• 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!

The Evils of Climate Enthusiasm

Jack Hays said:
Politics / Ridiculae
[h=1]University of Pennsylvania : Israeli Tree Planting is Environmental Racism[/h]Guest essay by Eric Worrall [UPDATE: Edited from Penn State to University of Pennsylvania 8:43 am Pacific Time ~ ctm] h/t Nick – If there was one Israeli initiative you would think radical greens would support, that would be Israeli efforts to restore ancient forests and improve national CO2 sequestration with a massive tree planting…
Click to expand...

Penn State losers must be running out of things to be stupid about.
 

[h=1]Institutional decay in climate science[/h]Roger Pielke Jr. describes the decay of climate science By Larry Kummer. From the Fabius Maximus website Summary: Science and public policy collide in climate science as they have in few fields. Here Roger Pielke Jr., describes an example of how the resulting stress has begun to corrupt the field. “Pielke on Climate” – Part…
Continue reading →
 
Climate ugliness
[h=1]Oreskes Inability to Keep Her Mouth Shut & the Big Erik Conway Problem[/h]Guest essay by Russell Cook Excerpt: If Conway and Oreskes were placed under oath in courtroom appearances or in congressional hearing appearances, would their narratives be forced to line up right? That’s a good question. At a rock-bottom level, this question must be asked: if a particular set of details is as damaging to Dr…
 
97% consensus
[h=1]A Reply to Cook and Oreskes on Climate Science Consensus[/h]By Warren Pearce, , Reiner Grundmann, Mike Hulme, Sujatha Raman, Eleanor Hadley Kershaw and Judith Tsouvalis Published in: Environmental Communication In their replies to our paper (Pearce et al., 2017), both Cook (2017) and Oreskes (2017) agree with our central point: that deliberating and mobilizing policy responses to climate change requires thinking beyond public belief in a scientific consensus.…
 

Roger Pielke Jr. describes the distorting of climate science

By Larry Kummer. From the Fabius Maximus website, 18 November 2017. Summary: Scientists and journalists play a vital role in the public policy debate about climate change, explaining the reports of the major climate agencies. Here Roger Pielke Jr. describes an example of how they too often misrepresent those findings, distorting the debate and feeding…
Continue reading →


  • “…there is still low confidence that any reported long-term (multidecadal to centennial) increases in TC {tropical cyclone} activity are robust are robust, after accounting for past changes in observing capabilities …
  • “A particular challenge in quantifying the existence and intensity of {tornado} events arises from the data source …
  • “Analysis of {winter} storm tracks indicates that there has been an increase in winter storm frequency and intensity since 1950. …
  • “drought statistics over the entire CONUS have declined …
  • “no detectable change in meteorological drought at the global scale. …
  • “Western North America …where determining if observed recent droughts were unusual compared to natural variability was particularly difficult …
  • “IPCC AR5 did not attribute changes in flooding to anthropogenic influence nor report detectable changes in flooding magnitude, duration, or frequency …
  • “{In the US| increasing & decreasing flooding magnitude but does not provide robust evidence that these trends are attributable to human influences… no formal attribution of observed flooding changes to anthropogenic forcing has been claimed …
  • “a number of precipitation metrics over the continental United States has been examined; however trends identified for the U.S. regions have not been clearly attributed to anthropogenic forcing …”
The data says what it says. There is precious little evidence that extremes have become worse in the US since at least 1900, with the exception of more winter storms since 1950 and overall fewer cold spells. Attribution {for these trends} is weak to nonexistent.
The data says what it says. There is precious little evidence that extremes have become worse in the US since at least 1900, with the exception of more winter storms since 1950 and overall fewer cold spells. Attribution {for these trends} is weak to nonexistent.
Despite the evidence there is a drumbeat of news stories and various claims that weather disasters are getting worse. For instance, the New York Times article on the release of the report contained this statement…
“In the United States, the report finds that every part of the country has been touched by warming, from droughts in the Southeast to flooding in the Midwest …”
​
{In it} Michael Mann, the same professor suing his critics for being wrong about scientific claims says this:
“Whether we’re talking about unprecedented heat waves, increasingly destructive hurricanes, epic drought and inundation of our coastal cities, the impacts of climate change are no longer subtle“
​
Both the NYT characterization of the report and Mann’s claims are irrefutably incorrect according to the report. These are just a few of many similar examples of claims that are contrary to the NCA related to extreme weather.
Claiming that the weather has gotten worse is today an important cultural shibboleth related to climate science. It’s not supported by the evidence but it serves an important role in the political debate over climate. Another weakened norm, I suppose.




 
Climate News
[h=1]Roger Pielke Jr. describes the politics of unlikely climate scenarios[/h]By Larry Kummer. From the Fabius Maximus website. Summary: The public policy choices we make about climate policy depend on the future that we expect. Here Roger Pielke Jr. describes an example of how climate scenarios too often misrepresent what we know about our world and its likely futures. “Pielke on Climate” – part 3…
 

[h=1]More slime from the Lewandowsky-Mann machine, calling for ‘trench warfare’[/h]First, the press release on this new opinion hit-piece masquerading as peer-reviewed science that smacks of desperation, especially in light of the fact that “climate change” seems to be disappearing from grant applications. Science community considers approaches to climate disinformation AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES Despite overwhelming scientific agreement on the question of human-caused global…
Continue reading →
 
Jack Hays said:

[h=1]More slime from the Lewandowsky-Mann machine, calling for ‘trench warfare’[/h]First, the press release on this new opinion hit-piece masquerading as peer-reviewed science that smacks of desperation, especially in light of the fact that “climate change” seems to be disappearing from grant applications. Science community considers approaches to climate disinformation AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES Despite overwhelming scientific agreement on the question of human-caused global…
Continue reading →
Click to expand...

Greetings, Jack. :2wave:

"Trench warfare," huh? :lamo Good for Judith Curry for saying "this is the stupidist paper I have ever read!" :thumbs:
 
Jack Hays said:
Extreme Poverty USA: The True Cost of Climate Madness
Click to expand...

Good morning, Jack. :2wave:

I found it very shocking to read that there are people in this country trying to survive under living conditions that sound more like poverty-ridden Africa than America! Sad and disgusting to learn about hookworm and other parasites being so common here that it's become a fact of life for some, and that probably includes children! :thumbdown:

Perhaps some of the $One hundred Billion dollars we were expected to send to the UN to dole out to other countries shouldn't be sent until we clean up our own act first - and I mean that literally as well as figuratively! I'm pleased that Trump has decided to pull America out of the Paris Accord on Climate Change until everyone is treated fairly, which is not currently the case!.... :2mad:
 
polgara said:
Good morning, Jack. :2wave:

I found it very shocking to read that there are people in this country trying to survive under living conditions that sound more like poverty-ridden Africa than America! Sad and disgusting to learn about hookworm and other parasites being so common here that it's become a fact of life for some, and that probably includes children! :thumbdown:

Perhaps some of the $One hundred Billion dollars we were expected to send to the UN to dole out to other countries shouldn't be sent until we clean up our own act first - and I mean that literally as well as figuratively! I'm pleased that Trump has decided to pull America out of the Paris Accord on Climate Change until everyone is treated fairly, which is not currently the case!.... :2mad:
Click to expand...

Good morning, Polgara.:2wave:

You've got it.:mrgreen:
 
polgara said:
Good morning, Jack. :2wave:

I found it very shocking to read that there are people in this country trying to survive under living conditions that sound more like poverty-ridden Africa than America! Sad and disgusting to learn about hookworm and other parasites being so common here that it's become a fact of life for some, and that probably includes children! :thumbdown:

Perhaps some of the $One hundred Billion dollars we were expected to send to the UN to dole out to other countries shouldn't be sent until we clean up our own act first - and I mean that literally as well as figuratively! I'm pleased that Trump has decided to pull America out of the Paris Accord on Climate Change until everyone is treated fairly, which is not currently the case!.... :2mad:
Click to expand...

You have to consider that the AGW crowd claims they have a planet to save. :doh I can't fully describe my disdain for the arrogance and self-appointed sense of importance these people assign themselves.
 
Surface Detail said:
The US is one of the richest countries in the world. The appallingly high death rates among your poor are a consequence of your lack of social provision, and the blame for this lies squarely with the heartlessness of your rich, not climate change mitigation.
Click to expand...

I'm sure you believe that.
 
Jack Hays said:
Here's a thoughtful perspective. I suspect current events will not make pleasant history reading in the future.


The Evils of Climate Enthusiasm

Address to the Alumni of Warrane College, University of New South Wales Academic Dinner, September 2017 Dr Howard Thomas Brady No matter our age we are all adapting to circumstance. I would never have thought, after I went away to be a Catholic priest at the age of 16, that 20 years later I would…
Continue reading →

. . . Forecasts of global climate disaster have dominated the climate debate for the last 40 years.The father of the modern climate nihilism in the United States was James Hansen of the NASA Goddard Space Centre. Thirty years ago he predicted that Manhattan would be flooded by 2010. He is still predicting metres of sea level rise this century. Only ten years ago, a Professor in England predicted that the next generation of children in Scotland would never know snow. Australia wasted over 10 billion dollars building desalination plants due to advice from the Australian Climate Council that Australia would be trapped in never-ending drought due to climate change. Australians were told that their dams would never fill again, that Adelaide would endure eternal drought and that Perth would be the world’s first wasteland metropolis. The United Nations in 2005 predicted there would be 20 million climate refugees by 2010; there were none.
Any sensible person would think these failed prophets should be sacked, but no: the environmental movement canonises its prophets. They continually reinvent themselves and remain supported and defended by university intelligentsia and by a media that loves headlines predicting disaster.
In contrast, those who call these prophets charlatans are not treated with the same kindness, but with systematic persecution. Did you know, within the hallowed halls of many universities throughout the world, there are teams linked to the Rapid Climate Response Team, which manthe trenches to debunk scientists like me, who do not deny climate change, but think it is not catastrophic and not a cause to panic! The late Australian Professor Bob Carter, Head of the Geology Department at James Cook University for over a decade, had his position of Emeritus Professor terminated in 2013 because of his outspoken views on these climate prophets. Even now there are calls for the position of Professor Peter Ridd at that same University to be terminated as he has questioned those who say that the Australian Barrier Reef is in decline due to bleaching. Ridd’s scientific opinion is that bleaching events spur the coral to further adapt to warming by choosing better algae symbionts that make them more resilient when the next warming event occurs.
So where are our ideals of academic freedom allowing opposing views to be aired? How can science go forward without significant review? Consensus is never scientific proof. It always needs to be challenged. It is often proved wrong. When I wrote, ‘Mirrors and Mazes: a guide through the climate debate’, I wrote this:
There is now a New Inquisition presided over by a clique of scientists who have given themselves the right of trial to put scientific heretics to the stake. The new torture methods are not the stake or the rack but the denial of promotion, the manipulation of the media to denigrate, and the refusal to employ. Indeed, efforts to stop such scientists publishing in scientific periodicals have extended to controlling the editorial committees of many well-known periodicals. This is the modern equivalent of the Spanish Inquisition’s Burning of the Books. (Brady, 2017) . . .
Click to expand...

well said
 
Jack Hays said:
Humor / Ocean Heat Content
[h=1]Friday Funny – Climate Central’s scare graph excuse: ‘The oceans ate the warming’[/h]Sometimes, you just have to laugh at the sheer desperation of claims being made. Such is the case of the agitprop known as “Climate Central” which is privately funded to produce slick graphics and scare stories about climate change. Case in point, their recent graph that purports to show why the atmosphere hasn’t warmed as…
Click to expand...

Which scientific organization are you quoting from? Are they more reputable than the National Academy of Science, the IPCC, the NOAA and NASA?
 
Media_Truth said:
Which scientific organization are you quoting from? Are they more reputable than the National Academy of Science, the IPCC, the NOAA and NASA?
Click to expand...

The article ridicules an AGW advocacy site, Climate Central.

[h=3]Climate Central: A Science & News Organization[/h]www.climatecentral.org/



Climate Central bridges the scientific community and the public, providing clear information to help people make sound decisions about the climate.
 
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom