Prominent Scientists Declare Climate Claims Ahead of UN Summit ‘Irrational’

[Revi]

The way they go on about "Co2 is vital for life!" makes me think these are not actual respected scientists.

It has all the makings of a scientifically illiterate soundbite from some climate change denying think-tank.

[Rizendragon]

So what's you're problem then, if you're not this guy?

Well at the moment it means a higher cost of living, less convenience, and more social systems. I agree with some of the sentiments of these scientists. Immediately thinking someone is paid off though because they have a differing interpretation of the data is a dark place to be in...

[caervek]

I used to be a big believer in MMCC but after the infamous "hockey stick" graph was debunked I'm not so sure.

[Dsonsion]

Ok, so there's the world's evil elites trying to take over the world by introducing changes using the boogeyman of the global warming as their jack of all trades. The great majority of the qualified scientists are paid by them to agree on that, and to publish false papers that are made to look good by being filled with false information about everything. Also, it seems Al Gore's jet fuel is being paid by them too, this whole thing also seems to have ties with the UN and other worldwide organisations which are sure to seize power from, eh, us when the global warming when the governments and the nations bite the bait. We are yet to see how they do it, but we're pretty sure they will.

On the other hand, there's the brave Texas Public Policy Foundation fighting a lost fight for reason and liberty, with only so many allies at its side: a handful of scientists with their morals on the right place and a couple True American entrepreneurs that know how serious a threat all this is to our civil right and liberties. So they created the aforementioned institute to produce sound science in this world of darkness and lies, a beacon of hope in this future filled with dread.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...icy_Foundation

Continue the fight David, Charles, Richard, Bob and co. True Americans salute you!

[Cthulhu 2020]

Well at the moment it means a higher cost of living, less convenience, and more social systems. I agree with some of the sentiments of these scientists. Immediately thinking someone is paid off though because they have a differing interpretation of the data is a dark place to be in...

We established that Lindzen is well funded by Koch in the first two pages. We also know that all of his past opinions about climate change he managed to squeeze out of his ass were all wrong.

[caervek]

This is the bit people actually get hung up on:

[Cthulhu 2020]

Ok, so there's the world's evil elites trying to take over the world by introducing changes using the boogeyman of the global warming as their jack of all trades. The great majority of the qualified scientists are paid by them to agree on that, and to publish false papers that are made to look good by being filled with false information about everything. Also, it seems Al Gore's jet fuel is being paid by them too, this whole thing also seems to have ties with the UN and other worldwide organisations which are sure to seize power from, eh, us when the global warming when the governments and the nations bite the bait. We are yet to see how they do it, but we're pretty sure they will.

On the other hand, there's the brave Texas Public Policy Foundation fighting a lost fight for reason and liberty, with only so many allies at its side: a handful of scientists with their morals on the right place and a couple True American entrepreneurs that know how serious a threat all this is to our civil right and liberties. So they created the aforementioned institute to produce sound science in this world of darkness and lies, a beacon of hope in this future filled with dread.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...icy_Foundation

Continue the fight David, Charles, Richard, Bob and co. True Americans salute you!

10/10 would sig if not for size.

[alexw]

the last 3 years have been the coldest/snowiest in my area *2 years ago we broke all the records in my area* and i live in indiana.

Which is local weather not what has been seen overall. Globally 2015 will be the hottest year on record. Oh and that means the second warmest year on record will be 2014. Yet the evidence deniers still deny. No doubt its a global conspiracy by thousands of scientists across dozens of different nations, both in the private and public sectors, because well, just because.

[Pterodactylus]

Ok, so there's the world's evil elites trying to take over the world by introducing changes using the boogeyman of the global warming as their jack of all trades. The great majority of the qualified scientists are paid by them to agree on that, and to publish false papers that are made to look good by being filled with false information about everything. Also, it seems Al Gore's jet fuel is being paid by them too, this whole thing also seems to have ties with the UN and other worldwide organisations which are sure to seize power from, eh, us when the global warming when the governments and the nations bite the bait. We are yet to see how they do it, but we're pretty sure they will.

On the other hand, there's the brave Texas Public Policy Foundation fighting a lost fight for reason and liberty, with only so many allies at its side: a handful of scientists with their morals on the right place and a couple True American entrepreneurs that know how serious a threat all this is to our civil right and liberties. So they created the aforementioned institute to produce sound science in this world of darkness and lies, a beacon of hope in this future filled with dread.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...icy_Foundation

Continue the fight David, Charles, Richard, Bob and co. True Americans salute you!

Edit: Maybe this is snark?

[Springrunner]

Princeton Physicist Dr. Will Happer: 'Policies to slow CO2 emissions are really based on nonsense. We are being led down a false path. To call carbon dioxide a pollutant is really Orwellian. You are calling something a pollutant that we all produce. Where does that lead us eventually?'

Is this guy a real scientist? Has he ever read what these things mean? A polluant is a substance that is introduced into an environemental system such as, you know, the earth atmosphere, that was in a different concentration than before and such increase causes some sort of undesirable effect. -anything- can be a polluant. This guy has never worked with environemental theory and proably works on a field of study completelly unrelated to climatology.

Edit: What a hack.

[Rizendragon]

Edit: Maybe this is snark?

You might want to breathe bro... That entire post was tongue-in-cheek...

[DSRilk]

Physicist from Princeton has a little clout. A meteorologist from MIT has a little more clout. When they can convince the other 99% of people who actually study this that their findings are more repeatable and accurate, I'm perfectly willing to change sides on this topic. Until then, I'm going with the reality that there are always outliers - especially from people who work in tangential fields.

[Druover]

For the most part, anyone believing that billions aren't harming the world, with all the collected garbage and crap, isn't using their common sense. We still have a big plastic patch growing in the pacific...getting bigger every year.

What on earth does this plastic patch have to do with greenhouse gas emissions and climate change?

[Methusula]

Yelling really loudly that it's obvious that the Earth is flat doesn't make your position any more credible, dude.

The climate hasn't changed at anything like the current rate, at any point in the past, where natural causes were the only ones in play. Plus, if natural causes alone were the only ones affecting climate, we'd be cooling right now.

I mean, sure, I guess you can try and claim that basically all the thousands of climate scientists around the world, in every country, are all somehow part of the same global conspiracy, for no benefit whatsoever, and without any record of such collaboration, and with no identifiable purpose, but it sure seems silly to claim that this is the more realistic or reasonable option.

This.

People spouting nonsense about how we are getting snow in November and shouting in all caps about the Illuminati lizard overlords are the definition of Idiocracy. You cite non scientific studies, biased sources, and flat out fear mongering, conspiracy theory loving, B.S. that anyone with an iota of critical thinking capability would instantly see right through. The overwhelming majority of scientific opinion, based on peer reviewed excruciatingly scrutinized data, believes that we are adversely affecting our climate, and the warming trend we are seeing over decades of recorded weather are a very credible and significant threat.

[DSRilk]

My favorite thing is "prominent scientists." How about "prominent religious leaders agree that Jesus is not the son of God." Quoting scientists from other fields as if "scientist" were a blanket expert on all things sciency... just like any religious leader is an expert on all religions and the validity of them, right?

[Druover]

Heres the bottom line. There are many discerning opinions on climate change. And big money interests biasing both sides of the conversation. To completely ignore the potential for climate change would be a mistake, as the effect MAY be irreversible. But to call climate change the biggest current threat to America is also a mistake and just sounds silly in todays current climate. So rationale steps should be taken to minimize greenhouse gas emissions without greatly affecting business or the energy economy. But going overboard is not the answer either, and is pushed by the Koch brother equivalents on the left. People who say big oil bad, Al Gore good are blind. They are both equally only interested in the economics their side supports.

We just need to study CO2 effects more. Things like Acid rain, smog, etc. are well known and are great reasons to limit coal and oil combustion for power, which the Boiler MACT (utility) rules are achieving. Trying to require carbon capture systems for GHG emissions at this point is over the top.

- - - Updated - - -

My favorite thing is "prominent scientists." How about "prominent religious leaders agree that Jesus is not the son of God." Quoting scientists from other fields as if "scientist" were a blanket expert on all things sciency... just like any religious leader is an expert on all religions and the validity of them, right?

How is an MIT Climate scientist considered "from other fields". I think this is the same field as climate change. About as close to it as you can possibly get.

Richard Siegmund Lindzen is an American atmospheric physicist known for his work in the dynamics of the middle atmosphere, atmospheric tides, and ozone photochemistry

[alexw]

Way to miss the forest for the trees.

The simple fact is that there are think tanks established to push climate change denial, whose sole funding purpose is to manufacture a false sense of debate.

Actual scientists don't get paid anything to back a given theory. Not one red cent. They get paid their normal salaries, which they draw as academics or researchers, but none of that requires a specific conclusion to come out of their work, unlike those think tanks.

The IPCC is a good example; all contributors to the IPCC's reports are volunteers. They're paid nothing for their participation. They do it because the work is important.

There's essentially no money that's spent in backing anthropogenic climate change, specifically. The money people point to isn't earmarked for AGCC research, it's money paid to researchers to do whatever research they're interested in. AGCC theory comes out of that because it's literally the only model that makes any sense at all, given the data we have.

For instance; I'm working on an RAship this term, writing a primer on climate change adaptation. The money I get paid is to do research and produce justifiable and empirically valid conclusions, whatever those might be. If I could actually "prove" that AGCC was a fraud, I'd be lauded. I'd be a freaking celebrity. There's no way I'm going to pull that off, but the reason I can't is because the data backing AGCC theory is so thick and dense and conclusive that it's a titanic proposition. If I had the right stone to kill that giant, the entire scientific community would back me. That's how science works.

Bingo. That is the scientific method summed up in a nutshell. Scientists (I'm one by training) can't afford to do otherwise, as it would destroy the very basis of scientific advancement on which human progress is built. The scientific process was designed to be results neutral in terms of funding and in terms of outcome for this very reason. There are of course still a few bad eggs about but they are few and far between. Even the scientists working for the tobacco companies found that tobacco smoke was harmful, the managers simply lied about the results. Most non-scientists of course don't understand this, they don't understand how the search for truth is built into the very DNA of science and its scientists. Instead we are easily corrupted (supposedly) and so many have become part of a global conspiracy (supposedly).

[Druover]

For anyone looking to understand both sides, this is a good read. If you just think our world is collapsing because of bad GHG emissions, then don't read this:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/richard-...ics-1425513033

[RaoBurning]

How is an MIT Climate scientist considered "from other fields". I think this is the same field as climate change. About as close to it as you can possibly get.

Richard Siegmund Lindzen is an American atmospheric physicist known for his work in the dynamics of the middle atmosphere, atmospheric tides, and ozone photochemistry

I think he meant the other, presumably vanilla physicist, Happer, and the Greenpeace guy. And, while Lindzen appears to have proper credentials, by all available evidence he doesn't live up to them. Bit of a shame, really. I like MIT.

[Jessicka]

The "Greenpeace guy" hasn't had anything to do with Greenpeace for decades.