Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

BTW Climate gate.

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: BTW Climate gate.

    Originally posted by boytyperanma View Post
    China has invested three times what the US has into green technology. They aren't stupid. They know they need far more energy in their future. They can look at us and our dependence on oil and say we don't want to become that.

    China being a communist country has the advantage of their 40 year energy policy will actually be a 40 year policy. In the US our policies only go as far as the next election.

    They are making their investments now while we argue about what ours should be.
    I agree with your post except for the green tech part. They are investing in alternate energy, currently about at a rate twice what we are putting in, and growing fast. Most of our investment is private money. But CHina's effort is not about green, unless that happens by coincidence. It's about domestic energy. Part of their plan is development of their domestic fossil fuels.

    China's single minded goal is growth. They are even willing to fund the US Government to ensure that our markets will remain open to them. THey used to think they needed to compete with weapons. Then they saw how tht worked out for the Soviets and decided that WalMart was much more lethal. So far we have no defense.

    America is somewhat unique in the world, really, with regard to our preoccupation with short term thinking. Maybe it's because we're the new kids on the block, having barely been around for 230 years, and really only 100 as any sort of world power...65 as THE world power Europe definitely takes a longer view and the far east measures 'short term' in generations.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: BTW Climate gate.

      Originally posted by Frankiarmz View Post
      If global warming is real, (which I happen to believe), then we need to reign in china and india. I think it is stupid to think we can have much of a positive impact if other countries are not onboard. It's like having a hundred kids with matches in a field of dry grass and saying they can play with matches, but I'll save the field by not doing the same!
      Better hope they keep on chuggin' smoke Frankie.

      http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/sun/dimming.html

      I see it as man's innate desire for survival along with many peoples' need for control. Almost a want to be "God" like. But as usual, just when something is thought to be understood, it's not.

      China's just getting started. Wait 'til they get this thing running good.

      http://www.internationalrivers.org/node/356

      J.C.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: BTW Climate gate.

        LOL. They found no evidence? I've personally seen the evidence and it's astounding. The fact that a bunch of people in parliament who have stocks in eco energy companies found no evidence is just laughable. Who in their right mind would believe what they have to say?

        The evidence is all over the internet and it comes directly from the scientists themselves and their emails.

        For extra credit research what policy making politicians in the US and UK have big money tied up in "eco" companies ranging from carbon credit traders(al gore will be a billionaire soon) to companies involved in solar power and wind generation.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: BTW Climate gate.

          Originally posted by ToUtahNow View Post
          Global Warming may or may not be real but not too long ago scientist were warning of Global Cooling.
          Mark
          False. That was the media. No credible scientist made any such claim. I just read an article about this.

          I'm all for saving the environment but it has to be responsible.
          I'm not sure what you mean by responsible.
          Last edited by SpiffPeters; 04-03-2010, 10:09 PM.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: BTW Climate gate.

            Originally posted by SpiffPeters View Post
            False. That was the media. No credible scientist made any such claim. I just read an article about this.
            That's funny because I happen to have an old issue of popular mechanics with quotes from scientists talking about and warning about global cooling. It's pretty neat, I bought it for 25 cents at a garage sale a few years ago :-)

            Obviously no credible scientist made such a claim. I have to ask what a credible scientist is and how do you find one? If you look at who is paying a scientist and what they're paying them for you'll find that it's very difficult to find one that is not possibly biased in their findings and research methodology.

            In my opinion a credible scientist will use the scientific method for their findings. What's happening is so called scientists are not following the scientific method and are using their gut feelings, subterfuge, and browning their noses in order to change data to suit their beliefs, misdirect their results or hide "flaws" in their data, and to profit.

            When you hire someone do you hire them to do a task or do you hire them to tell you you're wrong?

            I'm not saying global warming doesn't exist in some form or that all scientists are bad.

            I'm just saying... watch out. You may be being misled or be being robbed

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: BTW Climate gate.

              Originally posted by SpiffPeters View Post
              False. That was the media. No credible scientist made any such claim. I just read an article about this.
              That's not true, while there was not a consensus of scientist there were enough that several papers were written showing a cooling trend from 1945 through 1970 after a long trend of warming. The media picked it up and ran with it much as they are doing today with Global Warming. Looking back it appears the cooling trend stopped and we went back to warming. None the less we were warned of catastrophic consequences due to cooling.

              Mark
              "Somewhere a Village is Missing Twelve Idiots!" - Casey Anthony

              I never lost a cent on the jobs I didn't get!

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: BTW Climate gate.

                http://www.ridgidforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=31805

                J.C.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: BTW Climate gate.

                  Originally posted by SpiffPeters View Post
                  False. That was the media. No credible scientist made any such claim. I just read an article about this.
                  Science also told us that margarine was better for us than butter, that it was healthy to get some sunshine, and that no drag car could do the quarter in less than 9 seconds.

                  I always chuckle when I read someone that says "No credible scientists claim....." or "All credible scientists support..."

                  What credible in this context means is, "The ones that support the point I am trying to make".

                  In science just like in everything else, opinions are interesting and possible even useful. But science is considered good if it stands up to scrutiny, data and results can be reproduced independently, etc. Lots of good scientists have screwy opinions, and lots of folks with great opinions and insight haven't got a clue about scientific method.

                  At least, credible sources tell me so.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: BTW Climate gate.

                    Originally posted by ToUtahNow View Post
                    My problem with Global Warming is the way it was introduced with gloom and doom as an immediate consequence.

                    Mark
                    I have a similar tendency to look skepticallyat overly dramatic press reporting. But there is another side to the coin. The media tends to only report on stories that are sensationalized. And, both the public and government both are notorious for ignoring things that aren't sensational.

                    If you were a scientist that was genuinely concerned about a possible ecological disaster, you might take the same tactic just so your information wouldn't be buried back on page 23.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: BTW Climate gate.

                      There are a number of scientists that the deniers employ whose credibility is questionable. Seemingly, some of these scientists are able to provide their considered analysis based on who is paying the tab. This is not a new phenomenon. There are/have been failed scientists that found being a paid shill pays well.

                      Consider this to be the context by which I mean 'credible' scientist.

                      Perhaps not the best example, but Dr. Laura Schlessinger gives personal advice on her radio show. Sure she's a doctor. But she is no more qualified to provide personal advice than you or I. She received her Ph.D. in physiology. But she uses her professional title to create the illusion that she is qualified to offer professional advice.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: BTW Climate gate.

                        Originally posted by SpiffPeters View Post
                        There are a number of scientists that the deniers employ whose credibility is questionable. Seemingly, some of these scientists are able to provide their considered analysis based on who is paying the tab. This is not a new phenomenon. There are/have been failed scientists that found being a paid shill pays well.

                        Consider this to be the context by which I mean 'credible' scientist.

                        Perhaps not the best example, but Dr. Laura Schlessinger gives personal advice on her radio show. Sure she's a doctor. But she is no more qualified to provide personal advice than you or I. She received her Ph.D. in physiology. But she uses her professional title to create the illusion that she is qualified to offer professional advice.
                        LOL, you're right that was a horrible example. The truth is there are some very respected scientists who disagree with the current global warming theory. Most agree it is happening but not to the degree or for the reasons currently begin being pushed.

                        In my work I work with a lot of scientists (none climate related) and if they had made some of the mistakes which have been made by the current global warming scientist, they would be out of work. That doesn't mean it is not happening it only means it leads to a lot of questions.

                        Mark
                        "Somewhere a Village is Missing Twelve Idiots!" - Casey Anthony

                        I never lost a cent on the jobs I didn't get!

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: BTW Climate gate.

                          Originally posted by ToUtahNow View Post
                          LOL, you're right that was a horrible example. The truth is there are some very respected scientists who disagree with the current global warming theory. Most agree it is happening but not to the degree or for the reasons currently begin being pushed.

                          In my work I work with a lot of scientists (none climate related) and if they had made some of the mistakes which have been made by the current global warming scientist, they would be out of work. That doesn't mean it is not happening it only means it leads to a lot of questions.

                          Mark
                          I think the deniers do offer some interesting points. However these opinion are usually given a very direct conduit for public consumption while the rest of the global warming community releases reports, usually of a very narrow focus, here an there.

                          And when you look at who is footing the tab on the deniers camp, one should be skeptical of their motives. I'm not going to say that some scientists on the global warming side don't have an self serving interest either (securing grants, recognition....), but the community is by definition self policing.

                          Deniers are actually performing within parameters of the scientific community. They challenge theories and question the findings. However they generally take pot shots at the global warming theories and don't engage in a public debate with the global warming community.

                          I would like to see a public debate between the two camps. Each side gets to pick their panel. And then have a series of public debates.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: BTW Climate gate.

                            Originally posted by SpiffPeters View Post
                            I think the deniers do offer some interesting points. However these opinion are usually given a very direct conduit for public consumption while the rest of the global warming community releases reports, usually of a very narrow focus, here an there.

                            And when you look at who is footing the tab on the deniers camp, one should be skeptical of their motives. I'm not going to say that some scientists on the global warming side don't have an self serving interest either (securing grants, recognition....), but the community is by definition self policing.

                            Deniers are actually performing within parameters of the scientific community. They challenge theories and question the findings. However they generally take pot shots at the global warming theories and don't engage in a public debate with the global warming community.

                            I would like to see a public debate between the two camps. Each side gets to pick their panel. And then have a series of public debates.
                            The question is the science used by the contrarians. They were found to have "stonewalled" their critics and were hiding data from them. They miscalculated the disappearing ice caps by 193,000 square miles. They used the less accurate Department of Defense satellites to measure ice caps rather than the more accurate NASA satellites. Now add the Mount Kilimanjaro hoax made famous by Gore and there are a lot of questions. The fact that Al Gore had been the face of Global Warming for so long also adds questions to the claims.

                            As for corporations supporting the deniers, I am sure you would not expect them to support the contrarians as it would be against their interest. The contrarians are for the most part supported by carbon credit managers, liberal governments and liberal colleges.

                            Mark
                            "Somewhere a Village is Missing Twelve Idiots!" - Casey Anthony

                            I never lost a cent on the jobs I didn't get!

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X