Re Comments? Re New York Times defends hiring extreme climate denier: 'millions agree with him'

["Dave Farber" <farber () gmail com>]

Begin forwarded message:

> From: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick () ianai net>
> Date: May 30, 2017 at 3:27:07 PM EDT
> To: Dave Farber <dave () farber net>, Rob McEwen <rob () invaluement com>
> Cc: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick () ianai net>, ip <ip () listbox com>
> Subject: Re: [IP] Re Comments? Re New York Times defends hiring extreme climate denier: 'millions agree with him'
>
> > > Meanwhile, the "natural" temperature of outer space is -455 degrees F. The ONLY reason we're not all frozen at -455 
> > > degrees F is due to this ball of fire 8 light minutes from us, that is so massively large that 1.3 millions earths 
> > > could fit inside of it. To think that tiny changes to such tiny portions of the trace gas C02 (measured in "parts 
> > > per million"!) could impact climate more so than long-term cyclical sun cycles - is to think that the wind produced 
> > > from the wings of a nearby fly (or something similarly silly/insignificant) is going to make more of a difference 
> > > to your comfort as you sit by a camp fire in freezing weather - than, for example, stirring around the logs in that 
> > > fire.
>
> Really?
>
> Is the Sun more powerful than our atmosphere? Duh. Ya know what else? My friend lives near a nuclear plant. That 
> plant is MILLIONS of times more powerful than the little electric heater she has near her desk. Logic obviously 
> dictates the nuke plant has more to do with the temperature of her home office than her little heater.
>
> Or maybe there is more to this than silly-sounding platitudes?
>
> Science is not perfect. But it is the tool we have, and discarding it is folly at best.
>
> If you can show other data, please do. When scientists are caught hiding or fudging data, that is important and 
> should be brought to the fore. If you want to argue the other side of “climate change”, that is good, solid ground to 
> stand on. Stick with that, and push it hard, because it should be exposed.
>
> The rest of the message below only serves to weaken the argument by showing a complete lack of understanding. The 
> models used by most cutting edge fields today (not just climate, but most fields) are not easily understood by the 
> lay person. Saying a blogger looked at something and came to a different conclusion than dozens of PhDs in the field 
> in question decided through anonymous peer review is the same as saying you think a brain surgeon made a mistake 
> because the scalpel she used the wrong color.
>
> I’m going to go with the experts, even when they are sometimes shown to be mistaken, or even intentionally wrong. 
> Call me silly, but that’s just how I roll.
>
> -- 
> TTFN,
> patrick
>
> > On May 30, 2017, at 12:37 PM, Dave Farber <farber () gmail com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Begin forwarded message:
> >
> > > From: Rob McEwen <rob () invaluement com>
> > > Date: April 23, 2017 at 3:55:15 PM EDT
> > > To: dave () farber net, ip <ip () listbox com>
> > > Subject: Re: [IP] Re Comments? Re New York Times defends hiring extreme climate denier: 'millions agree with him'
> > >
> > > > Climate change deniers, of course, have very little data on their side.
> > >
> > > First, nobody denies that the climate does change. It has been doing so for all of recorded history, and 
> > > beyond--long before humans spewed any (or very much) CO2. (mostly due to long-term cyclical sun cycles). Nobody 
> > > denies that.
> > >
> > > The attempted changing of the term "global warming" to "climate change" is a "bait n switch" - and then the 
> > > assumption that someone who:
> > >
> > > (A) doesn't believe that the release of CO2 by mankind has caused any statistically significant rise in global 
> > > warming... and that there are OTHER explanations for this that make more sense (such as long-term cyclical sun 
> > > cycles)
> > >
> > > therefore MUST ALSO believe:
> > >
> > > (B) that the climate doesn't ever change
> > >
> > > The idea that A must equal B... is insulting and childish. The real scandal here is the attempted "moving of the 
> > > goalposts" - by switching "global warming" to "climate change".
> > >
> > > In fact, a significant amount of climate change came BEFORE mankind spewed very much CO2.
> > >
> > > For example:
> > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Frost_of_1683–84
> > >
> > > For various years - the Thames river froze over - in 1683–84 it froze over to a depth of over 1 foot thick ice... 
> > > THEN... over the centuries since then - a whole lot of global warming happened SINCE then, yet BEFORE that point 
> > > where humans spewed any statistically significant amount of CO2 in the atmosphere.
> > >
> > > Then there is that pesky problem where CLIMATEGATE revealed that the scientists at the most prestigious institution 
> > > in Europe for studying global warming - had internal emails revealed them admitting that the Medieval Warming 
> > > Period was warmer than anything we've seen in modern times. They then discussed ways that they could hide that.
> > >
> > > Al Gore's Inconvenient Truth tried to downplay the Medieval Warming Period as more mild - but the the ONE scientist 
> > > whose data Inconvenient Truth was based on - LOST all of his data. Funny how this lost data - was made out to be 
> > > such a big deal in the news media - because if all of this data really is "peer reviewed", shouldn't that have not 
> > > even mattered? Hmmmmm?
> > >
> > > Then, more recently, a lowly blogger dug into the raw data of the ground sensor data for recent years... he just 
> > > looked at THEIR published data... and found that very very creative algorithms were being applied to the data to 
> > > FORCE it to show global warming - where their raw data (BEFORE applying those algorithms) showed ZERO global 
> > > warming in the past 15. (just as the satellite data shows no significant warming trend for the past 15 years either)
> > >
> > > Of course, whenever there is an unusual seasonal/regional warmth due to ocean current cycles (El Ni·ño, etc), it 
> > > gets (mistakenly!) attributed to global warming. But when the Great Lakes recently froze over, that got attributed 
> > > to a one-time "arctic blast". (notice a pattern here?)
> > >
> > > Finally, the rate of sea level rise is continuing to rise at the TINY rate of about 3-4 millimeters per year with 
> > > ZERO sign of acceleration. (yet year after year, we keep seeing new charts and graphs predicting an acute 
> > > acceleration in the rate of sea level rising, followed by more failed predictions when that continues to NOT happen)
> > >
> > > In fact, Global Warming "science" (which is really pseudoscience) is littered with failed predictions and fudged 
> > > data. That its proponents also want to shut down all debate/discussion about it and declare is as "settled science" 
> > > - shows that THEY are the ones who believe in THEIR version of religious dogma much more so that the scientific 
> > > method.
> > >
> > > Meanwhile, the "natural" temperature of outer space is -455 degrees F. The ONLY reason we're not all frozen at -455 
> > > degrees F is due to this ball of fire 8 light minutes from us, that is so massively large that 1.3 millions earths 
> > > could fit inside of it. To think that tiny changes to such tiny portions of the trace gas C02 (measured in "parts 
> > > per million"!) could impact climate more so than long-term cyclical sun cycles - is to think that the wind produced 
> > > from the wings of a nearby fly (or something similarly silly/insignificant) is going to make more of a difference 
> > > to your comfort as you sit by a camp fire in freezing weather - than, for example, stirring around the logs in that 
> > > fire.
> > >
> > > -- 
> > > Rob McEwen
> >
> > Archives  | Modify Your Subscription | Unsubscribe Now        



-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/18849915-ae8fa580
Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=18849915&id_secret=18849915-aa268125
Unsubscribe Now: 
https://www.listbox.com/unsubscribe/?member_id=18849915&id_secret=18849915-32545cb4&post_id=20170530160007:8C1D12DA-4572-11E7-BE6C-856BFF55A9DC
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com