General Weather/Earth Sciences Topics > Weather Conditions Discussion
Fewer People Buy Into Global Warming
W3DRM:
Here's a link to an article by a Dr. Fred S. Singer. a sidenote on the website describes him as follows:
--- Quote ---"He is an atmospheric physicist at George Mason University and founder of the Science and Environmental Policy Project, a think tank on climate and environmental issues. Singer has been a leading skeptic of the scientific consensus on global warming. He points out that the scenarios are alarmist, computer models reflect real gaps in climate knowledge, and future warming will be inconsequential or modest at most."
--- End quote ---
* http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/warming/debate/singer.html
I've read about half of his article and am finding that the global warming issue is so complex we, as humans, may never know what the correct answer may be.
I suggest that everyone read this article to get yet one more viewpoint from someone who seems to have the credentials to make an assessment on the topic.
Mark / Ohio:
Although I agree pretty much with everything he says, he's not exactly without possible / probable(?) underlying bias neither.
Snip of text from Wiki link below:
"A 2007 Newsweek cover story on climate change denial reported that: "In April 1998 a dozen people from the denial machine — including the Marshall Institute, Fred Singer's group and Exxon — met at the American Petroleum Institute's Washington headquarters. They proposed a $5 million campaign, according to a leaked eight-page memo, to convince the public that the science of global warming is riddled with controversy and uncertainty." The plan was reportedly aimed at "raising questions about and undercutting the 'prevailing scientific wisdom'" on climate change. According to Newsweek, the plan was leaked to the press and therefore was never implemented.[10] ABC News has reported that Singer insists he is not on the payroll of the energy industry, but admits he once received an unsolicited $10,000 from Exxon.[11] Singer subsequently stated that his purported "connection" to ExxonMobil was more like being on their mailing list than to holding a paid position, pointing out that this single charitable donation comprised a tiny fraction (1%) of all donations received."[12]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Singer
I don't think any of us would argue too much that Wiki articles can be loaded to the brim with bias as well even though they may try to appear neutral. At the very least he is a very intelligent man by his credentials though.
I would take his word on the subject over the inventor of the internet any day of the week. ;)
tomwxman:
--- Quote from: xmas1313 on November 28, 2009, 06:31:57 PM ---Those of you who say you don't care for whatever reason are part of the problem. You should just be glad there weren't too many people that didn't care 100 years ago. I don't have any children, but I'm not so selfish as to say that the state of the earth doesn't matter because I won't be here in 50 years.
--- End quote ---
I was only reacting to the post "If the end comes, I'm ready"! But if YOU think that YOU are doing more to "fight the future" than I or anyone else in this forum, then you are welcome to your fantasy!
Don't think that just because you feel you aren't part of the problem, that makes you part of the solution!
W3DRM:
Just keeping this thread alive with some additional information I just read:
--- Quote ---SCIENTISTS at the University of East Anglia (UEA) have admitted throwing away much of the raw temperature data on which their predictions of global warming are based.
It means that other academics are not able to check basic calculations said to show a long-term rise in temperature over the past 150 years.
The UEA's Climatic Research Unit (CRU) was forced to reveal the loss following requests for the data under Freedom of Information legislation.
The data were gathered from weather stations around the world and then adjusted to take account of variables in the way they were collected. The revised figures were kept, but the originals -- stored on paper and magnetic tape -- were dumped to save space when the CRU moved to a new building.
The admission follows the leaking of a thousand private emails sent and received by Professor Phil Jones, the CRU's director. In them he discusses thwarting climate sceptics seeking access to such data.
In a statement on its website, the CRU said: "We do not hold the original raw data but only the value-added (quality controlled and homogenised) data."
--- End quote ---
Another item that seems to be hitting the news this morning regards the hacked files containing lots of computer modeling code in addition to the emails. The stories unfolding at the moment, after some initial analysis of the modeling code, are showing some very revealing details of how the "scientists" were apparently manipulating the data to fit their assumptions. I suspect we will hear lots more of this from both sides of the dispute as the days go by.
The real problem is who do you believe? I don't think we have enough information at this point in time to make any real decisions on the matter and only in due time will the truth be revealed on this subject and that of the Global Warming issue itself.
SoMDWx:
This is the whole crux of the problem. Unless you know how to take the data, analyze it correctly without any bias, THEN and only then would you have an answer that YOU come up with and believe. Who do you believe anymore on anything?
:roll:
Jim
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version