• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Moderated Global Warming Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
Trakar said:
Disruptions in the food chain due to loss of habitat and the disappearance or changes of those species present;
Click to expand...

I like the way Paul Nicklen described the loss of the plant and marine life that grows under the ice in his presentation at TED showing a few images from under the ice.

This is at 8:10 in the presentation "Tales of an Icebound Wonderland" which is currently one of my favorite programs. The story about the seal trying to feed him penguins is just great.

http://www.ted.com/talks/paul_nicklen_tales_of_ice_bound_wonderlands.html
 
NASA scientists disprove the meme of "consensus"

I am grateful that the scientific community is finally beginning to actually look at the claims of Hansen et al. Here is a letter from 50 current and former NASA scientists detailing their concern for the lack of empirical data to support Hansens wild claims.


March 28, 2012
The Honorable Charles Bolden, Jr.
NASA Administrator
NASA Headquarters
Washington, D.C. 20546-0001
Dear Charlie,

We, the undersigned, respectfully request that NASA and the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) refrain from including unproven remarks in public releases and websites. We believe the claims by NASA and GISS, that man-made carbon dioxide is having a catastrophic impact on global climate change are not substantiated, especially when considering thousands of years of empirical data. With hundreds of well-known climate scientists and tens of thousands of other scientists publicly declaring their disbelief in the catastrophic forecasts, coming particularly from the GISS leadership, it is clear that the science is NOT settled.
Click to expand...
Edited by Gaspode: 
Snipped to comply with rule 4 and enclosed extract in quote tags.


http://sppiblog.org/news/former-nas...ts-admonish-agency-on-climate-change-position
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Haig said:
Nope, he's doing better than ever :) (No I'm not back , just passing, too busy these days)

Increasingly popular - WeatherAction USA "10/10 Brilliant consistent long range skilled extremes forecasts"
Click to expand...

Once again you quote Piers Corbyn as support for his excellence. You're an ad-man's dream.
 
Westwall said:
Yes, it is well established that farm practices can increase the devestation wrought by weather disasters. Witness the Dust Bowl of the 30's, however, man had nothing to do with the weather event. Climatology is the only science I have ever witnessed that seems to believe correlation equals causation.

It doesn't.
Click to expand...

To be fair it isn't the scientists claiming causation, it's the alarmists. GW has been blamed for hundreds of events in the past 20 years, but never proven using science.
 
NASA scientists supprt the fact of scientific consensus

Westwall said:
I am grateful that the scientific community is finally beginning to actually look at the claims of Hansen et al.
Click to expand...
That is wrong - the claims of Hansen et al. have been looked at ever since they were made in 1988:
Hansen's 1988 prediction was wrong
Although Hansen's projected global temperature increase has been higher than the actual global warming, this is because his climate model used a high climate sensitivity parameter. Had he used the currently accepted value of approximately 3°C warming for a doubling of atmospheric CO2, Hansen would have correctly projected the ensuing global warming.
Click to expand...


Westwall said:
Here is a letter from 50 49 current and former NASA scientists detailing their concern for the lack of empirical data to support Hansens wild claims.
http://sppiblog.org/news/former-nas...ts-admonish-agency-on-climate-change-position
Click to expand...
Emphasis added.
A bit of math for your Westwall:
NASA employs ~18,000 people. 49 assorted NASA personnel is 0.3% :eye-poppi!

The astounding thing is that this list includs only one meteorologist! The letter itself reveals ignorance of the consensus and science
  • It ignores the thousands of well-known climate scientists and tens of thousands of other scientists publicly declaring their belief in the forecasts.
  • The evidence for CO2 being the major cause of climate change is strong.
  • The "possible overwhelming impact of natural climate drivers" sounds like the debunked stuff that comes from Roy Spenser. Or maybe the even worse the Sun is doing it myth.
50 assorted NASA personnel is a rather small number compared to the actual scientific consensus from practicing climate scientists ().
Is there a scientific consensus on global warming?
That humans are causing global warming is the position of the Academies of Science from 19 countries plus many scientific organizations that study climate science. More specifically, around 95% of active climate researchers actively publishing climate papers endorse the consensus position.
Click to expand...
 
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/11/nasa-global-warming-letter-astronauts_n_1418017.html

Of course, NASA isn't the only government agency to finger carbon dioxide as a key culprit in global warming.

The EPA website says that "Increasing levels of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide in the atmosphere since pre-industrial times are well-documented and understood." It goes on to say that "The atmospheric buildup of CO2 and other greenhouse gases is largely the result of human activities such as the burning of fossil fuels."

What does NASA say?

“NASA sponsors research into many areas of cutting-edge scientific inquiry, including the relationship between carbon dioxide and climate," the agency's chief scientist, Dr. Waleed Abdalati, told The Huffington Post in an email. "As an agency, NASA does not draw conclusions and issue 'claims' about research findings. We support open scientific inquiry and discussion...If the authors of this letter disagree with specific scientific conclusions made public by NASA scientists, we encourage them to join the debate in the scientific literature or public forums rather than restrict any discourse.”


Look at all the deniers sites that have jumped on this. Someone "wrote a letter" and that will be enough for deniers to believe the science has been turned on it's head rather than discussing the actual science.

"If the authors of this letter disagree with specific scientific conclusions made public by NASA scientists, we encourage them to join the debate in the scientific literature or public forums"

It's time to track down the scientists and find out what they believe.

It will be amazing to find out if the letter is authentic and if the people's names have been added agree with the statement and it's not just like the many other bogus petitions and statements that have been cooked up before. It's amazing that scientists can't easily get their names removed from these bogus creations.
 
Furcifer said:
To be fair it isn't the scientists claiming causation, it's the alarmists. GW has been blamed for hundreds of events in the past 20 years, but never proven using science.
Click to expand...
Actually you are wrong - it is climate scientists claiming causation of events from GW, e.g.
What is the link between hurricanes and global warming?
Extreme Events Increase With Global Warming
Ocean acidification: global warming's evil twin
GW has been blamed for hundreds of events in the past 20 years and actually proven using science!
AR4 in 2007 listed the changes caused by GW known about then: Climate Change 2007: Working Group II: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability

It is mainly reporters who tend to go on about single events happening because of GW. They are obviously wrong to blame a single event on GW. And you are right - it is these reporters who are the alarmists because it is their business to sell news.
 
Westwall said:
I am grateful that the scientific community is finally beginning to actually look at the claims of Hansen et al. Here is a letter from 50 current and former NASA scientists detailing their concern for the lack of empirical data to support Hansens wild claims.
Edited by Gaspode: 
Snipped to comply with rule 4 and enclosed extract in quote tags.

http://sppiblog.org/news/former-nas...ts-admonish-agency-on-climate-change-position
Click to expand...

If what you cite is worth the electrons it took to carry it to my screen, how come it is published on a blog instead of in a peer-reviewed science journal?

A quick scan of the retirees who have signed this letter, indicates that not a single individual there is professionally or academically qualified to properly assess, yet alone pass judgement on the climate work of GISS or Dr. Hansen. Most of these people retired from NASA more than 20 years ago. We have a couple of medical doctors, a handful of computer programmers/analysts and couple dozen assorted engineers, and a mathematician. What's so bad, is that this is out of the tens of thousands of engineers and actual field-qualified scientists who have worked for and in association with NASA over the last 50 years.
 
Furcifer said:
To be fair it isn't the scientists claiming causation, it's the alarmists. GW has been blamed for hundreds of events in the past 20 years, but never proven using science.
Click to expand...

It is apparently easy to make assertions, have you any compelling supportive evidences to offer?
 
Reality Check said:
...50 assorted NASA personnel is a rather small number compared to the actual scientific consensus from practicing climate scientists...
Click to expand...

more importantly the closest they come to anyone even remotely qualified to comment on the subject is a noted denialist (Tom Wysmuller - meteorologist) whose only connection to NASA is that he interned at NASA for five years back in the late '60s and early '70s.
 
Westwall said:
Here is a letter from 50 current and former NASA scientists detailing their concern for the lack of empirical data to support Hansens wild claims.


Edited by Gaspode: 
Snipped to comply with rule 4 and enclosed extract in quote tags.


http://sppiblog.org/news/former-nas...ts-admonish-agency-on-climate-change-position
Click to expand...

Can you tell us which of these are climate scientists and link to some of their published papers. A cursory review on my part showed a lot of astronauts and people of various other titles which didn't seem to indicate any background in climate science.
 
Reality Check said:
Actually you are wrong - it is climate scientists claiming causation of events from GW, e.g.
What is the link between hurricanes and global warming?
Extreme Events Increase With Global Warming
Ocean acidification: global warming's evil twin
GW has been blamed for hundreds of events in the past 20 years and actually proven using science!
AR4 in 2007 listed the changes caused by GW known about then: Climate Change 2007: Working Group II: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability

It is mainly reporters who tend to go on about single events happening because of GW. They are obviously wrong to blame a single event on GW. And you are right - it is these reporters who are the alarmists because it is their business to sell news.
Click to expand...

These are all clear examples of correlation being used to claim causation, thank you.

You're also right, the media tends make the most egregious claims when it comes to weather and global warming.
 
Furcifer said:
These are all clear examples of correlation being used to claim causation, thank you.
Click to expand...
These are clear examples of physics and correlation being used to claim causation.
Ocean acidification: global warming's evil twin is simple enough (more CO2 means more CO2 absorbed into the ocean thus acidification :eye-poppi!).

What is the link between hurricanes and global warming? is an example of the correlation between increasing hurricane intensity and GW. This is expected from the science: more energy available = more intense events are possible.

Extreme Events Increase With Global Warming is an example of the physics of climate science that is then confirmed with the correlation between extreme events and GW.
 
I feel it is necessary to post the full response from NASA again, and which is linked in Reality Check's post.

Response from NASA Chief Scientist Waleed Abdalati to Letter on NASA Climate Studies Source: NASA HQ

"NASA sponsors research into many areas of cutting-edge scientific inquiry, including the relationship between carbon dioxide and climate. As an agency, NASA does not draw conclusions and issue 'claims' about research findings. We support open scientific inquiry and discussion.

"Our Earth science programs provide many unique space-based observations and research capabilities to the scientific community to inform investigations into climate change, and many NASA scientists are actively involved in these investigations, bringing their expertise to bear on the interpretation of this information. We encourage our scientists to subject these results and interpretations to scrutiny by the scientific community through the peer-review process. After these studies have met the appropriate standards of scientific peer-review, we strongly encourage scientists to communicate these results to the public.

"If the authors of this letter disagree with specific scientific conclusions made public by NASA scientists, we encourage them to join the debate in the scientific literature or public forums rather than restrict any discourse."


Those that are unfamiliar with NASA's science and reports regarding global warming and climate change by going to NASA's homepage at

http://www.nasa.gov/home/index.html

and then type "global warming", or "climate change", in the white search window in the upper right hand side of the page, and then click on the blue button beside the window that has "Search" on it.

What specific scientific conclusions do the 49 authors of the letter not agree with? I'll bet you won't hear any of this on Fox News!
 
Furcifer said:
The compiled list of inanities attributed to Global Warming have graced this thread no less than twice.
Click to expand...

Speaking around my question is not a response to my question. Please respond to my question.

Can you provide compelling evidence for your assertions that:

a) the planet's field-recognized leading climate researchers are not scientists, but merely "alarmists,"

b) and that none of the evidences and occurences of impact identified by these researchers are related to anthropogenic fossil-fuel emissions and their alteration of radiative balance of our planet?
 
Furcifer said:
The compiled list of inanities attributed to Global Warming have graced this thread no less than twice.
Click to expand...

This is, in itself, yet another unsupported assertion. Please link to these "inanities,"* and provide your compelling argument and references in support of this qualification (that they are "inanities").

*(inane) Lacking sense or meaning (often implying, "to the point of boredom or annoyance")
en.wiktionary.org/wiki/inane
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom