Global Warming News
- Thread starter KB9UDE
- Start date
- Views: 107663
- Status
dcyrilc
Super Member
Loren49
Veteran Member
On the lighter side - A John Stewart analyses of Glen Beck at the recent convention - a few minutes into the program. Please don't watch if you know my view of most things makes you upset.
Full Episode | February 22, 2010 - Ricky Gervais | The Daily Show
Enjoy,
Loren
Full Episode | February 22, 2010 - Ricky Gervais | The Daily Show
Enjoy,
Loren
Loren49
Veteran Member
This site has a fox news discussion on the global warming debate from the O'Reilly Factor:
Bill Nye, Joe Bastardi Debate Global Warming On The O'Reilly Factor (VIDEO)
Loren
Bill Nye, Joe Bastardi Debate Global Warming On The O'Reilly Factor (VIDEO)
Loren
keegs
Veteran Member
Pilot
Veteran Member
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2004
- Messages
- 1,224
- Location
- Oregon
- Tractor
- JD 770, Yanmar 180D, JD 420 (not running), had a Kubota B6200
Ken,
I, too have had courses outside my area of expertise, but I would not pretend to have serious expertise in soils, geology, climate (yes, I had one in that, too), wildlife management, hydrology, etc. The purpose of those courses was to give me enough of an understanding that I could converse intelligently with experts in those areas, not to make me an expert.
So aside from my assertion that geoscientists are not climate scientists, the natural question, is why do I feel qualified to criticize AGW? Because I do know something about basic science and although I wouldn't say I could design a proper study on some aspect of climate science, I can recognize blatant b.s. when I see it, and there has been a lot of that in the alarmist's assertions. If you have followed all these 100 pages now of posts, you would have seen my mention of Home. Just now getting a little tiny bit of recognition in the press, this non-peer reviewed report (and there are non-peer reviewed citations in the IPCC report) points out a huge problem with the databases that hasn't been addressed by the IPCC and until it is, no assertions of warming mean a thing, because the warming over the last 100 years or so is an artifact of the weather station siting problems, e.g., you pave a parking lot next to a weather station in 1970 and your station will show warming after 1970.
And someone else made a comment in the last several posts about this winter's weather not being evidence against warming. That's true, weather is not climate--unless we get a heat wave in the summer, then you'll see it all over the news that the world is warming. Neither is evidence.
I, too have had courses outside my area of expertise, but I would not pretend to have serious expertise in soils, geology, climate (yes, I had one in that, too), wildlife management, hydrology, etc. The purpose of those courses was to give me enough of an understanding that I could converse intelligently with experts in those areas, not to make me an expert.
So aside from my assertion that geoscientists are not climate scientists, the natural question, is why do I feel qualified to criticize AGW? Because I do know something about basic science and although I wouldn't say I could design a proper study on some aspect of climate science, I can recognize blatant b.s. when I see it, and there has been a lot of that in the alarmist's assertions. If you have followed all these 100 pages now of posts, you would have seen my mention of Home. Just now getting a little tiny bit of recognition in the press, this non-peer reviewed report (and there are non-peer reviewed citations in the IPCC report) points out a huge problem with the databases that hasn't been addressed by the IPCC and until it is, no assertions of warming mean a thing, because the warming over the last 100 years or so is an artifact of the weather station siting problems, e.g., you pave a parking lot next to a weather station in 1970 and your station will show warming after 1970.
And someone else made a comment in the last several posts about this winter's weather not being evidence against warming. That's true, weather is not climate--unless we get a heat wave in the summer, then you'll see it all over the news that the world is warming. Neither is evidence.
SpringHollow
Elite Member
I find it hard to trust non-peer reviewed claims on either side. The chances of the science being good are significantly better if some skeptical scientists have read it. Traditionally, one focuses on finding out what is wrong with the work, looking for all the loopholes, mistakes, possible alternative explanations etc. Even then, sometimes crap gets published, especially in the lesser journals, but the incidence rate is greatly reduced.
The NPR link was quite interesting but maybe i only believe that because it fits my view of things (which is exactly what they were saying for those who did not listen to it). I have long held that very few of us are very good at keeping an open mind, that we significantly color what we see based upon our preconceived beliefs. Scientists struggle to try to correct for their own bias but they are not always successful. And i will say that i see more lapses in that regard now that getting funding has become so difficult. As an aside, i do not think people realize how much of our prosperity in the 60's up until about 1980 was directly or indirectly a result of academic research. The impact of the research done and the researchers produced who went on to create new things is quite significant. Industry funds very little basic research that becomes tomorrow's inventions. That pipeline of new ideas is being significantly throttled down.
Ken
The NPR link was quite interesting but maybe i only believe that because it fits my view of things (which is exactly what they were saying for those who did not listen to it). I have long held that very few of us are very good at keeping an open mind, that we significantly color what we see based upon our preconceived beliefs. Scientists struggle to try to correct for their own bias but they are not always successful. And i will say that i see more lapses in that regard now that getting funding has become so difficult. As an aside, i do not think people realize how much of our prosperity in the 60's up until about 1980 was directly or indirectly a result of academic research. The impact of the research done and the researchers produced who went on to create new things is quite significant. Industry funds very little basic research that becomes tomorrow's inventions. That pipeline of new ideas is being significantly throttled down.
Ken
Loren49
Veteran Member
Here is some other info on surfacestations.org
Cherry picking confirmed : Deltoid
Cherry picking confirmed
Category: Global Warming
Posted on: September 16, 2007 2:20 PM, by Tim Lambert
Earlier I suggested that surfacestations.org was cherry picking by showing a station with warming as an example of a "bad" station, and a station with no warming as an example of a "good" station. Of course, it could have turned out that I was wrong, and those were the temperature trends of typical "bad" and "good" stations. But now they've classified one third of the stations and you can see that the cherry picking has been confirmed -- the trends are the same for "good" stations (in red) and "bad" stations (in green).
(there is a graph at the site)
So that's why surfacestations.org hasn't published : Deltoid
What is the truth?
Loren
Cherry picking confirmed : Deltoid
Cherry picking confirmed
Category: Global Warming
Posted on: September 16, 2007 2:20 PM, by Tim Lambert
Earlier I suggested that surfacestations.org was cherry picking by showing a station with warming as an example of a "bad" station, and a station with no warming as an example of a "good" station. Of course, it could have turned out that I was wrong, and those were the temperature trends of typical "bad" and "good" stations. But now they've classified one third of the stations and you can see that the cherry picking has been confirmed -- the trends are the same for "good" stations (in red) and "bad" stations (in green).
(there is a graph at the site)
So that's why surfacestations.org hasn't published : Deltoid
What is the truth?
Loren
Chuck52
Veteran Member
Good news for those planning to visit England:
The Vineyards of England and Wales - on www.English-Wine.com
Chuck
The Vineyards of England and Wales - on www.English-Wine.com
Chuck
- Status
