Scientists agree ... Consensus on Global Warming

POSTED BY: Ghoulman
UPDATED: Friday, February 10, 2006 11:42
VIEWED: 22755
PAGE 6 of 21

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT PAGE

RUE

Friday, January 21, 2005 3:31 AM

Here is a brief sampling from a general science website about some environmental problems identified within the last week:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/01/050111123103.htm
Component Of Plastic Stimulates Growth Of Certain Prostate Cancer Cells
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/01/050110113825.htm
Gorillas In The Midst Of Extinction
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/01/050111091640.htm
Drought's Growing Reach: NCAR Study Points To Global Warming As Key Factor
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/01/050106110114.htm
Flame Retardant Exposure Linked To House Dust

GEEZER

Friday, January 21, 2005 3:47 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
An article about other threats to global environment in addition to global warming:

Professor Jared Diamond, of the University of California, Los Angeles, said society was on the brink of irreversible decline unless 12 major environmental problems were tackled.

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/environment/story.jsp?story=603040

Not trying to disparage Prof. Diamond's work, which I'm looking forward to reading, but the Independent's article does appear to focus quite a bit on his worst-case scenarios, while not being too specific about the problems or their solutions. A good teaser for the book, but not very informative.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

RUE

Friday, January 21, 2005 3:59 AM

I read his earler title "Guns, Germs and Steel", and recommend it. I haven't read his first book book "The Third Chimpanzee".

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Friday, January 21, 2005 5:13 AM

I am generally very skeptical of apocalyptic environmentalist stories because so many of them are based on sensationalism, pseudo-science or just pure fabrication. And what troubles me even more, particularly as a scientist, is that much of this nonsense comes from the scientific community. Generally science is very reliable in most fields, but when politics gets mixed in, as it has with environmental science, you run a real chance of ending up with bullshit. The real scary part about this is that most people tend to look to the scientific community for answers (e.g. the media), and if the scientific community is propping up poor conclusion for political reasons, there's a real chance that some bad ideas could get disseminated as good ideas.

GEEZER

Friday, January 21, 2005 11:08 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
I read his earler title "Guns, Germs and Steel", and recommend it. I haven't read his first book book "The Third Chimpanzee".

I read "Guns, Germs..." at SignyM's suggestion. While I didn't agree with it 100%, it was interesting and thought provoking.

And relating to Finn's comment above, the latest Analog has a blurb from Jeff Kooistra about a book titled "Kicking the Sacred Cow: Questioning the Unquestionable and Thinking the Impermissible", by James P Hogan. It goes after many of the "Everybody Knows" subjects from Darwinism to global warming. Should be an interesting read as well.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

SIGMANUNKI

Saturday, January 22, 2005 8:51 PM

Hey Rue! Good to meet on the forums again

Here's another good read.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=109

Basically put, it's the fault of the media for jumping on papers the have not gone through peer review and not reporting when they are de-bunked. Along with the very few "scientists" that project a political agenda by publishing in a non-scientific journal and publicizing there results before peer review kicks in.

Finn makes the mistake that because of a few bad apples and what the media does with it is politicised, the scientific community as a whole is guilty of it as well.

This is exactly wrong. This exactly wrong statement also implies a world wide conspericy to put forth this agenda. Unfortunatly (for Finn) if this was the case, scientists from other fields that do some work in climatology from time to time would notice this and sound the bells of alarm. This is exactly not happening.

Basically, the science is good. It's what the media does with it that is typically not.

----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Saturday, January 22, 2005 10:55 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
This is exactly wrong. This exactly wrong statement also implies a world wide conspericy to put forth this agenda. Unfortunatly (for Finn) if this was the case, scientists from other fields that do some work in climatology from time to time would notice this and sound the bells of alarm. This is exactly not happening..

“Exactly wrong?” Vizzini.

No it doesn’t imply a world wide conspiracy, just a particular state of mind and an adherence to an ideology. People, who believe an idea is fundamentally true, will sometimes find evidence to support such ideas, whether evidence exists or not. And (fortunately for me) there are in fact scientists from other fields who “sound the bells of alarm” when they notice such fallacies in the evidence from time to time. But largely, scientists tend to form little niches which can impede the movement of new ideas.

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
And relating to Finn's comment above, the latest Analog has a blurb from Jeff Kooistra about a book titled "Kicking the Sacred Cow: Questioning the Unquestionable and Thinking the Impermissible", by James P Hogan. It goes after many of the "Everybody Knows" subjects from Darwinism to global warming. Should be an interesting read as well.

This sounds like a very interesting book. I checked at the local B&N, but no one seems to carry it. It must be new. Or banned.

NEUTRINOLAD

Sunday, January 23, 2005 3:37 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Ghoulman:
...yes, science is real!

This is my new all-time most favorite quote of all.
All of the coworkers and ex-coworkers (engineers and scientists all) who heard it laughed uproariously!

Sorry I didn't credit you, Ghoulman

CANTTAKESKY

Sunday, January 23, 2005 7:13 AM

My husband is a research scientist working for the US Department of Energy. Neither he, nor any other scientist he knows there at the Dept, have found any scientific evidence that CO2 is causing global warming. He has studied the data and attended computer modeling training on global warming issues. He tells me it is all unspeakable junk science.

The ironic thing is that his bosses, yes the ones hired by the Bush administration, have instructed him and other scientists to refrain from openly criticizing the whole global warming speculation. The whole attitude is, "We don't care about whether or not you think there is no scientific support for global warming. You will pay lip service to because it has political clout." Notice that the federal government's position has always supported the whole idea that global warming is happening. The current admin simply refuses to DO anything about it, but they don't deny the premise itself. It is the individual scientists who are the disbelievers, not the Bush admin.

Before my husband's position is dismissed because he is a "govt employee under the Bush administration," please note had Kerry won, he'd be a govt employee under the Kerry admin. The same people work for the dept no matter who is elected. And by the way, he didn't vote for either Kerry or Bush.

Having said that, should you or anything take his word for it? Absolutely not.

People who really want to claim the high ground of science should 1) learn the rigors of scientific methodology, and 2) look at the data themselves rather than rely of pronouncements of scientists. Scientists are just human and can make pronouncements for all sorts of reasons that are political, financial, religious, emotional and NOT scientific.

For what it's worth,

Can't Take My Gorram Sky

SIGMANUNKI

Monday, January 24, 2005 1:19 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by canttakesky:
My husband is a research scientist working for the US Department of Energy. Neither he, nor any other scientist he knows there at the Dept, have found any scientific evidence that CO2 is causing global warming. He has studied the data and attended computer modeling training on global warming issues. He tells me it is all unspeakable junk science.

Please ask him then, what parts of the IPCC ( http://www.ipcc.ch/) report and the ACIA ( http://amap.no/acia/) report does he disagree with?

----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT PAGE