Interesting read re. Global warming

[blackrock13]

Except there's more more scientists turning against global warming now, rockie.

It's not just one, there's a whole laundry list of people now

Really, where do you get that tidbit from, about scientist turning against GW, having initially believing in it? The last scientist I heard of changing was Muller, but he now agrees with it. Give us two example of two climatologist that now disagree with it. I never said there was 'one', but that you just keep bringing up one example, then another and then another, mny using using the same old arguments most of which don't say much or stand up to scrutiny. Now we have a whole list? How many in a whole list? The last time a whole list was offered up it was filled with a lot of non climatologist.

 

[blackrock13]

I hear you.

One of the best examples of that type of scientist would be James Hansen, NASA's lead guy on global warming, who wrote in the New York Review of Books that Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth was "scientifically accurate."

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2006/jul/13/the-threat-to-the-planet/?page=3

Yikes! :Eek:

You'll have to expand on that. How exactly has he changed his view over the years and is now anti global warming or does he also beleive in dinosaurs sharing the earth with human?

Did you actually read the three page review?

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

Now we have a whole list? How many in a whole list?

I will post that list later today when I have more time. Its a partial list of both climatologists and other scientists from global warming related fields.

And the list apparently is growing very year

 

[Moviefan-2]

You'll have to expand on that. How exactly has he changed his view over the years and now anti global warming?

Did you actually read the three page review?

Sure.

Even the New York Times acknowledges that Gore's movie and book were alarmist and had numerous inaccuracies.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/13/science/13gore.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Much of Gore's information came from guys like James Hansen and Michael Mann. While you could argue that Gore may have taken liberties with the information, Hansen praised the book after he had seen the final product. He stated it was "scientifically accurate."

Clearly, NASA's Hansen -- who is one of the leaders of the global-warming movement -- believes in the 'scientific accuracy' of inaccurate, alarmist statements.

 

[blackrock13]

I will post that list later today when I have more time. Its a partial list of both climatologists and other scientists from global warming related fields.

And the list apparently is growing very year

Apparently? Something tells me they alway disbelieved in GW and are now just more vocal, not that they changed their position. Are they climatologist or just scientists?

How about a list of 100 scientist who don't believe in evolution. Does that mean their right?

http://www.reviewevolution.com/press/pressRelease_100Scientists.php

"I am skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged."

Henry F.Schaefer: Director, Center for Computational Quantum Chemistry: U. of Georgia • Fred Sigworth: Prof. of Cellular & Molecular Physiology- Grad. School: Yale U. • Philip S. Skell: Emeritus Prof. Of Chemistry: NAS member • Frank Tipler: Prof. of Mathematical Physics: Tulane U. • Robert Kaita: Plasma Physics Lab: Princeton U. • Michael Behe: Prof. of Biological Science: Lehigh U. • Walter Hearn: PhD Biochemistry-U of Illinois • Tony Mega: Assoc. Prof. of Chemistry: Whitworth College • Dean Kenyon: Prof. Emeritus of Biology: San Francisco State U. • Marko Horb: Researcher, Dept. of Biology & Biochemistry: U. of Bath, UK • Daniel Kubler: Asst. Prof. of Biology: Franciscan U. of Steubenville • David Keller: Assoc. Prof. of Chemistry: U. of New Mexico • James Keesling: Prof. of Mathematics: U. of Florida • Roland F. Hirsch: PhD Analytical Chemistry-U. of Michigan • Robert Newman: PhD Astrophysics-Cornell U. • Carl Koval: Prof., Chemistry & Biochemistry: U. of Colorado, Boulder • Tony Jelsma: Prof. of Biology: Dordt College • William A.Dembski: PhD Mathematics-U. of Chicago: • George Lebo: Assoc. Prof. of Astronomy: U. of Florida • Timothy G. Standish: PhD Environmental Biology-George Mason U. • James Keener: Prof. of Mathematics & Adjunct of Bioengineering: U. of Utah • Robert J. Marks: Prof. of Signal & Image Processing: U. of Washington • Carl Poppe: Senior Fellow: Lawrence Livermore Laboratories • Siegfried Scherer: Prof. of Microbial Ecology: Technische Universitaet Muenchen • Gregory Shearer: Internal Medicine, Research: U. of California, Davis • Joseph Atkinson: PhD Organic Chemistry-M.I.T.: American Chemical Society, member • Lawrence H. Johnston: Emeritus Prof. of Physics: U. of Idaho • Scott Minnich: Prof., Dept of Microbiology, Molecular Biology & Biochem: U. of Idaho • David A. DeWitt: PhD Neuroscience-Case Western U. • Theodor Liss: PhD Chemistry-M.I.T. • Braxton Alfred: Emeritus Prof. of Anthropology: U. of British Columbia • Walter Bradley: Prof. Emeritus of Mechanical Engineering: Texas A & M • Paul D. Brown: Asst. Prof. of Environmental Studies: Trinity Western U. (Canada) • Marvin Fritzler: Prof. of Biochemistry & Molecular Biology: U. of Calgary, Medical School • Theodore Saito: Project Manager: Lawrence Livermore Laboratories • Muzaffar Iqbal: PhD Chemistry-U. of Saskatchewan: Center for Theology the Natural Sciences • William S. Pelletier: Emeritus Distinguished Prof. of Chemistry: U. of Georgia, Athens • Keith Delaplane: Prof. of Entomology: U. of Georgia • Ken Smith: Prof. of Mathematics: Central Michigan U. • Clarence Fouche: Prof. of Biology: Virginia Intermont College • Thomas Milner: Asst. Prof. of Biomedical Engineering: U. of Texas, Austin • Brian J.Miller: PhD Physics-Duke U. • Paul Nesselroade: Assoc. Prof. of Psychology: Simpson College • Donald F.Calbreath: Prof. of Chemistry: Whitworth College • William P. Purcell: PhD Physical Chemistry-Princeton U. • Wesley Allen: Prof. of Computational Quantum Chemistry: U. of Georgia • Jeanne Drisko: Asst. Prof., Kansas Medical Center: U. of Kansas, School of Medicine • Chris Grace: Assoc. Prof. of Psychology: Biola U. • Wolfgang Smith: Prof. Emeritus-Mathematics: Oregon State U. • Rosalind Picard: Assoc. Prof. Computer Science: M.I.T. • Garrick Little: Senior Scientist, Li-Cor: Li-Cor • John L. Omdahl: Prof. of Biochemistry & Molecular Biology: U. of New Mexico • Martin Poenie: Assoc. Prof. of Molecular Cell & Developmental Bio: U. of Texas, Austin • Russell W.Carlson: Prof. of Biochemistry & Molecular Biology: U. of Georgia • Hugh Nutley: Prof. Emeritus of Physics & Engineering: Seattle Pacific U. • David Berlinski: PhD Philosophy-Princeton: Mathematician, Author • Neil Broom: Assoc. Prof., Chemical & Materials Engineeering: U. of Auckland • John Bloom: Assoc. Prof., Physics: Biola U. • James Graham: Professional Geologist, Sr. Program Manager: National Environmental Consulting Firm • John Baumgardner: Technical Staff, Theoretical Division: Los Alamos National Laboratory • Fred Skiff: Prof. of Physics: U. of Iowa • Paul Kuld: Assoc. Prof., Biological Science: Biola U. • Yongsoon Park: Senior Research Scientist: St. Luke's Hospital, Kansas City • Moorad Alexanian: Prof. of Physics: U. of North Carolina, Wilmington • Donald Ewert: Director of Research Administration: Wistar Institute • Joseph W. Francis: Assoc. Prof. of Biology: Cedarville U. • Thomas Saleska: Prof. of Biology: Concordia U. • Ralph W. Seelke: Prof. & Chair of Dept. of Biology & Earth Sciences: U. of Wisconsin, Superior • James G. Harman: Assoc. Chair, Dept. of Chemistry & Biochemistry: Texas Tech U. • Lennart Moller: Prof. of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institute: U. of Stockholm • Raymond G. Bohlin: PhD Molecular & Cell Biology-U. of Texas: • Fazale R. Rana: PhD Chemistry-Ohio U. • Michael Atchison: Prof. of Biochemistry: U. of Pennsylvania, Vet School • William S. Harris: Prof. of Basic Medical Sciences: U. of Missouri, Kansas City • Rebecca W. Keller: Research Prof., Dept. of Chemistry: U. of New Mexico • Terry Morrison: PhD Chemistry-Syracuse U. • Robert F. DeHaan: PhD Human Development-U. of Chicago • Matti Lesola: Prof., Laboratory of Bioprocess Engineering: Helsinki U. of Technology • Bruce Evans: Assoc. Prof. of Biology: Huntington College • Jim Gibson: PhD Biology-Loma Linda U. • David Ness: PhD Anthropology-Temple U. • Bijan Nemati: Senior Engineer: Jet Propulsion Lab (NASA) • Edward T. Peltzer: Senior Research Specialist: Monterey Bay Research Institute • Stan E. Lennard: Clinical Assoc. Prof. of Surgery: U. of Washington • Rafe Payne: Prof. & Chair, Biola Dept. of Biological Sciences: Biola U. • Phillip Savage: Prof. of Chemical Engineering: U. of Michigan • Pattle Pun: Prof. of Biology: Wheaton College • Jed Macosko: Postdoctoral Researcher-Molecular Biology: U. of California, Berkeley • Daniel Dix: Assoc. Prof. of Mathematics: U. of South Carolina • Ed Karlow: Chair, Dept. of Physics: LaSierra U. • James Harbrecht: Clinical Assoc. Prof.: U. of Kansas Medical Center • Robert W. Smith: Prof. of Chemistry: U. of Nebraska, Omaha • Robert DiSilvestro: PhD Biochemistry-Texas A & M U., Professor, Human Nutrition, Ohio State University • David Prentice: Prof., Dept. of Life Sciences: Indiana State U. • Walt Stangl: Assoc. Prof. of Mathematics: Biola U. • Jonathan Wells: PhD Molecular & Cell Biology-U. of California, Berkeley: • James Tour: Chao Prof. of Chemistry: Rice U. • Todd Watson: Asst. Prof. of Urban & Community Forestry: Texas A & M U. • Robert Waltzer: Assoc. Prof. of Biology: Belhaven College • Vincente Villa: Prof. of Biology: Southwestern U. • Richard Sternberg: Pstdoctoral Fellow, Invertebrate Biology: Smithsonian Institute • James Tumlin: Assoc. Prof. of Medicine: Emory U. Charles Thaxton: PhD Physical Chemistry-Iowa State U.

What's your stance on evolution.


I found this report on the list of 1000 scientists, and examined the ones quoted. i was hard pressed to find one 'climatologist'.

http://www.climatedepot.com/a/9035/...lobal-Warming-Claims--Challenge-UN-IPCC--Gore

Also included is a 300+ page report on the hearings on climate change debate, enjoy. I wonder how many climatologist/scientist there are who support GW.

 

[blackrock13]

Sure.

Even the New York Times acknowledges that Gore's movie and book were alarmist and had numerous inaccuracies.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/13/science/13gore.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Much of Gore's information came from guys like James Hansen and Michael Mann. While you could argue that Gore may have taken liberties with the information, Hansen praised the book after he had seen the final product. He stated it was "scientifically accurate."

Clearly, NASA's Hansen -- who is one of the leaders of the global-warming movement -- believes in the 'scientific accuracy' of inaccurate, alarmist statements.

i tried to find this quote of Hansen's about the book, but only fond one from our most trusted Glenn Beck. i'll continue to look as i think it's incomplete, not necessarily on your part.

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

Here you go, a small but growing list of esteemed scientists who are beginning to question global warming. And I'm starting to agree with them, I dont think earth is warming as rapidly and severely as the Al Gore crowd claims:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...tream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming

Scientists questioning the accuracy of IPCC climate projections

Judith Curry, American climatologist, chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology.

Freeman Dyson, professor emeritus of the School of Natural Sciences, Institute for Advanced Study; Fellow of the Royal Society.

Richard Lindzen, Alfred P. Sloan professor of atmospheric science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and member of the National Academy of Sciences.

Nils-Axel Mörner, retired head of the Paleogeophysics and Geodynamics department at Stockholm University, former chairman of the INQUA Commission on Sea Level Changes and Coastal Evolution (1999–2003), and author of books supporting the validity of dowsing.

Garth Paltridge, retired chief research scientist, CSIRO Division of Atmospheric Research and retired director of the Institute of the Antarctic Cooperative Research Centre.

Philip Stott, professor emeritus of biogeography at the University of London.

Hendrik Tennekes, retired director of research, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute



Scientists arguing that global warming is primarily caused by natural processes

Khabibullo Abdusamatov, mathematician and astronomer at Pulkovo Observatory of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

Sallie Baliunas, astronomer, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics.

Ian Clark, hydrogeologist, professor, Department of Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa.

Chris de Freitas, associate professor, School of Geography, Geology and Environmental Science, University of Auckland.

David Douglass, solid-state physicist, professor, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester.

Don Easterbrook, emeritus professor of geology, Western Washington University.

William M. Gray, professor emeritus and head of the Tropical Meteorology Project, Department of Atmospheric Science, Colorado State University.

William Happer, physicist specializing in optics and spectroscopy, Princeton University.

William Kininmonth, meteorologist, former Australian delegate to World Meteorological Organization Commission for Climatology.

David Legates, associate professor of geography and director of the Center for Climatic Research, University of Delaware.

Tad Murty, oceanographer; adjunct professor, Departments of Civil Engineering and Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa.

Tim Patterson, paleoclimatologist and professor of geology at Carleton University in Canada.

Ian Plimer, professor emeritus of Mining Geology, the University of Adelaide.

Nicola Scafetta, research scientist in the physics department at Duke University.

Tom Segalstad, head of the Geology Museum at the University of Oslo.

Fred Singer, professor emeritus of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia.

Willie Soon, astrophysicist, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics.

Roy Spencer, principal research scientist, University of Alabama in Huntsville.

Henrik Svensmark, Danish National Space Center.

Jan Veizer, environmental geochemist, professor emeritus from University of Ottawa.



Scientists arguing that the cause of global warming is unknown

Syun-Ichi Akasofu, retired professor of geophysics and founding director of the International Arctic Research Center of the University of Alaska Fairbanks.

Claude Allègre, politician; geochemist, Institute of Geophysics (Paris).

Robert C. Balling, Jr., a professor of geography at Arizona State University.

John Christy, professor of atmospheric science and director of the Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, contributor to several IPCC.

Petr Chylek, space and remote sensing sciences researcher, Los Alamos National Laboratory.

David Deming, geology professor at the University of Oklahoma.

Antonino Zichichi, emeritus professor of nuclear physics at the University of Bologna and president of the World Federation of Scientists.



Scientists arguing that global warming will have few negative consequences

Craig D. Idso, faculty researcher, Office of Climatology, Arizona State University and founder of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change.

Sherwood Idso, former research physicist, USDA Water Conservation Laboratory, and adjunct professor, Arizona State University.

Patrick Michaels, senior fellow at the Cato Institute and retired research professor of environmental science at the University of Virginia

 

[blackrock13]

Wow 30, my list was longer. As I said, few climatologists. One on the list I know personally from his work up north, as mentioned before, and as much as I respect him personally, he is a real maverick.

As asked before how many believe in/agree with GW/ Anyone thinks it's a shorter list?

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

The big one for me is John Christy, he at one time worked for the IPCC:

Christy was a lead author of the 2001 report by the IPCC and the U.S. CCSP report Temperature Trends in the Lower Atmosphere – Understanding and Reconciling Differences. Christy helped draft and signed the 2003 American Geophysical Union statement on climate change

If someone as knowledgable on global warming as he is turns against the establishment, it gives the movement more credibility.

And again, he's not saying earth is warming somewhat, he's questioning how much that warming is caused by the Sun, CO2's or other factors.

He's also against the fear-mongering the Al Gore crowd does

 

[groggy]

LOL @ groggy

You know how I know you're full of shit, groggy. Its because you got defensive when I asked you a simple question.

So insults towards me aside, this is your answer in a nutshell:



Right groggy, but a pot of water gets warmer and warmer before it reaches boiling point. So far earth is not warming, at least not statistically significant. The Met office and Phil Jones have admitted this

Got defensive?
I answered your question three times. The first two times you couldn't understand it and the third time you your comparison shows you still don't understand it.
You said

Right groggy, but a pot of water gets warmer and warmer before it reaches boiling point.

Which misses the central point, how long does it take to register the change in temperature from when you turn on the stove?
This was the question we were debating.

You have once again shown that you are not smart enough to understand what you are arguing.
You were totally unable to put any cogent argument into your own words, and instead did just what I predicted - you went and copied and pasted more dubious links and tried to change the subject entirely.


I think that this debate should be put on pause until you show that you can show that you understand even one of these so called arguments you are trying to raise.

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

Got defensive?
I answered your question three times. The first two times you couldn't understand it and the third time you your comparison shows you still don't understand it.
You said

Which misses the central point, how long does it take to register the change in temperature from when you turn on the stove?
This was the question we were debating.

You have once again shown that you are not smart enough to understand what you are arguing.
You were totally unable to put any cogent argument into your own words, and instead did just what I predicted - you went and copied and pasted more dubious links and tried to change the subject entirely.


I think that this debate should be put on pause until you show that you can show that you understand even one of these so called arguments you are trying to raise

Groggy, you're full of shit.

You claim to understand the science behind global warming and I dont believe you.

At least I'm honest enough to admit its complicated science and I dont fully understand it. And the fact that so many esteemed scientists are now turning against global warming proves no scientist completely understands the complicities behind global warming.

But keep pretending you're smarter then me and know what you're talking about, its good for a laugh or two :biggrin1:

Oh, did I mention I think you're full of shit??!!

 

[groggy]

Groggy, you're full of shit.

You claim to understand the science behind global warming and I dont believe you.

At least I'm honest enough to admit its complicated science and I dont fully understand it. And the fact that so many esteemed scientists are now turning against global warming proves no scientist completely understands the complicities behind global warming.

But keep pretending you're smarter then me and know what you're talking about, its good for a laugh or two :biggrin1:

Oh, did I mention I think you're full of shit??!!

What I am waiting for is just the slightest glimmer that you understand the arguments that you routinely copy and paste.
Dunning-kruger exemplified.

So what I promise to do, is to continue to argue the one point until you get it, every time you try to change the subject rather then face the fact that you don't know what you are talking about just shows how little you do understand.


Do you still believe:

can prove this whole global warming thing is hysteria.

Due to Russia, India and China joining the industrial revolution late in 1993, we have tripled CO2 output the last 16 years or so. So if we have tripled CO2 we should also see a rise in temperatures, and yet we see nothing.

This is where we started the argument, with your confused copying of a chart of China's CO2 output that you called a global chart.

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

Groggy who posts on an internet forum for hookers thinks he knows more then these people:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...tream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming

Thats the funny part :biggrin1:

And once again, I readily admit I dont understand all the complexities of global warming, but neither does groggy. He just thinks he does.

Very amusing

 

[groggy]

And once again, I readily admit I dont understand all the complexities of global warming, but neither does groggy.

That's the point.
You copy and paste arguments you don't understand and when people try to explain why they are wrong you just change the topic.
You still haven't admitted you were wrong with your statement:

Due to Russia, India and China joining the industrial revolution late in 1993, we have tripled CO2 output the last 16 years or so. So if we have tripled CO2 we should also see a rise in temperatures, and yet we see nothing.

Until you understand what you are talking about and why you are wrong, why should we even bother with any of the junk you post?

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

You still haven`t admitted you were wrong with your statement:

Until you understand what you are talking about and why you are wrong, why should we even bother with any of the junk you post?

Yes I did. I stated I used the wrong graph, and posted the right one:

https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...obal-warming&p=4229245&viewfull=1#post4229245

Easy there tiger. I made a mistake, I included the wrong graph.

The world didnt triple their CO2 output, but China did

Are you even reading this thread??!

 

[blackrock13]

The big one for me is John Christy, he at one time worked for the IPCC:



If someone as knowledgable on global warming as he is turns against the establishment, it gives the movement more credibility.

And again, he's not saying earth is warming somewhat, he's questioning how much that warming is caused by the Sun, CO2's or other factors.

He's also against the fear-mongering the Al Gore crowd does

So he's cherry picking the parameters to argue against, nice. Somewhat? The graph shown early certainly challenges his somewhat.

 

[groggy]

Yes I did. I stated I used the wrong graph, and posted the right one:

https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...obal-warming&p=4229245&viewfull=1#post4229245
Are you even reading this thread??!

And you realize that your new graph showed you were wrong with this claim:

we have tripled CO2 output the last 16 years or so

So the basic tenant of your argument was shown, by you, to be false yet you seem to continue on as if it were correct. That just shows you don`t understand what you are talking about.

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

And you realize that your new graph showed you were wrong with this claim:


So the basic tenant of your argument was shown, by you, to be false yet you seem to continue on as if it were correct. That just shows you don't understand what you are talking about

I was wrong it didnt triple. I then corrected myself and showed the graph where we went from 5 million metric tons of CO2 to 9 million metric tons. This was over a period of about 16 years.

So thats almost double, not triple the amount of CO2 released into the atmosphere. Thats still a HUGE a mount of CO2 over a very short period of time into our atmosphere.

My point still stands. Why was there no temperature increase over that same period??

 

[blackrock13]

I was wrong it didnt triple. I then corrected myself and showed the graph where we went from 5 million metric tons of CO2 to 9 million metric tons. This was over a period of about 16 years.

So thats almost double, not triple the amount of CO2 released into the atmosphere. Thats still a HUGE a mount of CO2 over a very short period of time into our atmosphere.

My point still stands. Why was there no temperature increase over that same period??

It's already been mentioned about the unconventional 16 year timeline, it was done to make the stats support the argument. had they done a 30, 20 year or 10 year timeline(too short in my mind) the result would have been very different.

it's clear you didn't really understand to the explanation in my earlier #172 post on why CO2 lags and not look through this http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=13 or you wouldn't continue with these links.

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

It's already been mentioned about the unconventional 16 year timeline, it was done to make the stats support the argument. had they done a 30, 20 year or 10 year timeline(too short in my mind) the result would have been very different.

it's clear you didn't really understand to the explanation in my earlier #172 post on why CO2 lags and not look through this http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=13 or you wouldn't continue with these links

So just to make sure rockie, are you saying global warming is real and poses an immediate serious threat to planet earth??