Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Deniers
On Apr 29, 2008, at 7:04 PM, Richard M wrote: Notice the phrase the world's most prominent scientists rather than the world's most prominent climate or meteorology scientists. This seems to be an appeal to priesthood pedigree rather than scientific rationality? Your conclusion, not mine. But if that's your guiding light, what ad hominem will you deploy to denigrate climate sceptics such as Richard Lindzen, atmospheric physicist Oil and coal interests $2,500 a day for his consulting services; [and] his 1991 trip to testify before a Senate committee was paid for by Western Fuels and a speech he wrote, entitled 'Global Warming: the Origin and Nature of Alleged Scientific Consensus,' was underwritten by OPEC. Thanks for proving my point! Yeah I'd trust someone sponsored by OPEC and coal companies to present unbiased material on human impact. and the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology? Or John Christy, professor of atmospheric science and director of the Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama in Huntsville? (continues ad nauseam...) I like some of what Christy says: It is scientifically inconceivable that after changing forests into cities, turning millions of acres into irrigated farmland, putting massive quantities of soot and dust into the air, and putting extra greenhouse gases into the air, that the natural course of climate has not changed in some way. More recently, in a publication in the series Washington Roundtable on Science and Public Policy he said:[5] I showed some evidence that humans are causing warming in the surface measurements that we have but it is not the greenhouse relation. Christy has also said that while he supports the AGU declaration, and is convinced that human activities are a cause of the global warming that has been measured, he is still a strong critic of scientists who make catastrophic predictions of huge increases in global temperatures and tremendous rises in sea levels.[4]
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Deniers - Now: Scientists Demand Removal from Denier List
A fascinating look at this trend. Thanks for sharing this Boo. What saddens me is that there is a certain group of people who will hear of this Heartland Institute and actually use it to confirm their conviction that Global Climate Change is a hoax. Given that I've watched time after time as George Bush, a man who's caused such incredible suffering, try and then try again to get permission for oil drilling in ANWR, I can't help but see the danger in such unfounded and politicized actions as he calls (once again this week) for oil drilling. I strongly recommend anyone who has any questions on whether or not drilling should take place in ANWR watch the movie Being Caribou where the filmmakers follow the 1500 km route of the endangered Porcupine Caribou herd to their traditional calving grounds in ANWR. On Apr 30, 2008, at 8:08 AM, boo_lives wrote: This story about the sham Heartland Institute is currently breaking: http://www.desmogblog.com/500-scientists-with-documented-doubts- about-the-heartland-institute Dozens of scientists are demanding that their names be removed from a widely distributed Heartland Institute article entitled 500 Scientists with Documented Doubts of Man-Made Global Warming Scares. The article, by Hudson Institute director and Heartland Senior Fellow Dennis T. Avery (inset), purports to list scientists whose work contradicts the overwhelming scientific agreement that human-induced climate change is endangering the world as we know it. DeSmogBlog manager Kevin Grandia emailed 122 of the scientists yesterday afternoon, calling their attention to the list. So far - in less than 24 hours - three dozen of those scientists had responded in outrage, denying that their research supports Avery's conclusions and demanding that their names be removed. This is a brief taste of some of the responses that have been copied to the DeSmogBlog so I am horrified to find my name on such a list. I have spent the last 20 years arguing the opposite. Dr. David Sugden. Professor of Geography, University of Edinburgh have NO doubts ..the recent changes in global climate ARE man-induced. I insist that you immediately remove my name from this list since I did not give you permission to put it there. Dr. Gregory Cutter, Professor, Department of Ocean, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Old Dominion University I don't believe any of my work can be used to support any of the statements listed in the article. Dr. Robert Whittaker, Professor of Biogeography, University of Oxford Please remove my name. What you have done is totally unethical!! Dr. Svante Bjorck, Geo Biosphere Science Centre, Lund University I'm outraged that they've included me as an author of this report. I do not share the views expressed in the summary. Dr. John Clague, Shrum Research Professor, Department of Earth Sciences, Simon Fraser University The DeSmogBlog will follow up with additional postings of scientist reaction as it comes in.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Deniers
On Apr 30, 2008, at 8:24 AM, shempmcgurk wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Apr 29, 2008, at 7:04 PM, Richard M wrote: Notice the phrase the world's most prominent scientists rather than the world's most prominent climate or meteorology scientists. This seems to be an appeal to priesthood pedigree rather than scientific rationality? Your conclusion, not mine. But if that's your guiding light, what ad hominem will you deploy to denigrate climate sceptics such as Richard Lindzen, atmospheric physicist Oil and coal interests $2,500 a day for his consulting services; [and] his 1991 trip to testify before a Senate committee was paid for by Western Fuels and a speech he wrote, entitled 'Global Warming: the Origin and Nature of Alleged Scientific Consensus,' was underwritten by OPEC. So, how do you feel about Al Gore allegedly making $100 million off of his Green companies? I don't know the details (so it's hard to comment) but I am always happy when green based alternatives become investment worthy. If it's true, I guess it's what they call putting you're money where your mouth is.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Deniers
On Apr 30, 2008, at 9:14 AM, Richard M wrote: But if that's your guiding light, what ad hominem will you deploy to denigrate climate sceptics such as Richard Lindzen, atmospheric physicist and the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology? They say you should be careful what you wish for. Silly me - I brought the following on myself: Oil and coal interests $2,500 a day for his consulting services; [and] his 1991 trip to testify before a Senate committee was paid for by Western Fuels etc etc etc I find it ironic Vaj that just a short while ago you posted to mock the scientific pretensions of TMO research, and now you follow a form of argument that is just so beyond the pale it beggars belief. You can't have it both ways: Either you believe in rigour or you believe in sophistry (Or is that too rigorous?). Bias is bias dude. Tell me then - would you have the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at MIT removed from his post? I'm not in any sort of position to make that decision. Are you?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Deniers
On Apr 29, 2008, at 5:44 PM, shempmcgurk wrote: My Deniers series, which now runs to some 40 columns, describes many of the world's most prominent scientists. Notice the phrase the world's most prominent scientists rather than the world's most prominent climate or meteorology scientists. How many studies were part of the massive campaign by oil companies to seed dissent and doubt with often very questionable science? What about the former oil company lobbyist Bush used for science review (who would edit out anything remotely hinting at climate change being real)? Where do you get this crap Shemp, the Rush Limbaugh Show? Your climate change advice sounds like it comes from a right-wing drug addict (to put it nicely)!
