Posts Tagged ‘scientists’

Question: If scientists cannot explain past global climate, why do they think they can predict the future?
For the past 65 million years since the dinosaurs died off, the earth’s climate has changed constantly. For the past 1.8 million years known as the Pleistocene, there has been at least 17 ice ages. Not a single scientist on the planet can explain what caused these weather patterns, yet, now all these same scientists claim to know the future. What gives?

Answer:

Answer by Alvaro R
The believe they can predict the future because of all the Sample they been collecting from the poles and how old they really are.

Also predicting these weather change is probably proof that humans are accelerating the world worst climate change.

by fotdmike

Question: How can climate scientists better communicate with the wider public.?
Background: At the end of last year several thousand documents belonging to climate scientists were allegedly stolen. The material was published on the internet and upon reading it, some climate change skeptics and deniers claimed that research and data had been fabricated, destroyed, exaggerated, withheld etc.

In the wake of the incident there have been several investigations, in all cases the validity of the scientists work and their findings has been upheld. One point these investigations did highlight was the need for better dissemination of information.

It was also noted by some investigations that the media often omitted to print the original caveats and were prone to selective editing, thus effectively misrepresenting the scientists.

Question: What steps do you think could, or should, be taken in order to improve upon the way information is communicated to the public at large?

Answer:

Answer by Alex Death
It sounds weird, but think of the way the media works…
Perhaps a commercial leading to their own website they can have for them selves. No editing or anything if THEY put it down. And people pretty much believe what ever their TV says now adays, ever more on new station channels. Well, maybe not everything, but its more likely.

Probably not what you where looking for, but for the way people go with things now a days, it would be more informative.

by SEDACMaps

Question: Why do warming deniers think they know better than climate scientists?
Virtually all climate scientists agree that global warming is real and a consequence of human activity. Why do warming deniers pretend that they know better than the scientists, or that the entire scientific community is, ludicrously, part of some kind of gigantic hoax? Do they have some kind of special knowledge that scientists don’t have? Would they fly in an airplane that had been designed by Rush Limbaugh rather than by engineers?

Answer:

Answer by Aleferny
because they don’t believe in facts!!!!!!

by Oxfam International

Question: What are scientists doing to prevent the Mars Climate Orbiter Disaster from happening again?
What systems did the two groups of scientists use?
What are scientists doing to prevent the Mars Climate Orbiter Disaster from happening again?

Answer:

Answer by Peter T
ftp://ftp.hq.nasa.gov/pub/pao/reports/1999/MCO_report.pdf

http://www.space.com/news/mco_report-a_991110.html

Better communication between project teams
More support to flight navigation teams
Pay more attention to anomalous data
Access to higher quality tracking resources when needed

by Oxfam International

Question: How do you feel about scientists holding an emergency summit on climate change?
“Scientists are to hold an emergency summit to warn the world’s politicians they are being too timid in their response to global warming.

Climate experts from across the world will gather in Copenhagen next month to agree a stark message to policy makers, which they hope will break the political deadlock on efforts to curb rising temperatures. The meeting follows “disturbing” studies that suggest global warming could strike harder and faster than expected.

Katherine Richardson, a marine biologist at the University of Copenhagen, who is organising next month’s event, said: “This is not a regular scientific conference. This is a deliberate attempt to influence policy.”

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/feb/09/scientists-summit-climate-change

Now for all you conspiracy theorists out there, scientists have nothing to gain monetarily from such a summit. They already have no trouble getting research grants to study climate change, and influencing political policy at this point does not benefit them in any way.

What are your thoughts on this emergency summit?

Answer:

Answer by John Terry
I think scientists should stick to science and not engage in lobbying.

And I think that the longer we go with 1998 as the “warmest year” since the end of the Little Ice Age, the more foolish AGW proponents look.

Bottom line, what they’re afraid of is that if CO2 emissions keep going up but the temperature keeps not going up, people will realize that the two are only loosely related and support for their agenda will wane.

by jpstanley

Question: What more do scientists need to do to lower emissions from cars and lower air pollution?
Heterogeneous Catalysis, Catalysitic converters and Noxer block are example I have already, but I need more ways that can limit air pollution and emissions from cars.

Answer:

Answer by Mike W
All of those are aftertreatments. The other approach is to reduce the emission coming out of the engine, which the manufacturers have been doing for years. Slowly but steadily the engines are getting cleaner.

A more radical approach is to change the engine, as in hybrids, or fuel cell vehicles.

Question: How can climate scientists using in some cases only 30 years worth of data?
Say for a fact that we know that man is the main driving factor behind climate change. Just because the temperature has risen from a global minimum and CO2 has increased during the same time frame doesn’t mean that CO2 and methane are driving the temperature change.
For MTR and others who spout the use of tree rings etc to recreate past temperature history, than why does the US EPA now is seriously doubting this information? That is one of the points that I am trying to make, the more research into the climate the more the AGW models are being filled with doubts.

Answer:

Answer by Conservative
You’ve forgotten the Fundamental Theorem of AGW.

A follows B, therefore, A caused B.

by fotdmike

Question: Was the climate change email fraud just a red herring to smear global warming scientists?
Phil Jones and others have been smeared. According to the international panels statement “the scientific reputation of Professor Jones and CRU remains intact” climate change is still a fact. What did the emails show. Nothing.

East Anglia and the Climate Research Unit (CRU) have been cleared and can proceed with the quality research on global warming. Now that this has blown over, should we all get on with Ktoto and beyond?

Answer:

Answer by El Tecolote
Ahahahahahhahahaaahhhahhahahahhaha…. jeez, all I can do is laugh here. Ahahahahha… Why in the hell would these guys deliberately make themselves look so… ahhahahahahahha… Some defense here.

I hope you’re not planning on continuing in law school after you’re done being an “average college student.” Then again, maybe you should.

scientists studying scrub jays found it is common for "helpers" to assist mated birds in raising their young. the helpers lack territories and mates of their own. instead, they help the territory owners gather food for their offspring. helpers are usually fledglings from the same family and stay and help for a year before mating. A) propose a hypothesis to explain what advantage there might be for the helpers to engage in this behavior instead of seeking their own territories and mates. B) how would you test your hypothesis?

Someone I know is looking for funding to build a green energy invention. Can’t give details because inventions have to be protected, but if anyone knows of a real source of funding for this kind of thing your help would be nice. It has to be available to the average person though, not scientists and so on.
Also this invetion so far has no working models, but it does not use any kind of fuel and produces no pollution. It is a power unit that will be used to turn a generator to produce electric.