• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Politically a Firm Democrat, Scientifically a Firm AGW Skeptic

Jack Hays

Jack Hays

Traveler
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
94,823
Reaction score
28,342
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
This is for all of you who think only Republicans or conservatives are climate skeptics. Meet Freeman Dyson.

Climate Models / Freeman Dyson / Politics
Freeman Dyson: Democrat Supporter, Climate Skeptic

Guest essay by Eric Worrall. Freeman Dyson, one of the world’s most prominent physicists, has given an interview to The Register, in which he discusses climate change, and his disappointment that President Obama, whom he strongly admires, chose the wrong side of the Climate issue. Freeman Dyson on Politics; An Obama supporter who describes himself…
 
Jack Hays said:
This is for all of you who think only Republicans or conservatives are climate skeptics. Meet Freeman Dyson.

Climate Models / Freeman Dyson / Politics
Freeman Dyson: Democrat Supporter, Climate Skeptic

Guest essay by Eric Worrall. Freeman Dyson, one of the world’s most prominent physicists, has given an interview to The Register, in which he discusses climate change, and his disappointment that President Obama, whom he strongly admires, chose the wrong side of the Climate issue. Freeman Dyson on Politics; An Obama supporter who describes himself…
Click to expand...

And brain surgeon Ben Carson doesn't believe in evolution.

I've always thought highly of the guy who came up with the idea of the "Dyson sphere", but just because someone is very smart and highly educated doesn't mean that he or she is right about everything.

Heck, even I was wrong once - I thought I'd know everything by the time I was 35, but I was wrong - I knew it all by the time I was 15...of course, I quickly found out that all my fellow 15 year-olds knew everything already, too....
 
Glen Contrarian said:
And brain surgeon Ben Carson doesn't believe in evolution.

I've always thought highly of the guy who came up with the idea of the "Dyson sphere", but just because someone is very smart and highly educated doesn't mean that he or she is right about everything.

Heck, even I was wrong once - I thought I'd know everything by the time I was 35, but I was wrong - I knew it all by the time I was 15...of course, I quickly found out that all my fellow 15 year-olds knew everything already, too....
Click to expand...

Fair enough, but beside my point. Democrats can be skeptics too.
 
Jack Hays said:
This is for all of you who think only Republicans or conservatives are climate skeptics. Meet Freeman Dyson.

Climate Models / Freeman Dyson / Politics
Freeman Dyson: Democrat Supporter, Climate Skeptic

Guest essay by Eric Worrall. Freeman Dyson, one of the world’s most prominent physicists, has given an interview to The Register, in which he discusses climate change, and
his disappointment that President Obama, whom he strongly admires, chose the wrong side of the Climate issue.
Click to expand...
Freeman Dyson on Politics; An Obama supporter who describes himself…
Click to expand...

heh heh. To that Obama says screw Libya, screw Syria, screw Iraq, screw Iran, screw Israel, screw Idaho, Iowa, Indiana, Illinois and any other "I" anything but me ... I'm a leader on Climate Change.
 
Jack Hays said:
This is for all of you who think only Republicans or conservatives are climate skeptics. Meet Freeman Dyson.

Climate Models / Freeman Dyson / Politics
Freeman Dyson: Democrat Supporter, Climate Skeptic

Guest essay by Eric Worrall. Freeman Dyson, one of the world’s most prominent physicists, has given an interview to The Register, in which he discusses climate change, and his disappointment that President Obama, whom he strongly admires, chose the wrong side of the Climate issue. Freeman Dyson on Politics; An Obama supporter who describes himself…
Click to expand...

But on a serious note, Dyson, being an alleged 100% Democrat, should realize Climate Change isn't what matters to Obama ... it's the "solutions" that are so appealing to him, if you catch my drift.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
And brain surgeon Ben Carson doesn't believe in evolution.

I've always thought highly of the guy who came up with the idea of the "Dyson sphere", but just because someone is very smart and highly educated doesn't mean that he or she is right about everything.

Heck, even I was wrong once - I thought I'd know everything by the time I was 35, but I was wrong - I knew it all by the time I was 15...of course, I quickly found out that all my fellow 15 year-olds knew everything already, too....
Click to expand...

But it will be interesting to get the reactions from the usual "consider the source" crew.
 
bubbabgone said:
But on a serious note, Dyson, being an alleged 100% Democrat, should realize Climate Change isn't what matters to Obama ... it's the "solutions" that are so appealing to him, if you catch my drift.
Click to expand...

Got it. Dyson's problem is that his politics don't determine his science.
 
Jack Hays said:
Fair enough, but beside my point. Democrats can be skeptics too.
Click to expand...

Democrats can be just about anything. Only Republicans demand purity tests.
 
bubbabgone said:
heh heh. To that Obama says screw Libya, screw Syria, screw Iraq, screw Iran, screw Israel, screw Idaho, Iowa, Indiana, Illinois and any other "I" anything but me ... I'm a leader on Climate Change.
Click to expand...

What is this post?
 
Jack Hays said:
This is for all of you who think only Republicans or conservatives are climate skeptics. Meet Freeman Dyson.

Climate Models / Freeman Dyson / Politics
Freeman Dyson: Democrat Supporter, Climate Skeptic

Guest essay by Eric Worrall. Freeman Dyson, one of the world’s most prominent physicists, has given an interview to The Register, in which he discusses climate change, and his disappointment that President Obama, whom he strongly admires, chose the wrong side of the Climate issue. Freeman Dyson on Politics; An Obama supporter who describes himself…
Click to expand...

I doubt there are any individuals seriously arguing that all democrats support AGW as a theory. Heck, the public acceptance of the theory in the United States is only about 50% (although the acceptance of the theory is much higher in other countries and much, much higher amongst the relevant experts in the field), so it is pretty clear that some Democrats would reject the theory.

There is just a much larger correlation between being Republican and rejecting AGW because of the alignment between the political ideology of Republicans and the solutions required by Climate Change.
 
MrT said:
I doubt there are any individuals seriously arguing that all democrats support AGW as a theory. Heck, the public acceptance of the theory in the United States is only about 50% (although the acceptance of the theory is much higher in other countries and
much, much higher amongst the relevant experts in the field
Click to expand...
), so it is pretty clear that some Democrats would reject the theory.

There is just a much larger correlation between being Republican and rejecting AGW because of the alignment between the political ideology of Republicans and the solutions required by Climate Change.
Click to expand...

Ah. I figured that's what you might be thinking and it's not correct.
 
MrT said:
What part? And how so?
Click to expand...

The much much higher part.
That 97% thing has long ago been busted.
But it had been repeated so often without challenge it got into the national bloodstream so people continue to repeat it (not necessarily yourself) without verification just as planned.
It's still not true though.
 
bubbabgone said:
The much much higher part.
That 97% thing has long ago been busted.
But it had been repeated so often without challenge it got into the national bloodstream so people continue to repeat it (not necessarily yourself) without verification just as planned.
It's still not true though.
Click to expand...

Roughly 97% of all climatologists agree that the Earth is Warming and that humans are playing a significant role, through the production of greenhouse gases, in that Warming. There are three independent and peer-reviewed studies that have reached that conclusion.

The most conservative interpretation of a study posted by Jack Hayes puts that number in the high 70s. In other words, the phrase, "much, much higher" is still accurate.
 
Jack Hays said:
Fair enough, but beside my point. Democrats can be skeptics too.
Click to expand...

Has anyone said that it's not possible for Democrats to be climate change skeptics? Just curious. I think it's obvious that the numbers in the two parties differ greatly, but I've never heard anyone suggest that it's not possible.
 
MrT said:
Roughly 97% of all climatologists agree that the Earth is Warming and that
humans are playing a significant role
Click to expand...
, through the production of greenhouse gases, in that Warming. There are three independent and peer-reviewed studies that have reached that conclusion.

The most conservative interpretation of a study posted by Jack Hayes puts that number in the high 70s. In other words, the phrase, "much, much higher" is still accurate.
Click to expand...
What's a "significant" role?
 
bubbabgone said:
What's a "significant" role?
Click to expand...

"of or relating to observations that are unlikely to occur by chance and that therefore indicate a systematic cause."
 
MrT said:
Roughly 97% of all climatologists agree that the Earth is Warming and that humans are playing a significant role, through the production of greenhouse gases, in that Warming. There are three independent and peer-reviewed studies that have reached that conclusion.
Click to expand...
The problem with the statement is that it would be true with only the direct response warming from CO2,
Which the IPCC says is 1.2C for a doubling of the CO2 level, neither catastrophic, or alarming.
The statement does not require any of the predicted amplified warming necessary for the
alarmist prediction of the IPCC.
 
MrT said:
I doubt there are any individuals seriously arguing that all democrats support AGW as a theory. Heck, the public acceptance of the theory in the United States is only about 50% (although the acceptance of the theory is much higher in other countries and much, much higher amongst the relevant experts in the field), e.
Click to expand...

Most , in fact almost all, of the experts in the field are liberals.
 
KLATTU said:
Most , in fact almost all, of the experts in the field are liberals.
Click to expand...

That statement is:

A) Bull****
B) Irrelevant
C) Unfounded
D) All of the Above.
 
MrT said:
"of or relating to observations that are unlikely to occur by chance and that therefore indicate a systematic cause."
Click to expand...
Well then "significant" is definitely NOT the proper use of the word because warming to the degree it has (and for a couple of decades it hasn't) would have happened anyway.
Kinda takes the anthropo right out of the genic of warming.

As for Cook's 97% "study" ...
"University of Delaware Prof. David Legates and three colleagues examined the Cook team’s database, and found that less than 1% of the 11,944 abstracts explicitly endorse the so-called consensus."
 
bubbabgone said:
Well then "significant" is definitely NOT the proper use of the word because warming to the degree it has (and for a couple of decades it hasn't) would have happened anyway.
Kinda takes the anthropo right out of the genic of warming.

As for Cook's 97% "study" ...
"University of Delaware Prof. David Legates and three colleagues examined the Cook team’s database, and found that less than 1% of the 11,944 abstracts explicitly endorse the so-called consensus."
Click to expand...

The fact that you used the phrase, "would have happened anyway," is the exact reason that I used the word, "significant." The warming that has occurred over the past several decades (and continued during the past couple of decades) is NOT likely to have occurred on its own without the significant contribution from human pollution.

The analysis that you're referencing hinges on the phrase, "so-called consensus." So, here is a detailed description of the Prof. Legates study which attempts to categorize the studies more explicitly.

The most important detail in this paper is the following table:

The chart wouldn't copy over, so you can find it here: Fox News Defends Its False Balance With Climate Science Denial - Real Skeptic

It shows the different levels of endorsement, the amount of abstracts that matched it, and the percentage of it compared to all the included abstracts. The flaw in this paper becomes very obvious when you look at this table.

If you take for example the papers that explicitly reject that humans are causing global warming based on the abstract rating you get the number of 0.08%. That’s based on 9 papers explicitly rejecting that humans are causing global warming. Against 64 abstract that explicitly state that humans are causing it.

So yes, if you calculate the endorsement level in the way this paper did it you’ll indeed find a 1% endorsement level (0.54% to be precise). But it also shows that only 0.08% of the included abstracts explicitly reject the consensus. This undermines the very point Lewis is trying to make.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom