Global warming

brianlux said:

BS44325 said:

brianlux said:

BS44325 said:

The key to good science is verifiable data and reproducible results. Hopefully after this study we will have more reliable data so that we might better interpret the results


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/11561629/Top-scientists-start-to-examine-fiddled-global-warming-figures.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3055646/Did-exaggerated-records-make-global-warming-look-worse-Scientists-investigate-adjusted-temperatures-skewed-data.html

These kinds of claims by highly paid science deniers working for big oil come up on a fairly regular basis.

Science deniers refuse to look at the data for fear of what they might find. The data clearly has some issues right now. You should not be afraid to find out why.

"Science deniers"? Oh man, BS, you certainly are relentless, haha!

Have you read any of the tons of information I've posted from realclimate.org, ucsusa.org, 350.org etc.? Look into who these people are and what their qualifications are. They are non-partisan scientists who are fanatical about one thing: SCIENCE! They don't work for big oil or other corporations that have a lot to lose when global warming is finally recognized in their tiny corner. Nothing has changed. The mis-information coming from corporations is the same and the people they hire are a very small and well paid off percentage of the qualified world science community. Why do you insist on listening to those who are paid off to support climate deniers? Does it make you feel more secure? Does it make you feel less guilty about using more plastic and petroleum? Or do you just enjoy the debate? I'm serious. I don't get it.

I have read a number of the things that you have posted but it doesn't change the actual fact that the science has evolved and the data is not lining up with earlier predictions. After all this time it has still not been explained. You posted a link that theorizes why it doesn't line up but that is not enough. I am a science guy. I have a master's of science in a different field. It doesn't even come close to making me an expert but it has trained me to think critically. Ten years ago I would have agreed with you on the certainty of man-made global warming but as the data changed so did my thinking. The environment is such a complex system and the more we study it the more we find how other variables affect the climate as well. As I have said before...this doesn't mean man has zero effect on climate. It might mean though the that significance of man's actions may not be as impactful when compared to these other variables. Not all skeptics are in the pockets of big oil. You should recognize that and be ok with an examination of data.

brianlux said:

backseatLover12 said:

BS44325 said:

Science deniers refuse to look at the data for fear of what they might find. The data clearly has some issues right now. You should not be afraid to find out why.

This quote wins an award. FEAR! Hilarious! :lol

I think someone is a bit unclear on what scientist do, haha? Sorry, BS, don't mean to laugh at you but really, think about it. They're SCIENTISTS!

Not understanding you here.

brianlux said:

BS44325 said:

brianlux said:

backseatLover12 said:

BS44325 said:

Science deniers refuse to look at the data for fear of what they might find. The data clearly has some issues right now. You should not be afraid to find out why.

This quote wins an award. FEAR! Hilarious! :lol

I think someone is a bit unclear on what scientist do, haha? Sorry, BS, don't mean to laugh at you but really, think about it. They're SCIENTISTS!

Not understanding you here.

I'm referring the idea that "Science deniers refuse to look at the data for fear of what they might find." These are scientists. The vast majority of them don't base their research on emotions like fear. They are totally obsessed with trying to figure out WHAT IS. Fear just doesn't factor in. Have you ever met a scientist? They really are as I describe them. They just want to get the the bottom of things.

well, brian, to be honest, all scientists work for someone. or their work is subsidized by grants given them based on a hypothesis or theory. if all of a sudden that theory dries up, so does that funding.

I would say most scientists, whether you want to believe it or not, are in the pocket of someone or something. just depends on how deep.

I think maybe the mocking of someone who is having a clear, concise, and credible discussion, is not warranted.

.

backseatLover12 said:

Only the fossil fuel industry threatens to censor scientific findings and reports…

Really, all of this questioning science that's suddenly trendy is just that, trendy. A clear, concise and credible discussion would actually not involve the idea that science can be debated by, ugh, non-science.

Gotta disagree. Just look at anything relating to GMOs and the food industry.

BS44325 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

brianlux said:

BS44325 said:

brianlux said:

backseatLover12 said:

BS44325 said:

Science deniers refuse to look at the data for fear of what they might find. The data clearly has some issues right now. You should not be afraid to find out why.

This quote wins an award. FEAR! Hilarious! :lol

I think someone is a bit unclear on what scientist do, haha? Sorry, BS, don't mean to laugh at you but really, think about it. They're SCIENTISTS!

Not understanding you here.

I'm referring the idea that "Science deniers refuse to look at the data for fear of what they might find." These are scientists. The vast majority of them don't base their research on emotions like fear. They are totally obsessed with trying to figure out WHAT IS. Fear just doesn't factor in. Have you ever met a scientist? They really are as I describe them. They just want to get the the bottom of things.

well, brian, to be honest, all scientists work for someone. or their work is subsidized by grants given them based on a hypothesis or theory. if all of a sudden that theory dries up, so does that funding.

I would say most scientists, whether you want to believe it or not, are in the pocket of someone or something. just depends on how deep.

I think maybe the mocking of someone who is having a clear, concise, and credible discussion, is not warranted.

I don't find it as mocking. It is more of a dodge. There are a ton of scientists in countless industries and academia who are heavily invested in the current climate models. The data is not supporting these models anymore and we should want to know why. Those that suggest anyone who re-evaluates the data is "in the pocket of big oil" are in fact afraid of having their livelihood affected and are practicing a form of Scientific McCarthyism.

There were some earlier posts by him that i would call mocking. But either way, i agree with you. As long as it is supported by sound science, it should be thought of as welcoming dialogue. But i know brians position on this, and i am admittedly paraphrasing, that he says the science is sound, there is no room for debate, that we need to stop discussing and start acting. Which is fair, as we are either in dire straights because of man, in dire straights be ause of nature, but any way you slice it, the storm is coming.

backseatLover12 said:

BS44325 said:

backseatLover12 said:

Then it shouldn't be a problem to post Scholarly articles.

Correct. Here is a great article discussing what it is skeptics actually believe...

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/04/25/i-am-a-climate-skeptic-who-believes-in-global-warming/

There is a lot of science in there outlining the controversies. Very rational.

There is no such academia by the name of wattsupwiththat University...

Oh come now, bsL, you and I know that any science related web site that features hot babes with their legs up on a car's steering wheel and articles on budget friendly puppy dogs are VERY LIKELY to be filled with excellent scientific data of the highest quality!

BS44325 said:

brianlux said:

backseatLover12 said:

BS44325 said:

backseatLover12 said:

Then it shouldn't be a problem to post Scholarly articles.

Correct. Here is a great article discussing what it is skeptics actually believe...

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/04/25/i-am-a-climate-skeptic-who-believes-in-global-warming/

There is a lot of science in there outlining the controversies. Very rational.

There is no such academia by the name of wattsupwiththat University...

Oh come now, bsL, you and I know that any science related web site that features hot babes with their legs up on a car's steering wheel and articles on budget friendly puppy dogs are VERY LIKELY to be filled with excellent scientific data of the highest quality!

Keep dodging the data boys.

I was kidding, BS.

Not dodging the data at all. In fact, today is the first day of the free climate change course. Did you sign up for it?