Comments on: Climate Change Puts Our Country at Risk
Newest First
By Montanadan on 07-15-12 @ 3:47 pm
Mr. Tanner. Sorry but you sound just like the cool-aid drinkers of he last 20 years. Have younot read about the leaked e-mails from the repository of so called climate change scientists in
England proving their data was just a scam, so they can get their million dollar grants. I
noticed Mr. Tanner just bloviates with no verifiable statistics. The research I have looked into
15 years ago was the Japanese ice core research data that showed the only major climate changes
all happened before the Industrial Age and all centered around major volcanic eruptions.
Most credible climate scientists are now changing their minds about man made climate change and
admit it would bankrupt every goverment in the world to make any real changes.
Wise up.
Checkout and google 2016 OBAMA’s America this is whats important. The NOV. Elections. Its
about your freedom and your money. A must see.
By Craig moore on 07-16-12 @ 2:10 pm
Mr. Tanner, I know of no more effective way to turn off people than you example of thunderingjudgmental name calling from the pulpit.
Dr. Curry has a forthcoming paper. I suggest you read what she intends to cover:
http://judithcurry.com/2012/07/13/no-consensus-on-consensus-part-ii/
===quote===
Consensus statements silence and marginalize members who disagree with some or all of the
statement, “demoting them to second-class citizens in their own profession, regardless of their
numbers or credibility as scientists.” This marginalization acts to degrade the intellectual
climate in the field, and the declaration of consensus becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
The scientists who disagree with some or all aspects of the IPCC consensus include not only
scientists from within the field of climate science (however that might be defined), but an
increasingly broad community of technical educated people from a range of science and
engineering disciplines that have educated themselves on climate science. Some of these
individuals are quite vocal and are frequently quoted by the mainstream media. This has led to
increasingly vociferous attacks on these dissenting scientists by supporters of the IPCC
consensus, and to the labeling of anyone who disagrees with any aspect of the consensus as a
‘denier.’ (e.g Hasselman, etc.) The use of ‘denier’ to label anyone who disagrees with the
IPCC consensus leads to concerns about the IPCC being enforced as dogma, which is tied to how
dissent is dealt with.
The linear model of expertise places science at the center of political debate. Scientific
controversies surrounding evidence of climate change have thus become a proxy for political
battles over whether and how to react to climate change (Pielke 2007). Therefore, winning a
scientific debate means attaining a privileged position in political battle, hence providing
motivation for defending the consensus. As a result, it has become difficult to disentangle
political arguments about climate policies from scientific arguments about the evidence for
human-induced climate change. The quality of both political debate and scientific practice
suffers as a consequence (Hulme 2009c).
===end quote===
By Oliver on 07-16-12 @ 3:03 pm
A new analysis of 2,000 years of tree ring data has quickly made climate change deniers’ list of greatest hits to the theory of manmade global warming.
The tree rings “prove [the] climate was WARMER in Roman and Medieval times than it is now,” the
British newspaper the Daily Mail reported last week, “and [the] world has been cooling for 2,000
years.”
http://news.yahoo.com/does-tree-ring-study-put-chill-global-warming-170718316.html
By fourweight on 07-17-12 @ 2:51 pm
Modern Science brought us an end to thoughts of a flat earth, electricity, modern medicine, space travel, and cell phones. I doubt that even Copernicus (who was persecuted by the
religious zealots of his day) could have envisioned a time when that same science would be
spat upon like it is now.
Out of a few thousand doctors, you can find one who tells you that smoking might not be bad
for you…..and if you are dumb enough to follow his advice, then I guess you can cough till you
are dead. But you don’t have the right to take everyone else down with you. Unfortunately in
this case, that same stupidity is forcing everyone on the globe into forced chain-smoking
Now if that does not run afoul of Tea Party personal liberties I don’t know what does. Oh well –
guess they selectively value liberties too.
By brokenbutcher on 07-18-12 @ 11:00 am
All I have to say is, As we live essentially in a sealed sysem environment, a bubble is spacesealed up by
our atmosphere, hemisphere, and stratosphere, we have a finite amount room for poisons and toxins..
Eventually if you dont clean your fish tank, the fish die. and right now this planets “fish
tank” is the same size
as it was millions of years ago, but now home to a record amount of fish pumping out amounts of
poisons
and toxins a rate never before unleashed on the earth. Your great grand parents would never
believe we have to buy
water in bottles in stores now, and cannot just drink out of a stream.
By Craig moore on 07-18-12 @ 1:44 pm
brokenbutcher, the earth has demonstrated that it has many balancing feedback medchanisms. Youcouldn’t be more wrong about the amount of poisons and toxins being at record levels. Before
life on this planet was the most toxic.
By Eric Grimsrud on 07-18-12 @ 3:35 pm
Gentlemen,
How about cutting out the “he said, she said” approach to scientific discusssion and, instead,
make an effort to learn the science associated with climate change yourself. It ain’t that
tough to learn - there are only three factors that affect the Earth’s average temperature.
Always have been and always will.
So if you have about 90 minutes to spare, get yourself a beer or two and hit the “short course”
tab at ericgrimsrud.com, and watch and listen. The thinking required to learn the science
really won’t hurt that much. Be warned, however, the science certainly does tend to point very
strongly in one direction - Mother Nature does thing in one way - Her way and, unfortunately
does not seem to care much about our personal preferences.
By brokenbutcher on 07-18-12 @ 4:04 pm
Craig, I said, “I am just saying”. it seems to me, that you cannot just keep onspewing,shoveling,draining,
and burning hoping that the earth is going to just take care of itself. We see only a tiny blip
of time on this earth even if you live to be 100. There no possible way we can fathom the damage
we are doing over thousands of years..if we evolve with it, we dont see it. Just like obesity or
anorexia.
By Craig moore on 07-20-12 @ 10:01 am
brokenbutcher, before any statement of effect can be made, especially the “alarmist” rhetoric,there must be some way to adequately measure change. Other than reliance on models, there
just isn’t anything useful. As to models there are proving completely useless as Dr. Pielke,
Sr. writes.
http://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.com/2012/07/20/cmip5-climate-model-runs-a-scientifically-flawed-approach/
===quote===
These studies, and I am certain more will follow, show that the multi-decadal climate models are
not even skillfully simulating current climate statistics, as are needed by the impacts
communities, much less CHANGES in climate statistics. At some point, this waste of money to
make regional climate predictions decades from now is going to be widely recognized.
===end quote===
IMHO, communities should act on their regional issues.
By brokenbutcher on 07-20-12 @ 4:32 pm
Craig Moore, this is the kind of quality debate these posts should create. You bring another wayof looking at this issue to light. However “perspective” seems to be the only rusty tool we are
relying on to interperate an almost imeasurable topic with an almost infinte pile of data to
sift through..My general over thought on the entire concept of climate change is, we see a tiny
slice of history, other than what we can decypher from supposed other accurate methods, tree
rings etc.. if a fruit fly lives 24 hours.. you have to wonder if we aren’t a bunch of fruit
flies trying to unlock the mystery of why the orange shrivels and dries up all while not living
long enough even through a 100 generations of flies to understand the concept of decomposion and
evaporation…..just my little analogy… =)
By Craig moore on 07-20-12 @ 5:47 pm
brokenbutcher, I look forward to engaging with you on other issues, and keeping the discussionone of discovery.
By brokenbutcher on 07-20-12 @ 7:53 pm
C.M. I agree… I currently reside on Maui doing some discovering if you will. A formerresidence of Kalispell am I always peaking in on the “zoo” to catch up. See you around the
comment board.
B.B.
The views expressed in the comments section do not reflect those of the Beacon.