Re: Op-ed writers should just shut up about scientific matters

James Schrumpf wrote:
Quiet, Jeffrey Davis <jd_home@xxxxxxxxxx> -- I'm transmitting rage.

James Schrumpf wrote:
Quiet, Jeffrey Davis <jd_home@xxxxxxxxxx> -- I'm transmitting rage.

leinbacker wrote:
On Mar 2, 6:09 pm, James Schrumpf
<jaspammenotschru...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Quiet, "Mark Stahl" <s...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> -- I'm transmitting
rage.





"James Schrumpf" <jaspammenotschru...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote
in messagenews:Xns98E6F3D65176Fjaschrumpfadelphiane@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-
dyn/content/article/2007/03/01/AR2007030101293.html
http://tinyurl.com/yv3qbx
The Climate-Change Precipice
By David Ignatius
Friday, March 2, 2007; Page A13
The scientific debate about whether there is a global warming
problem is pretty much over. A leading international group of
climate scientists reported last month that the evidence for
global warming is "unequivocal" and that the likelihood it is
caused by humans is more than 90 percent. Skeptical researchers
will continue to question the data, but this isn't a "call both
sides for comment" issue anymore. For mainstream science, it's
settled. * * *
This is so wrong from a scientific viewpoint it's unfunny.
In your considered scientific opinion, what's wrong with it?
That "The scientific debate about whether there is a global
warming problem is pretty much over," and that "For mainstream
science, it's settled."

It's still going strong in the journals, even if the skeptics are
tarred with the "holocaust-denier" brush.
which is sad since science can't advance without skeptics and
debate.
Ridiculous. Science advances by testing hypotheses. NOT the same
thing as skepticism.

Note please: skepticism that is just rote and mechanical is no more skepticism than it's a bottle of rum. Doubt to be meaningful has to actually point to something that is unlikely.


How about the fact that Mars and Earth are experiencing "global
warming"? The southern icecap has shrunk continually over the past
three years:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070228-mars-warming.ht
ml

"In 2005 data from NASA's Mars Global Surveyor and Odyssey missions revealed that the carbon dioxide "ice caps" near Mars's south pole
had been diminishing for three summers in a row.

Habibullo Abdussamatov, head of the St. Petersburg's Pulkovo
Astronomical Observatory in Russia, says the Mars data is evidence
that the current global warming on Earth is being caused by changes
in the sun.

"Man-made greenhouse warming has made a small contribution to the
warming seen on Earth in recent years, but it cannot compete with the
increase in solar irradiance," Abdussamatov said."

* * *

Of course, global warming advocates feel otherwise (from the same article), AND manage to misquote him:

"His views are completely at odds with the mainstream scientific opinion," said Colin Wilson, a planetary physicist at England's
Oxford University.

"And they contradict the extensive evidence presented in the most
recent IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] report."

Perhaps the biggest stumbling block in Abdussamatov's theory is his dismissal of the greenhouse effect, in which atmospheric gases such
as carbon dioxide help keep heat trapped near the planet's surface.

He claims that carbon dioxide has only a small influence on Earth's climate and virtually no influence on Mars. "

* * *

Except that he doesn't. He said that "Man-made greenhouse warming
has made a small contribution to the warming seen on Earth in recent
years"; nothing there about "dismissing" the greenhouse effect that
keeps Earth warm in the long run.

It's this _insistance_ that we _know_ the cause of current warming
trends -- which may have ended, actually -- which flies in the face
of science's usual pace of make hypothesis -- test hypothesis --
derive model -- generate theory (to put it simply).

What hypotheses have been made and verified? What trends have been predicted and measured? None that I've seen mentoned in the MSM. I've seen lots of measurements of ice cores and C14 in trees or
whatever, but the short time scale we've been working on (the last 30
years?) preclude any real long-term measurements of climate cycles.

Merely making a hypothesis is not science; making a _falsifiable_ hypothesis is. So tell me: what evidence would falsify the
"mainstream scientific opinion"?
A fair question. The discovery that CO2 doesn't trap heat. That would
do it.

What would ever convince you?


No, it's known that CO2 is a GHG, that's not being argued. The hypothesis seems to be that human-originated carbon output is causing global temperature increases. If you'd like to propose another, I'll listen -- but don't quote the actual givens and pretend those are what's being discussed.

OK. I'll just take yours. Once it's disproved, I won't believe it anymore.

What would convince me are studies showing direct correlations between atmospheric CO2 and global temperatures over several climate fluctuations in the geologic record. Can you point to any?

In other words, you've got no intention in your lifetime of changing your mind.

Eh, bien.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Op-ed writers should just shut up about scientific matters
    ... The scientific debate about whether there is a global warming ... climate scientists reported last month that the evidence for ... recent IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] report." ...
    (rec.sport.football.college)
  • Re: Doom is at the Door
    ... The world's top scientists warned last week that ... > climate change is taking place today, ... > global warming, comes into force after a seven-year delay. ... as the seas rise dramatically. ...
    (sci.energy)
  • Re: Arctic ice cover
    ... Dissent Over Global Warming Claims! ... Call Climate Fears 'Pseudo ... dissent from man-made global warming fears in an Open Letter to German ... measurable effect on global warming through CO2 emissions. ...
    (soc.culture.scottish)
  • Re: OT: Al Gore has completely lost his mind!
    ... contribution to global warming. ... Hint for you: No scientists were. ... complicated than the story sold to us by many climate scientists or ...
    (rec.autos.sport.f1)
  • Re: NBC: An Inconvenient Truth
    ... particularly the assertion that it was scientists who were having their ... Global warming has achieved the status of a major threat. ... all of which point to a very warm climate in medieval times. ...
    (rec.music.artists.springsteen)
Loading