Members banned from this thread: Cypress, evince, Micawber, ThatOwlWoman, katzgar and Jade Dragon


Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 73

Thread: MIT Professor Richard Lindzen on Climate Sensitivity

  1. #46 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    96,404
    Thanks
    49,287
    Thanked 29,752 Times in 22,770 Posts
    Groans
    40,133
    Groaned 4,297 Times in 4,097 Posts
    Blog Entries
    53

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sear View Post
    Please do not presume to instruct me, a scientist, on scientific method.

    Quite the contrary. I contributed multiple times to this and other topics IN HOPE of being challenged. It's OK HM. I suppose you at least tried.

    You challenged* in this thread, I presented my perspective, and in short order you conceded my point.

    That's not incidental to my participation. It's why I participate.

    It may also be worth noting that Earth's climate has undergone substantial changes in its ~billion year history.
    Proof that 3rd millennium climate change is substantially anthropogenic is scant.

    What we do know is that we're adding Carbon to the atmosphere by the ton, and that while natural gas might seem a cleaner burning fuel than coal, fracking as currently practiced in the U.S. includes an enormous amount of spillage.
    And that spillage of gas, dumping it into the atmosphere has environmental consequences.

    It's a vast and complex eco-system.
    But insulting science isn't going to diminish harm somehow.

    * Not in the sense of being difficult, but merely in taking an alternate perspective.
    IF you think that less than 6 inch rise in sea level in 80 years is a big deal then I am not sure what to say to you?

  2. #47 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    21,058
    Thanks
    7,282
    Thanked 9,225 Times in 6,111 Posts
    Groans
    2,013
    Groaned 1,476 Times in 1,364 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Havana Moon View Post
    She is very much, by your definition anyway, a denier, to anyone else she is a sceptic which is the only right and proper position for any good scientist. In fact she left the Georgia Institute of Technology because of all the hounding by former colleagues and the media. Here is another article that should clarify her position. Richard Lindzen and Judith Curry are pretty much in lockstep over the science and only really disagree over details. One being the value of the Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity for CO2 (ECS), which she thinks is around 1.66C and Lindzen believes it to far nearer to 1.2C or below.
    So IOW, she is just siding with Lindzen, because she is one of his fellow corporate paid whores and she's trying to provide cover for them.

    Got it.

    And BTW, it's spelled "skeptic" with a k, not "sceptic" with a c.

    Mr. Advanced Degree.
    https://i.postimg.cc/PqVCnGks/gojoe1.jpg
    C'MON MAN!!!!

  3. The Following User Groans At Nomad For This Awful Post:

    Primavera (08-11-2018)

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Nomad For This Post:

    Micawber (08-11-2018)

  5. #48 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    96,404
    Thanks
    49,287
    Thanked 29,752 Times in 22,770 Posts
    Groans
    40,133
    Groaned 4,297 Times in 4,097 Posts
    Blog Entries
    53

    Default

    It's spelt sceptic over here, ignorant Septic. She points exactly what you are doing here and the Left always does. Climate science has been hopelessly commandeered by left wing politicians and environmentalists who have little interest in the facts, only using confirmation bias and dodgy climate models for their own ends.

  6. #49 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    96,404
    Thanks
    49,287
    Thanked 29,752 Times in 22,770 Posts
    Groans
    40,133
    Groaned 4,297 Times in 4,097 Posts
    Blog Entries
    53

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nomad View Post
    So IOW, she is just siding with Lindzen, because she is one of his fellow corporate paid whores and she's trying to provide cover for them.

    Got it.

    And BTW, it's spelled "skeptic" with a k, not "sceptic" with a c.

    Mr. Advanced Degree.
    Sorry you're just an idiot, I won't be responding to you anymore.

  7. #50 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    96,404
    Thanks
    49,287
    Thanked 29,752 Times in 22,770 Posts
    Groans
    40,133
    Groaned 4,297 Times in 4,097 Posts
    Blog Entries
    53

    Default

    All too often you will get some smug git invoking Gonad's Law. It is second nature to them but it is arrant bullshit for the most part and easily disproven. Anybody who reads this article in the National Review will quickly realised who the real culprits are.

    https://www.nationalreview.com/2015/...y-henry-payne/

  8. #51 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    96,404
    Thanks
    49,287
    Thanked 29,752 Times in 22,770 Posts
    Groans
    40,133
    Groaned 4,297 Times in 4,097 Posts
    Blog Entries
    53

    Default

    It is truly laughable how the Left always tries to muddy the waters by claiming that anybody they dislike is receiving fossil fuel funding when it's the Left who are the biggest culprits. Gonad is just the latest to resort to this incredibly lazy and duplicitous bullshit. Here is an extremely well written article that documents the real culprits. It describes just how incestuous the climate alarmists were back in the Obama days. Fortunately Trump has put paid to a lot of that.


    It isn’t the fossil-fuel companies that are polluting climate science.

    Citing documents uncovered by the radical environmental group Greenpeace, a group of media outlets — including the New York Times and the Boston Globe — have attacked global-warming skeptic Wei-Hock (Willie) Soon for allegedly hiding $1.2 million in contributions from “fossil fuel companies.” The articles were the latest in an ongoing campaign by greens and their media allies to discredit opponents of the warming agenda.

    But in allying themselves closely with activist groups with which they share ideological goals, reporters have fundamentally misled readers on the facts of global-warming funding.

    In truth, the overwhelming majority of climate-research funding comes from the federal government and left-wing foundations. And while the energy industry funds both sides of the climate debate, the government/foundation monies go only toward research that advances the warming regulatory agenda. With a clear public-policy outcome in mind, the government/foundation gravy train is a much greater threat to scientific integrity.

    Officials with the Smithsonian Institution — which employs Dr. Soon — told the Times it appeared the scientist had violated disclosure standards, and they said they would look into the matter. Soon, a Malaysian immigrant, is a widely respected astrophysicist, and his allies came quickly to his defense.

    “It is a despicable, reprehensible attack on a man of great personal integrity,” says Myron Ebell, the director of Global Warming and International Environmental Policy for the Competitive Enterprise Institute, who questioned why media organizations were singling out Soon over research funding.

    Indeed, experts in the research community say that it is much more difficult for some of the top climate scientists — Soon, Roger Pielke Jr., the CATO Institute’s Patrick Michaels, MIT’s now-retired Richard Lindzen — to get funding for their work because they do not embrace the global-warming fearmongering favored by the government-funded climate establishment.

    “Soon’s integrity in the scientific community shines out,” says Ebell. “He has foregone his own career advancement to advance scientific truth. If he had only mouthed establishment platitudes, he could’ve been named to head a big university [research center] like Michael Mann.”

    Mann is the controversial director of Pennsylvania State’s Earth System Science Center. He was at the center of the 2009 Climategate scandal, in which e-mails were uncovered from climatologists discussing how to skew scientific evidence and blackball experts who don’t agree with them.

    Mann is typical of pro-warming scientists who have taken millions from government agencies. The federal government — which will gain unprecedented regulatory power if climate legislation is passed — has funded scientific research to the tune of $32.5 billion since 1989, according the Science and Public Policy Institute. That is an amount that dwarfs research contributions from oil companies and utilities, which have historically funded both sides of the debate.

    Mann, for example, has received some $6 million, mostly in government grants — according to a study by The American Spectator — including $500,000 in federal stimulus money while he was under investigation for his Climategate e-mails.

    Despite claims that they are watchdogs of the establishment, media outlets such as the Times have ignored the government’s oversized role in directing research. And they have ignored millions in contributions from left-wing foundations — contributions that, like government grants, seek to tip the scales to one side of the debate.

    Last summer, a minority staff report from the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works gave details on a “Billionaire’s Club” — a shadowy network of charitable foundations that distribute billions to advance climate alarmism. Shadowy nonprofits such as the Energy Foundation and Tides Foundation distributed billions to far-left green groups such as the Natural Resources Defense Council, which in turn send staff to the EPA who then direct federal grants back to the same green groups. It is incestuous. It is opaque. Major media ignored the report.

    Media outlets have also discriminated in their reporting on Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. The Times trumpeted Greenpeace FOIA requests revealing Soon’s benefactors, yet it has ignored the government’s refusal of FOIA filings requesting transparency in pro-warming scientists’ funding.

    The Competitive Enterprise Institute, for example, has submitted FOIA requests asking for the sources of outside income of NASA scientist James Hansen (a key ally of Al Gore). The government has stonewalled, according to Ebell.

    Media reporting further misleads readers in suggesting that “fossil fuel” utilities such as the Southern Company (a $409,000 contributor to Soon’s research, according to the Times) seek only to undermine climate science. In truth, energy companies today invest in solar, biomass, and landfill facilities in addition to carbon fuels. Companies such as Duke Energy, Exelon Corporation, NRG Energy, and Shell have even gone so far as to join with green groups in forming the U.S. Climate Action Partnership — an industry/green coalition that wants to “enact strong national legislation to require significant reductions of greenhouse gas emissions.”

    This alliance worries a scientific community that is hardly unanimous that warming is a threat. Continued funding of contrarians such as Soon and Lindzen is essential to getting the best scientific research at a time when the EPA wants to shut down America’s most affordable power source, coal — at enormous cost to consumers.

    The lack of warming for over a decade (witness this winter’s dangerous, record-breaking low temperatures) and Climategate are proof that the establishment has oversold a warming crisis. Attempts by the media to shut up their critics ignore the real threat to science.
    https://www.nationalreview.com/2015/...y-henry-payne/
    Last edited by Primavera; 08-11-2018 at 08:02 AM.

  9. #52 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    29,389
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 13,927 Times in 8,873 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 2,408 Times in 2,238 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Havana Moon View Post
    I am impressed with your mastery of Google!
    Nah, there are so many sources debunking your supposed expert that anyone can reproduce dozens, two minute task, if it walks like a duck, looks like a duck, and sounds like a duck, it probably is a ...................

    Admit it, you are going stick with the quack regardless because he tells you what you want to hear, you are not the first lemming to get played by a demagogue

  10. The Following User Groans At archives For This Awful Post:

    Primavera (08-11-2018)

  11. #53 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    29,389
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 13,927 Times in 8,873 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 2,408 Times in 2,238 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Havana Moon View Post
    You deduce wrong, I have an honours degree in chemistry.

    I also understand the Arrhenius equation for CO2 climate forcing as well, namely ΔFCO2 = (5.35 W·m–2) ln C/C0.

    I spelt your ID as Seer in an ironic twist, sorry if you didn't get it!

    https://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...38#post2528538
    That's the topper, "I have honor degrees in chemistry," too funny, like everyone is suppose to stop now because "moonie" tells us he has "honor degrees in chemistry," beautiful

    You are a Kool aid drinker, easy prey for demogogues.

  12. The Following User Groans At archives For This Awful Post:

    Primavera (08-11-2018)

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to archives For This Post:

    Nomad (08-11-2018)

  14. #54 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    96,404
    Thanks
    49,287
    Thanked 29,752 Times in 22,770 Posts
    Groans
    40,133
    Groaned 4,297 Times in 4,097 Posts
    Blog Entries
    53

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by archives View Post
    Nah, there are so many sources debunking your supposed expert that anyone can reproduce dozens, two minute task, if it walks like a duck, looks like a duck, and sounds like a duck, it probably is a ...................

    Admit it, you are going stick with the quack regardless because he tells you what you want to hear, you are not the first lemming to get played by a demagogue
    You're a fool, and sadly the worst kind, that think they are otherwise. Never once in any of your 'contributions' have you ever discussed the science because you can't, it's as simple as that. Will you be invoking Gonad's Law as well?

  15. #55 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    96,404
    Thanks
    49,287
    Thanked 29,752 Times in 22,770 Posts
    Groans
    40,133
    Groaned 4,297 Times in 4,097 Posts
    Blog Entries
    53

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by archives View Post
    That's the topper, "I have honor degrees in chemistry," too funny, like everyone is suppose to stop now because "moonie" tells us he has "honor degrees in chemistry," beautiful

    You are a Kool aid drinker, easy prey for demogogues.
    I have asked you before about your scientific qualifications and only been met with silence, I can only surmise that you have none and think a BA in gender studies is all you need.

  16. #56 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    land-locked in Ocala,FL
    Posts
    26,044
    Thanks
    29,477
    Thanked 16,081 Times in 11,084 Posts
    Groans
    999
    Groaned 859 Times in 817 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nomad View Post
    GTFOH, Stench.

    Nobody believes that nonsense.

    Nobody who was ever related to a dumbass like you ever taught physics anywhere.

    Physical education, maybe...
    Who chucked in your Cheerios this morning?
    Abortion rights dogma can obscure human reason & harden the human heart so much that the same person who feels
    empathy for animal suffering can lack compassion for unborn children who experience lethal violence and excruciating
    pain in abortion.

    Unborn animals are protected in their nesting places, humans are not. To abort something is to end something
    which has begun. To abort life is to end it.



  17. The Following User Says Thank You to Stretch For This Post:

    Primavera (08-11-2018)

  18. #57 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    96,404
    Thanks
    49,287
    Thanked 29,752 Times in 22,770 Posts
    Groans
    40,133
    Groaned 4,297 Times in 4,097 Posts
    Blog Entries
    53

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stretch View Post
    Who chucked in your Cheerios this morning?
    Truly odious little man, does he live near you?

  19. #58 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    land-locked in Ocala,FL
    Posts
    26,044
    Thanks
    29,477
    Thanked 16,081 Times in 11,084 Posts
    Groans
    999
    Groaned 859 Times in 817 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Havana Moon View Post
    Truly odious little man, does he live near you?
    Geeeeeeeeez I hope not.
    Abortion rights dogma can obscure human reason & harden the human heart so much that the same person who feels
    empathy for animal suffering can lack compassion for unborn children who experience lethal violence and excruciating
    pain in abortion.

    Unborn animals are protected in their nesting places, humans are not. To abort something is to end something
    which has begun. To abort life is to end it.



  20. The Following User Groans At Stretch For This Awful Post:

    Primavera (08-11-2018)

  21. #59 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    96,404
    Thanks
    49,287
    Thanked 29,752 Times in 22,770 Posts
    Groans
    40,133
    Groaned 4,297 Times in 4,097 Posts
    Blog Entries
    53

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stretch View Post
    Geeeeeeeeez I hope not.
    He lives in Florida as well!

  22. #60 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    29,389
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 13,927 Times in 8,873 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 2,408 Times in 2,238 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Havana Moon View Post
    I have asked you before about your scientific qualifications and only been met with silence, I can only surmise that you have none and think a BA in gender studies is all you need.
    Well my "studies" taught me enough to recognize a quack, and, when to side with those whose professions rely upon understanding climate.

    http://www.opr.ca.gov/facts/list-of-...nizations.html

    https://www.c2es.org/site/assets/upl...-are-doing.pdf

    https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

  23. The Following User Groans At archives For This Awful Post:

    Primavera (08-11-2018)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 58
    Last Post: 11-12-2019, 09:16 AM
  2. A Veneer of Certainty Stoking Climate Alarm (arsehole free zone)
    By Primavera in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 12-02-2017, 12:29 PM
  3. Five minutes with Prof. Richard Lindzen on 'climate change'
    By Primavera in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 11-23-2017, 03:51 AM
  4. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-08-2013, 03:06 PM
  5. Emeritus Professor of Physics resigns over AGW FRAUD!
    By Dixie - In Memoriam in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 106
    Last Post: 10-14-2010, 02:54 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •