"Why Americans are Skeptical of Their Role in Global Warming" (aka Global Climate Disruption)

That is what I like to hear. Open-mindedness of the like E.O. Wilson spoke about in his book "The Future of Life" and how many christian orgnizations are taking and active stance on global issues regarding the environment and how we cannot always assume that just because they are religious organizations that they are not interested in environmental issues, are out to exploit it, or simply take dominion over it. Thanks mate!

http://www.amazon.com/Future-Life-Edward-O-Wilson/dp/0679450785

 

I'll spare you the Roy Spencer quotes even though he has been recording the most accurate temperature measurements available since 1979.

“I am a skeptic…Global warming has become a new religion.” - Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever.

“Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly….As a scientist I remain skeptical...The main basis of the claim that man’s release of greenhouse gases is the cause of the warming is based almost entirely upon climate models. We all know the frailty of models concerning the air-surface system.” - Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a PhD in meteorology, and formerly of NASA, who has authored more than 190 studies and has been called “among the most preeminent scientists of the last 100 years.”

Warming fears are the “worst scientific scandal in the history…When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.” - UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist.

“The IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn’t listen to others. It doesn’t have open minds… I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are not geologists.” - Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and a board member of the UN-supported International Year of the Planet.

“So far, real measurements give no ground for concern about a catastrophic future warming.” - Scientist Dr. Jarl R. Ahlbeck, a chemical engineer at Abo Akademi University in Finland, author of 200 scientific publications and former Greenpeace member.

 

I find it amusing that those who think they are knowledgeable of the science of climate change and use the IPCC and realclimate.org as their sources are so easily led astray.

I do, however, find it interesting that they are politically driven and the stereotypical traits confirm that. #1 They generally live on the East or West coasts (highly liberal areas such as California, New York and Washington State where they pay draconian taxes and their teachers, judges and politicians tell them what to think) #2 They act in very immature fashion and have no doubt been ‘educated’ in ultra-liberal universities where political correctness restricts free speech (as well as thought) and ‘disciplines’ such as gender studies (oh, my God – women and men are different) have transplanted courses such as Western Civilization #3 Generally they use politically-based or politico-environmental user names, titles, avatars, signatures, etc. #4 They post hundreds or thousands of times wherever they wish, having been deluded into thinking what they have to say is important because they are expert in everything. They feel free to condescend; after all, their parents have repeatedly told them how overwhelmingly intelligent they are.

Of course, there are exceptions; they’re just difficult to find in this thread.

 

This must be more vomited Inhofe spin. I chose Dr. Simpson at random and googled a bit. Turns out the 'smoking gun' is a letter Dr. Simpson wrote to colleagues that was mostly a warning to avoid politics, but she did indeed (as of early 2008) voice skepticism that the data thus far was unimpeachable, although she was unclear whether she had the most reservations surrounding causes or eventual effects.

Anyway, here is the punchline: denialists will never bother to reprint the following, from the exact same letter:

If I am bored I look a little further into another of Inhofe's sic fourya's scientist "skeptics"

So, so predictable

 

I am much less forgiving of religious obstructionism, even if now passed, than F8L. I want them to take responsibility for the damage caused by their stupidity, and make amends. I suggest starting with the realization that religion does not inform science.

Of course I would have guessed that torturing (or was it *just* the threat?) of Galileo -- who ushered in modern science -- would have been enough. Obviously not. I'll not hold my breath that endangering the world will do the trick.

[double-rant-on]
My memories are still fresh of strident christians from around 5 years ago screaming that AGW was blasphemy, that humans doing god's work (that is, earth scale change) was the word of Satan. How utterly ARROGANT could a godless liberal be !? Any day now I fully expect to hear the same people scream that GW is god punishing humanity for it's liberal excesses. They will rejoice in the vindication of their belief in, and desire for, the end of the world.

Will the wider christian world go into mass hysteria ? Hardly. Will US evangelical sects become even more fundamental, more hateful, more fear driven ? I have little doubt.
[end]

 

"...What should we as a nation do? Decisions have to be made on incomplete information. In this case, we must act on the recommendations of Gore and the IPCC because if we do not reduce emissions of greenhouse gases and the climate models are right, the planet as we know it will in this century become unsustainable. But as a scientist I remain skeptical..."

...and the very next sentence is?

 

Inhofe's, and by extension your, skepticism leads you to conclude that AGW is a conspiracy of liberal enviromental wackos to perpetrate fraud on the greatest scale ever imagined on the good christians of America.

Dr. Simpson's skepticism leads her to conclude that the IPCC opinion must be accepted and the Gore recommendations for action be implemented.

Just my curiousity, can you see the difference ? Do you really think that Dr. Simpson would ally herself with Inhofe ? Or agree to have a sentence of her letter be used out of context to further the AGW denialist agenda ?

With all due respect, Wth is wrong with you ?

 

I'm afraid you have jumped to unwarranted conclusions. While I do indeed believe there is fraud involved, it comes from politicians who wish to gain and use power. They, in league with environmentalists who seem to believe that all bad things real or imagined result from mankind's malfeasance, misuse inconclusive scientific data.

This grab for power and the belief that centralized control over something as complex as worldwide energy usage has grave consequences for economies and freedoms. I see no reason why Christians should be any more or less worried than Buddhists or atheists. With all due respect, that's a knuckleheaded inference to draw from my comments. Now Americans do have much to lose by allowing themselves to be ruled by a global elite who have no love for them. Alas, the placing of 'cap and trade' restrictions and other such artificial programs amounts to a tax that will be most deleterious to underdeveloped and developing nations, while having a miniscule effect on reducing temperatures a century out.

As to Dr. Simpson, she says that as a scientist she is a skeptic. So her other conclusions are based on emotion or some other unscientific source, right?

More 'vomit' from Inhofe:

“Anyone who claims that the debate is over and the conclusions are firm has a fundamentally unscientific approach to one of the most momentous issues of our time.” - Solar physicist Dr. Pal Brekke, senior advisor to the Norwegian Space Centre in Oslo. Brekke has published more than 40 peer-reviewed scientific articles on the sun and solar interaction with the Earth.

“The models and forecasts of the UN IPCC "are incorrect because they only are based on mathematical models and presented results at scenarios that do not include, for example, solar activity.” - Victor Manuel Velasco Herrera, a researcher at the Institute of Geophysics of the National Autonomous University of Mexico

“It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who don’t buy into anthropogenic global warming.” - U.S Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA.

“Even doubling or tripling the amount of carbon dioxide will virtually have little impact, as water vapour and water condensed on particles as clouds dominate the worldwide scene and always will.” – . Geoffrey G. Duffy, a professor in the Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering of the University of Auckland, NZ.

“After reading [UN IPCC chairman] Pachauri's asinine comment [comparing skeptics to] Flat Earthers, it's hard to remain quiet.” - Climate statistician Dr. William M. Briggs, who specializes in the statistics of forecast evaluation, serves on the American Meteorological Society's Probability and Statistics Committee and is an Associate Editor of Monthly Weather Review.

 

I hear from Al Gore that James Inhofe waterboarded these unfortunate scientists so he could use their confessions in his propaganda campaign:

“The Kyoto theorists have put the cart before the horse. It is global warming that triggers higher levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, not the other way round…A large number of critical documents submitted at the 1995 U.N. conference in Madrid vanished without a trace. As a result, the discussion was one-sided and heavily biased, and the U.N. declared global warming to be a scientific fact,” Andrei Kapitsa, a Russian geographer and Antarctic ice core researcher.

“I am convinced that the current alarm over carbon dioxide is mistaken...Fears about man-made global warming are unwarranted and are not based on good science.” - Award Winning Physicist Dr. Will Happer, Professor at the Department of Physics at Princeton University and Former Director of Energy Research at the Department of Energy, who has published over 200 scientific papers, and is a fellow of the American Physical Society, The American Association for the Advancement of Science, and the National Academy of Sciences.

“Nature's regulatory instrument is water vapor: more carbon dioxide leads to less moisture in the air, keeping the overall GHG content in accord with the necessary balance conditions.” – Prominent Hungarian Physicist and environmental researcher Dr. Miklós Zágoni reversed his view of man-made warming and is now a skeptic. Zágoni was once Hungary’s most outspoken supporter of the Kyoto Protocol.

“For how many years must the planet cool before we begin to understand that the planet is not warming? For how many years must cooling go on?" - Geologist Dr. David Gee the chairman of the science committee of the 2008 International Geological Congress who has authored 130 plus peer reviewed papers, and is currently at Uppsala University in Sweden.

“Gore prompted me to start delving into the science again and I quickly found myself solidly in the skeptic camp…Climate models can at best be useful for explaining climate changes after the fact.” - Meteorologist Hajo Smit of Holland, who reversed his belief in man-made warming to become a skeptic, is a former member of the Dutch UN IPCC committee.

 

These 31,478 scientists are convinced that the human-caused global warming hypothesis is without scientific validity and that government action on the basis of this hypothesis would unnecessarily and counterproductively damage both human prosperity and the natural environment of the Earth.

Global Warming Petition Project

 

I've read that Winston Churchill may have said:

You can count on the Americans to do the right thing,
once every other option is ruled out.

regards
Froley

 

Bullshit

 

Exactly what I expected from you.

Here is a more balanced look at what is a decidedly controversial subject. Extremists use naughty language when they are incapable of civil discourse.


The Petition: A Global Warming Case Study - Case Study Collection - National Center for Case Study Teaching in Science

 

Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened. ~ Winston Churchill

The truth is that America is the greatest nation on earth.

 

"Greatness" is a value judgement, and therefore the statement "America is the greatest nation on earth," is an opinion and not a "truth." "Truth" is a statement of fact, but an opinion is a different category of thing than a fact.

"America is the greatest nation on earth," is your opinion, and you are entitled to it. But it's not a "fact" because "greatness" is not subject to fact.

Canadians and Brits and French and Russians and Slovenians and Albanians and Algerians and Saudis would probably all insist that their respective nations are "the greatest nation on earth."

Your statement (calling your opinion a "fact") shows sloppy thinking.

By the way, I quite like America. But I think that if we aspire to true greatness we have to take better care of those who cannot care for themselves, and we have to start placing humanistic values ahead of material greed and rampant consumerism. A truly great nation would not market confections that are 60% pure sugar to innocent children as "breakfast cereal" nor would it threaten trade sanctions against countries that try to ban tobacco advertising.

 

I like the USA for the most part. But it is not the greatest nation on earth. Whatever broad criteria you try to use, it's just not. In some aspects, it's great. But in some very important aspects, it's a work in progress. Maybe if and when you get universal health care... we can address this issue again.

 

One cannot rank nations absolutely. I'm free to rank them relatively. From my point of view, America is the greatest nation. You can't prove me wrong by any means. If I truly believe this then the phrase " I believe America is the greatest nation" is true.

Now, that said, America is the wealthiest, strongest, most inventive nation on earth. Is that broad enough?

She is also the most generous:

© 2009 WorldNetDaily

The U.S. is by far the most generous nation on earth – especially toward developing nations. But who is leading the way? It's not foreign aid from the U.S. government, but increasingly generous contributions from religious congregations around the country.
And despite a deepening worldwide recession, giving among America's religious congregations remains extremely high, according to the latest "Index of Global Philanthropy."

"The purpose of the report was to take a look at exactly how much money was going from private institutions, including churchs, foundations, and traditional charities," says Carol Adelman, director of the Hudson Institute's Center for Global Prosperity.

America has the most Nobel Laureates, more than twice the number of the next country. No country is more free. People from around the world literally die trying to get here from their particular hell-hole.

Her armies have liberated more people than any other, without bothering to subjugate them afterwards. Well, I could go on and on.

The reason we have these advantages is because our founders understood that people who are free to do as they wish without government interference can prosper above all others.

Our health system, despite its problems (mostly caused by government interference), is definitely superior to places like Canada, where people wait in line from hours to months to get services or operations and in many instances come to the US for help:

The Top Ten Things People Believe About Canadian Health Care, But Shouldn't

So, I like my opinion a lot.

 

Another example of Obama and those left-wing tree huggers at Cisco colluding together to destroy your standard of living:

Cisco: Smart Grid Will Be $20 Billion-A-Year Business

 

Looks who kicks some serious nice person!

[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Human_Development_Index]List of countries by Human Development Index - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]