Top MIT Climate Scientist disses Bernie Sanders position on mmgw
-
So, whatcha gonna do, when the top MIT scientist disagrees with you ?
-
MIT. A far more legit choice of engineering college, methinks...
Of course, Bernie Sanders, the socialist, wants mmgw to
be the official position...
it's all about the money, for re-distribution of all the wealth that everybody has.
socialism.
Top MIT Climate Scientist: ‘Senate’s Climate Change Vote Is Ludicrous’by Wochit 1:00 minsMIT climate scientist Richard Lindzen slammed this week’s amendment introduced by Vermont socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders that would make it the official position of the Senate that man-made global warming is real and a threat. Lindzen said Sanders’s amendment to a bill that approves the Keystone XL pipeline an “attempt to hijack science for political purposes.” “Climate change is of course real; change being the normal state of affairs in climate,” Lindzen told Climate Depot. “Climate change has caused catastrophic problems on occasion throughout the earth’s history. While man may have contributed somewhat to climate change in recent years, his contribution to the above is highly questionable, and continues to be debated.” “In the case of Bernie Sanders, a socialist, he is undoubtedly dreaming about nationalizing the energy industry,” Lindzen said. “For the U.S. Senate to accept guidance from Sanders’ bizarre dreams is ludicrous.” -
-
Far more legitimate choice than what?
Tri C?
Bryant and Stratton?
University of Phoenix?
WSS
-
Far more legitimate choice than what?
Tri C?
Bryant and Stratton?
University of Phoenix?
WSS
Tri C?
Bryant and Stratton?
University of Phoenix?
WSS
I would agree with that
-
It also is interesting to me, that I've posted studies and scientists before (as have many other posters on here) that have been dismissed for being from "liberal elitist professors and universities". "They are funded by our liberal govt." Etc etc etc. But now, this one scientist says something you agree with (which isnt that man made climate change isn't happening, he's just questioning the severity) and now it is ok to listen to a scientist.
Besides the fact that, it looks like there are plenty of other scientists and groups that disagree with this guy and think he misinforms more than anything else.
Oh, and what makes someone a "Top" scientist? I'm just curious.
-
It also is interesting to me, that I've posted studies and scientists before (as have many other posters on here) that have been dismissed for being from "liberal elitist professors and universities". "They are funded by our liberal govt." Etc etc etc. But now, this one scientist says something you agree with (which isnt that man made climate change isn't happening, he's just questioning the severity) and now it is ok to listen to a scientist.
Besides the fact that, it looks like there are plenty of other scientists and groups that disagree with this guy and think he misinforms more than anything else.
Oh, and what makes someone a "Top" scientist? I'm just curious.
It also is interesting to me, that I've posted studies and scientists before (as have many other posters on here) that have been dismissed for being from "liberal elitist professors and universities". "They are funded by our liberal govt." Etc etc etc. But now, this one scientist says something you agree with (which isnt that man made climate change isn't happening, he's just questioning the severity) and now it is ok to listen to a scientist.
Besides the fact that, it looks like there are plenty of other scientists and groups that disagree with this guy and think he misinforms more than anything else.
Oh, and what makes someone a "Top" scientist? I'm just curious.
No Woodley. You're missing the point. Recall those lunatics Copernicus and Galilei who believed that the sun, not the earth was the center of the solar system. The Church in those days had great influence over the scientific community.
Do you see the parallel Woodley?
-
In your example, the scientific, forward thinking individual is being silenced by a very, very unscientific group. The church doesn't think differently because of its own experiments and use of the scientific theory. They think differently because of an old book and because they see "science" as a threat to their control over the masses.
In this case, it is one scientist that disagrees with the overwhelming majority of other scientists and groups. These groups though, unlike the church, have arrived at their ideas through experiments, data, etc and the scientific method. They have reason to disagree outside of mere censorship.
This scientists is disagreeing with the extent at which we need to worry about climate change, and other scientists and groups have pointed out flaws in his statements, or just that they're incorrect in general. He exists as the very small minority not because he is expressing some status quo breaking, Earth shattering idea, but because there isn't the evidence to back his idea up. The scientists you mentioned had evidence, the church had none. They aren't doing this to censor him, they are doing it for science. There isn't some evil, liberal, hive mind of scientists trying to redistribute the wealth by tricking everyone into thinking climate change is real. If you believe that, then you have no reason to believe this particular scientist.
-
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/
Global Highlights- The year 2014 was the warmest year across global land and ocean surfaces since records began in 1880. The annually-averaged temperature was 0.69°C (1.24°F) above the 20th century average of 13.9°C (57.0°F), easily breaking the previous records of 2005 and 2010 by 0.04°C (0.07°F). This also marks the 38th consecutive year (since 1977) that the yearly global temperature was above average. Including 2014, 9 of the 10 warmest years in the 135-year period of record have occurred in the 21st century. 1998 currently ranks as the fourth warmest year on record.
- The 2014 global average ocean temperature was also record high, at 0.57°C (1.03°F) above the 20th century average of 16.1°C (60.9°F), breaking the previous records of 1998 and 2003 by 0.05°C (0.09°F). Notably, ENSO-neutral conditions were present during all of 2014.
- The 2014 global average land surface temperature was 1.00°C (1.80°F) above the 20th century average of 8.5°C (47.3°F), the fourth highest annual value on record.
- Precipitation measured at land-based stations around the globe was near average on balance for 2014, at 0.52 mm below the long-term average. However, as is typical, precipitation varied greatly from region to region. This is the third consecutive year with near-average global precipitation at land-based stations.
-
Except they are only 38 percent sure.
LOL.
-
That's generally how a margin of error works. There will be one associated with every data point they use. So it is most likely the hottest year on record, or it is just below the hottest year on record. I am not sure how that is a win for you.
-
-
-
www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/twenty-year...
Mar 30, 2013 · The fact that global surface temperatures have not followed the expectedglobal warming pattern is now widely accepted. Picture: Ray Strange Source: The ... -
wattsupwiththat.com/2011/07/04/a-peer-reviewed-admission... Cached
Jul 04, 2011 · Breaking: A peer reviewed admission that “global surface temperatures didnot rise between 1998 and 2008″ – Dr David Whitehouse on the PNAS paper ...
www.economist.com/news/...rising-temperatures-over-past... Cached
Mar 08, 2014 · Global warming Who pressed the pause button? The slowdown in risingtemperatures over the past 15 years goes from being unexplained to overexplainedwww.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2013/03/06/as-carbon... Cached
Mar 06, 2013 · New data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration show atmospheric carbon dioxide levels are continuing to rise but global temperatures are ... -
-
Please don't post google searches. Just post an article or two. The "throw shit at the wall and see what sticks" technique is played out. Also, the concerns of your links are addressed in my last link.
-
I don't see what you have a problem with woody? He essentially just posted four articles. I'm not reading them, or yours, because I couldn't give a shit about global warming but the fashion in which he posts his isn't bothersome to me.
Early man walked away as modern man took control. Their minds weren't all the same and to conquer was their goal. So He built his great empires and he slaughtered his own kind, and he died a confused man and killed himself in his own mind... -
Cysko, Cal has a bad habit of just slinging mountains of links to sites because he did a google search. They could all be billybobsbackyard.blog.com types of sites but it doesn't matter so long as you show a lot of them.
He basically only does it to Woody though haha.
-
Yeah one of them is from whatsupwitthat I wouldn't trust it but the economist and Forbes ought to be somewhat reputable.
Early man walked away as modern man took control. Their minds weren't all the same and to conquer was their goal. So He built his great empires and he slaughtered his own kind, and he died a confused man and killed himself in his own mind... -
Mostly me, haha. I think you're right.
I'm just saying, if we're trying to have some back and forth or debate here, that helps no one. Either posting Google searches or posting 10 posts in rapid succession from all over the internet.
-
Yeah one of them is from whatsupwitthat I wouldn't trust it but the economist and Forbes ought to be somewhat reputable.
Yeah one of them is from whatsupwitthat I wouldn't trust it but the economist and Forbes ought to be somewhat reputable.
FWIW, the Economist article basically explains the pause in temperature rise, ending with:
The solar cycle is already turning. And aerosol cooling is likely to be reined in by China’s anti-pollution laws. Most of the circumstances that have put the planet’s temperature rise on “pause” look temporary. Like the Terminator, global warming will be back.
-
So either Cal's changed his tune on global warming, or didn't really read the article.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login