David:
I typically enjoy your posts but I find the “Global Warming Hoax” material utterly ridiculous. It is being driven by strong nonscientific motives. Please examine your motives for embracing it. Then answer this question, “If there is even a minimal chance that WE (humanity) are contributing to a warming of the planet, what is the HARM of minimizing that effect” (and supporting steps to so minimize)? Your answer will tell you everything you need to understand about your motives and bias. PS, the HARM (instituting carbon emission standards etc) you imagine is just that (imagined) and it has to do with economics not science. Ransom From: David Roberson [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2015 2:09 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Vo]:Story on climate crisis would need some comments Jed, I can not force you to look into the data yourself. That is your decision. You sound much like the established Physics community in assuming that LENR is not real because most physicists believe that. Have you actually taken the time to look at how that 97% figure was determined? If you did, you would have seen that it was proven false and that the university for which the scientist worked could not be forced to release the procedure used to reach that figure. A hacker finally obtained the data! It is amazing that you attack what I am merely reporting without doing any research on your own. Google the phrase "Global Warming Hoax" and read plenty of articles by reputable scientists from NASA, etc. It shouldn't take too long for you to realize that the science is quite flawed. Of course, if you believe that the science is settled, then you do not need to research further. Can I assume that you are really going to review a few of those articles? If not, then please refrain from calling that 97% figure accurate until you prove it is. Also, no one is suggesting that the earth is not warming up. It is mainly a natural cycle with the contribution of man hidden within the noise. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Jed Rothwell <[email protected]> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> Sent: Wed, Dec 2, 2015 2:21 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Story on climate crisis would need some comments David Roberson <[email protected]> wrote: The reference that 97% of scientists believe that man is responsible for 90% of the problem has been proven wildly wrong (<1% actually agree) but keeps being stated over and over. That's nonsense. You sound like the editors at Scientific American who keep assuring me that no paper on cold fusion has ever been published. Most climatologists are sure that CO2 from burning fuel is causing global warming. Maybe they are right, and maybe they are wrong, but there is no doubt that is what the majority of them think. Not <1%; most of them. This is a matter of fact. Not an opinion, and not a scientific dispute. This is what climatologists say in opinion polls and in their own journals and web sites. You can dispute scientific findings all you like, but you cannot dispute what climatologists tell poll takers, or what they say publicly. They DO NOT say what you claim they say. Along the same lines, the people at Scientific American may claim that no good papers have been published. They may claim that no papers have been published in Nature, or in Science. But when they say that no papers have been published they are denying a matter of fact that anyone can verify. That's stupid. - Jed
