• Welcome, guest!

    This is a forum devoted to discussion of Wolverhampton Wanderers.
    Why not sign up and contribute? Registered members get a fully ad-free experience!

Climate Change Debate

Quelle surprise, Guardian linked
Even if you took into account Koch brothers donations to organisations like the Heartland Institute they are pififling compared to government and non-government activist organisations. I can't be arsed going on a link search at this point in time but I'm sure they are easy to find if not Vis approved.
The move to discredit scientists such as Willie Soon by Democrat politicians has been roundly criticised in many places.
This week's bun fight seems to be about the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation:
 
HAzelGroveWolf said:
Quelle surprise, Guardian linked
Even if you took into account Koch brothers donations to organisations like the Heartland Institute they are pififling compared to government and non-government activist organisations. I can't be arsed going on a link search at this point in time but I'm sure they are easy to find if not Vis approved.
The move to discredit scientists such as Willie Soon by Democrat politicians has been roundly criticised in many places.
This week's bun fight seems to be about the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation:
Click to expand...

You know the difference between a newspaper and a blog is that one has to be sourced and the other doesn't.

So I'll take the Guardian over anything you've yet linked us to.
 
Alan USA said:
You know the difference between a newspaper and a blog is that one has to be sourced and the other doesn't.

So I'll take the Guardian over anything you've yet linked us to.
Click to expand...

Rubbish, have you ever dealt with the press? When dealing with the news or other as an observer excercise caution in all cases. Opinion should be welcomed. There are plenty of examples of widely appreciated internet based media. BTW I have always tried to link well sourced articles, I don't think it appropriate to post the technical sources directly here. I'm not to keen on re-inventing the wheel.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/03/24/michael-mann-and-stefan-rahmstorf-claim-the-gulf-stream-is-slowing-due-to-greenland-ice-melt-except-reality-says-otherwise/

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/03/25/nasa-refutes-mann-and-rahmstorf-finds-atlantic-conveyor-belt-not-slowing/
 
Don't trust the media, but here, look at this blog.....
 
Pretty sure I was once told by HGW that my opinion on football matters was worthless as an enthusiastic amateur arguing against the decisions of McCarthy, a professional football manager.

Funny how he's changed his tune eh?
 
MARKakaJIM said:
Pretty sure I was once told by HGW that my opinion on football matters was worthless as an enthusiastic amateur arguing against the decisions of McCarthy, a professional football manager.

Funny how he's changed his tune eh?
Click to expand...

I think that was more down to the language you used, assertion when unwarranted.
 
Indeed. Such as the point made by 97% of scientists, expressed across vast swathes of peer reviewed papers, yes?
 
HAzelGroveWolf said:
I think that was more down to the language you used, assertion when unwarranted.
Click to expand...

Whereas you show no such assertion in dismissing the work of hundreds, if not thousands, of climatologists despite having no background in the field at all?
 
I express a sceptic viewpoint supported by many others inside and outside academia. I am a member of a professional institution that includes energy industry professionals so am aware of the so called mitigation technology. Please, please stop spouting the 97% cherry picking nonsense.
As for media bias note the BBC's 28gate:
https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2013/11/11/citizen-joe-smith-soft-soaping-bbc-climate-propaganda-while-demanding-more-of-it-and-denying-28gate-bias/

Follow the link to see both sides of the debate.
 
HAzelGroveWolf said:
I express a sceptic viewpoint supported by many others inside and outside academia. I am a member of a professional institution that includes energy industry professionals so am aware of the so called mitigation technology. Please, please stop spouting the 97% cherry picking nonsense.
As for media bias note the BBC's 28gate:
https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2013/11/11/citizen-joe-smith-soft-soaping-bbc-climate-propaganda-while-demanding-more-of-it-and-denying-28gate-bias/

Follow the link to see both sides of the debate.
Click to expand...

Dear me. I'm also a member of several energy industry bodies and fully accept I know sod all about the reasonings behind climate change, as would almost every sane non-climatologist and almost everybody else in these bodies.

I accept that climate change is happening, because the vast vast majority of people who have spent years studying the climate say that it is. That should be enough for any sane reasonable person.
 
tredman said:
Dear me. I'm also a member of several energy industry bodies and fully accept I know sod all about the reasonings behind climate change, as would almost every sane non-climatologist and almost everybody else in these bodies.

I accept that climate change is happening, because the vast vast majority of people who have spent years studying the climate say that it is. That should be enough for any sane reasonable person.
Click to expand...

I don't deny that climate changes, clearly humans change the environment. The debate is about how and what are the consequences, context within natural cycles, on and on....
The politically driven carbon dioxide control knob phylosophy is demonstrably falacious.
There is plenty of debate in academia, just look up Judith Curry or Richard Lindzen to name just two. Solving energy supply issues is a very inclusive game. I seek energy efficiency in my designs for practical reasons like reliability and thermal management. There is plenty of sceptism in the engineering community, people who have to demonstrate that their product works unlike the climate speculators (that is what they are).
 
Energy management in electronics has fuck all to do with the climate.
 
Visage said:
Energy management in electronics has fuck all to do with the climate.
Click to expand...

My point was that the people you need to solve your so called problem are likely established professional engineers, I was making what is important, important.
For someone who has a background in physics I struggle to understand why you do not question the retoric, no doubt though political self motivation. Most of what I have put forward is accepted by the IPCC in terms of model diversion from reality and (no) connections to deleterious weather events
BTW I'm slowly replacing my aging fleet of CFL lighting to LED, entirely motivated by performance, energy efficiency, ecconomy and practical lifetime. Note the electronics involved in those.
 
MARKakaJIM said:
Whereas you show no such assertion in dismissing the work of hundreds, if not thousands, of climatologists despite having no background in the field at all?
Click to expand...

Billions have faith in Roman Catholism invented by a small clergy, used like any other belief as politcal convenience to rule. People can follow if they chose, maybe it comforts them. I've yet to see a definition of a climatologist, I presume they are a priest in the climate catastrophe faith.
History is littered with religious/political dogma, today is no different.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top