Dear Mike: You are exactly right. The truth takes work. The best, Bill On Jun 28, 2009, at 9:17 AM, Mike MacCracken wrote:
> Ken, et al.---It takes a bit of patience, but we simply have to > address these types of claims. I have offered comments on a couple > of these. See: > > http://www.climatesciencewatch.org/index.php/csw/details/maccracken_critique_of_robinson_etal/ > > http://www.climatesciencewatch.org/index.php/csw/details/maccracken_on_lindzen/ > > MacCracken, M. C., E. Barron, D. Easterling, B. Felzer, and T. Karl, > 2003: Climate change scenarios for the U. S. National Assessment, > Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 84, 1711-1723. > > MacCracken, M. C., 2003: Uncertainties: How little do we really > understand, pp. 63-70 in Bridging the Gap Between Science and > Society: The Relationship Between Policy and Research in National > Laboratories, Universities, Government, and Industry, November 1-2, > 2003, Rice University, Houston TX, 287 pp. > > And realclimate.org does a lot of clearing up of things. Plus then > there is the Santer et al. article on Douglass et al. and lost of > others as well. It takes time (and time away from real research) and > is frustrating at times, but simply has to be done. I am very > surprised that there was now a response trying to address the > concerns (especially with Tom Wigley and Barrie Pittock being in > Australia and being real slayers of myths, etc.). > > But old criticisms keep popping up (and I mean really old ones, like > that there can be no CO2 effect because the bands are saturated—a > myth explained by Arrenihius and clearly demonstrated in Manabe’s > modeling of over 40 years ago—but up comes the myth again, and > again, and again. > > We just have to keep explaining in clearer and clearer ways, not > reverting to the authority or numbers doing the IPCC reports types > of arguments. Explain, teach, explain. > > Mike > > > > On 6/28/09 4:35 AM, "Ken Caldeira" <[email protected] > > wrote: > >> That something like this would be published in The Wall Street >> Journal indicates the deterioration of a world that believes that >> it is what you believe that counts, not empirical confrontation >> with experience. >> >> Empiricism may have risen its little head for a few centuries, but >> is now drowning in a sea of medievalism. >> >> Reality has become just another special interest group. >> >> >> >> On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 1:01 AM, Dan Whaley <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124597505076157449.html#printMode >>> >>> The Climate Change Climate Change >>> The number of skeptics is swelling everywhere. >>> >>> By KIMBERLEY A. STRASSEL >>> >>> Steve Fielding recently asked the Obama administration to reassure >>> him >>> on the science of man-made global warming. When the administration >>> proved unhelpful, Mr. Fielding decided to vote against climate- >>> change >>> legislation. >>> >>> If you haven't heard of this politician, it's because he's a >>> member of >>> the Australian Senate. As the U.S. House of Representatives prepares >>> to pass a climate-change bill, the Australian Parliament is >>> preparing >>> to kill its own country's carbon-emissions scheme. Why? A growing >>> number of Australian politicians, scientists and citizens once again >>> doubt the science of human-caused global warming. >>> [POTOMAC WATCH] Associated Press >>> >>> Steve Fielding >>> >>> Among the many reasons President Barack Obama and the Democratic >>> majority are so intent on quickly jamming a cap-and-trade system >>> through Congress is because the global warming tide is again >>> shifting. >>> It turns out Al Gore and the United Nations (with an assist from the >>> media), did a little too vociferous a job smearing anyone who >>> disagreed with them as "deniers." The backlash has brought the >>> scientific debate roaring back to life in Australia, Europe, Japan >>> and >>> even, if less reported, the U.S. >>> >>> In April, the Polish Academy of Sciences published a document >>> challenging man-made global warming. In the Czech Republic, where >>> President Vaclav Klaus remains a leading skeptic, today only 11% of >>> the population believes humans play a role. In France, President >>> Nicolas Sarkozy wants to tap Claude Allegre to lead the country's >>> new >>> ministry of industry and innovation. Twenty years ago Mr. Allegre >>> was >>> among the first to trill about man-made global warming, but the >>> geochemist has since recanted. New Zealand last year elected a new >>> government, which immediately suspended the country's weeks-old cap- >>> and-trade program. >>> >>> The number of skeptics, far from shrinking, is swelling. Oklahoma >>> Sen. >>> Jim Inhofe now counts more than 700 scientists who disagree with the >>> U.N. -- 13 times the number who authored the U.N.'s 2007 climate >>> summary for policymakers. Joanne Simpson, the world's first woman to >>> receive a Ph.D. in meteorology, expressed relief upon her retirement >>> last year that she was finally free to speak "frankly" of her >>> nonbelief. Dr. Kiminori Itoh, a Japanese environmental physical >>> chemist who contributed to a U.N. climate report, dubs man-made >>> warming "the worst scientific scandal in history." Norway's Ivar >>> Giaever, Nobel Prize winner for physics, decries it as the "new >>> religion." A group of 54 noted physicists, led by Princeton's Will >>> Happer, is demanding the American Physical Society revise its >>> position >>> that the science is settled. (Both Nature and Science magazines have >>> refused to run the physicists' open letter.) >>> >>> The collapse of the "consensus" has been driven by reality. The >>> inconvenient truth is that the earth's temperatures have flat-lined >>> since 2001, despite growing concentrations of C02. Peer-reviewed >>> research has debunked doomsday scenarios about the polar ice caps, >>> hurricanes, malaria, extinctions, rising oceans. A global financial >>> crisis has politicians taking a harder look at the science that >>> would >>> require them to hamstring their economies to rein in carbon. >>> >>> Credit for Australia's own era of renewed enlightenment goes to Dr. >>> Ian Plimer, a well-known Australian geologist. Earlier this year he >>> published "Heaven and Earth," a damning critique of the "evidence" >>> underpinning man-made global warming. The book is already in its >>> fifth >>> printing. So compelling is it that Paul Sheehan, a noted Australian >>> columnist -- and ardent global warming believer -- in April humbly >>> pronounced it "an evidence-based attack on conformity and orthodoxy, >>> including my own, and a reminder to respect informed dissent and >>> beware of ideology subverting evidence." Australian polls have >>> shown a >>> sharp uptick in public skepticism; the press is back to questioning >>> scientific dogma; blogs are having a field day. >>> >>> The rise in skepticism also came as Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, >>> elected >>> like Mr. Obama on promises to combat global warming, was attempting >>> his own emissions-reduction scheme. His administration was forced to >>> delay the implementation of the program until at least 2011, just to >>> get the legislation through Australia's House. The Senate was not so >>> easily swayed. >>> >>> Mr. Fielding, a crucial vote on the bill, was so alarmed by the >>> renewed science debate that he made a fact-finding trip to the U.S., >>> attending the Heartland Institute's annual conference for climate >>> skeptics. He also visited with Joseph Aldy, Mr. Obama's special >>> assistant on energy and the environment, where he challenged the >>> Obama >>> team to address his doubts. They apparently didn't. >>> >>> This week Mr. Fielding issued a statement: He would not be voting >>> for >>> the bill. He would not risk job losses on "unconvincing green >>> science." The bill is set to founder as the Australian parliament >>> breaks for the winter. >>> >>> Republicans in the U.S. have, in recent years, turned ever more to >>> the >>> cost arguments against climate legislation. That's made sense in >>> light >>> of the economic crisis. If Speaker Nancy Pelosi fails to push >>> through >>> her bill, it will be because rural and Blue Dog Democrats fret about >>> the economic ramifications. Yet if the rest of the world is any >>> indication, now might be the time for U.S. politicians to re- >>> engage on >>> the science. One thing for sure: They won't be alone. >>> >>> Write to [email protected] >>> >>> >>> ----- >>> >>> Much of the detail quoted in the article comes from a 250 page >>> report >>> posted by the senate minority... >>> >>> http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Files.View&FileStore_id=83947f5d-d84a-4a84-ad5d-6e2d71db52d9 >>> >> >> >> >> > > > Bill Fulkerson, Senior Fellow Institute for a Secure and Sustainable Environment University of Tennessee 311 Conference Center Bldg. Knoxville, TN 37996-4138 [email protected] 865-974-9221, -1838 FAX Home 865-988-8084; 865-680-0937 CELL 2781 Wheat Road, Lenoir City, TN 37771 --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
