on their board of directors shouldn't call into question any potential bias on global warming much in the same way that having executives from Phillip Morris on the board probably doesn't influence their position that second hand smoke isn't harmful; huh?

Are you for real?

[DannyBoy]

Another example of ....follow the money.

Where does the money come from to fund all these studies.....follow it and you won't even have to read the infomation to know what they will conclude.

Lifelong climatologists will lose their jobs, funding, etc if they don't "prove" global warming.

I saw one quote on these posts that read something like this......Now that I am no longer affiliated with....I can no tell you what I really believe the data suggests.

[Exterminator]

You didn't even bother to read those articles did you?

Perhaps you should do some reading.  If you are arguing that there is no consensus that global warming is occurring and that its cause is primarily man-made, you might want to read this: http://www.logicalscience.com/consensus/consensusD1.htm (note that none of the people or organizations named have asked to have their names removed).

[Henry Hawk]

again, the IPCC, is a government ran AND appointed organization, with UN backing...............there are enough credited denouncers of man-made global warming to keep this debate open..........and EX, I am open minded about this, but I am NOT yet convinced we are doomed IF we do not begin to TAX our way to save the planet.....I think the G8 summits are good, but are we willing to throw BILLIONS of $$ at something that will NOT make a real difference.............

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bal-op.smith07jan07,0,5420174.column..this explains how I feel, quite well.


and I have noticed, why is it NOW, referred to as Climate Change instead of Global Warming?.....is it because SOME of these scientist got it wrong?

[Bo D]

This list don't look anonymous to me:( did not include the entire list but scroll down to the end and you'll find all of them.
Highlights of the Updated 2008 Senate Minority Report featuring over 650 international scientists dissenting from man-made climate fears:   

"Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly....As a scientist I remain skeptical...The main basis of the claim that man's release of greenhouse gases is the cause of the warming is based almost entirely upon climate models. We all know the frailty of models concerning the air-surface system." - Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a PhD in meteorology, and formerly of NASA, who has authored more than 190 studies and has been called "among the most preeminent scientists of the last 100 years." 

Instead of posting from other blogs and forums, perhaps you should go to the source and see what was really said ..


Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson
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.

http://climatesci.org/2008/02/27/trmm-tropical-rainfall-measuring-mission-data-set-potential-in-climate-controversy-by-joanne-simpson-private-citizen/

[Exterminator]

Another example of ....follow the money.

Where does the money come from to fund all these studies.....follow it and you won't even have to read the infomation to know what they will conclude.

Lifelong climatologists will lose their jobs, funding, etc if they don't "prove" global warming.

I saw one quote on these posts that read something like this......Now that I am no longer affiliated with....I can no tell you what I really believe the data suggests.

Yeah, scientists like Dr. Peter Kershaw spend years in the sub-zero temperatuers in the arctic studying the effects of climate change on the permafrost for the money.    Nitwit.

[Exterminator]

again, the IPCC, is a government ran AND appointed organization, with UN backing...

So what?

...there are enough credited denouncers of man-made global warming to keep this debate open...

Only amongst the easily misled.

...and EX, I am open minded about this, but I am NOT yet convinced we are doomed IF we do not begin to TAX our way to save the planet...

Try to focus on the global warming subject and quit trying to sully up the waters with this tax bullshit, another of your red herrings.  If global warming is insignificant and we lower greenhouse gas emissions anyway, what's the effect; cleaner air.  What if it is real and it is as profound as some think and we do nothing; what if you're wrong?

For the record, you are anything but open-minded on the subject.

..I think the G8 summits are good, but are we willing to throw BILLIONS of $$ at something that will NOT make a real difference...

But throwing hundreds of billions at a struggling financial market is cool; huh?

[Henry Hawk]

What if it is real and it is as profound as some think and we do nothing; what if you're wrong?

I can ask the same on Christianity...What if your wrong?

sorry...............got a little side tracked...


Ex, I really don't think ANYONE is against cleaning the air or work on reducing carbons........but, I think we have to be careful on how we approach it, because IT COULD potentially impact our economy if we do not handle this correctly..........and not be hasty...first of all, I have also read where, reducing carbons produced by humans could have little effect....can we logicaly reduce enough too impact anything?.........I think we are making more strides for better effecient automobles by the oil crisis, more than the Al Gore scare-tactics......the future of battery, hybrid and fuel-cell cars is not too far away....WITHOUT a kyoto protocol....

[me]

Yeah, scientists like Dr. Peter Kershaw spend years in the sub-zero temperatuers in the arctic studying the effects of climate change on the permafrost for the money.     Nitwit.

Why do you always feel you have to name call to get a point across?  Are you a control freak or something?  I know that type always do that 'cause they think it makes them sound tough.  Having a different opinion from you don't make someone a nitwit, dumb ass, or moron.  It also makes discussions with the name caller pointless because they aren't listening anyway they're just interested in bullying and controlling.  When people stop posting to you its not because you won the argument its because you are trying to bully tough talk your way into being right whether you are or not.  No one, and I don't care who they are, is right 100% of the time so quit trying to belittle those who disagree with you and grow up.

[Exterminator]

Having a different opinion from you don't make someone a nitwit, dumb ass, or moron. 

Sure it does.

It also makes discussions with the name caller pointless because they aren't listening anyway they're just interested in bullying and controlling.  When people stop posting to you its not because you won the argument its because you are trying to bully tough talk your way into being right whether you are or not.  No one, and I don't care who they are, is right 100% of the time so quit trying to belittle those who disagree with you and grow up.

Are you such a nitwit that you don't see the irony in your indirectly calling me a bully, controlling and immature?   

[me]

Sure it does.

Are you such a nitwit that you don't see the irony in your indirectly calling me a bully, controlling and immature?   

You included immature I didn't say anything about that but if the shoe fits.    Besides thats regarding personality traits not intelligence and there is a difference ya know.

[Bo D]

Instead of posting from other blogs and forums, perhaps you should go to the source and see what was really said ..


Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson
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.

http://climatesci.org/2008/02/27/trmm-tropical-rainfall-measuring-mission-data-set-potential-in-climate-controversy-by-joanne-simpson-private-citizen/

What? You don't care to address this?

[Exterminator]

You included immature I didn't say anything about that but if the shoe fits.    Besides thats regarding personality traits not intelligence and there is a difference ya know.

* that's

And when you tell someone to grow up, you're implying they're immature so neener neener boo boo!   

[me]

* that's

And when you tell someone to grow up, you're implying they're immature so neener neener boo boo!   

Still a personality trait though.....