Posts Tagged ‘scientists’

by manos_simonides

Question: Does anyone think physicists are climate scientists?
I mean they studied physics not climate, but some seem to think they are climate experts and continue spreading their ignorance. Why?

Answer:

Answer by jewels
Do they now? Never heard of even one doing that – speaking about climate – but the maybe I don’t watch enough TV.

Question: Environmental scientists and biologists investigate air pollution in an area and predict possible health issue?
Environmental scientists and biologists investigate air pollution in an area and predict possible health issues that will affect the population. Having scientists with different backgrounds and expertise investigating the same situation means that there can be differing or competing inferences and explanations.

How will this affect the predictions made by the group of scientists?
Answer
It will weaken the prediction by adding confusion with too many different opinions.
It will strengthen the prediction by adding new perspectives and ideas for experiments.
It will weaken the prediction by producing conflict and competition between the scientists.
It will strengthen the prediction by adding more opinions from which to choose.

Answer:

Answer by bob_the_chemist
In an ideal world having a group of true scientists investigating a problem from different angles should produces a better outcome. This happens nearly every day in real science where collaboration produces great science.

I once worked in a pure Chemistry group which shared information with a Biology group and we got some fine outcomes. But this was away from the politics of the Environment where many other factors come into play.

For one all sorts of people are calling themselves scientists ?? We have a fellow in Australia who is a paleontologist running around making all sorts of predictions. The media love him and he was made Australian of the year. A great media performer but not a scientist. Similar to Al Gore and David Suzuki .. show ponies ..

And what is pollution ?? The media are now calling carbon dioxide emission carbon pollution ? Crazy stuff

The latest Australian of the year is a true scientist and a Noble prize winner . he is hoping to see improvements in Science education .. we must all agree.

When people can make sense of the hysterical scare stories on the ABC and Fairfax press we may get to the ideal world your question implies .. we should have better prediction when scientists work together and that will happen again once this silly era is over and the media move on to something else.

by Mink

Question: Environmental scientists and biologists investigate air pollution in an area and predict possible health issue?
Environmental scientists and biologists investigate air pollution in an area and predict possible health issues that will affect the population. Having scientists with different backgrounds and expertise investigating the same situation means that there can be differing or competing inferences and explanations.

How will this affect the predictions made by the group of scientists?

It will strengthen the prediction by adding new perspectives and ideas for experiments.

It will strengthen the prediction by adding more opinions from which to choose.

It will weaken the prediction by adding confusion with too many different opinions.

It will weaken the prediction by producing conflict and competition between the scientists.

Answer:

Answer by Dr Muhammad Khan
good

by dothegreenthing

Question: In what way are Climate Scientists Profiting from Global Warming debate?
I have seen in quite a few subjects the statement or implication that somehow climate scientists are ‘profiting’ from their research into global warming and its causes, can anyone provide any information and support for this?

Answer:

Answer by jelly
It’s not necessarily the climate “scientists” who profit most from the global climate change scam although their project funding heavily depends upon their agreement with the funding agency.

The real profit will go to the bottom-feeder politicians at the top of the pyramid and the con artist Texan wind-farmers.

As always, to find the truth of any government funding, follow the money.
The funding reports are public property and must be made available, possibly for a small fee, through the G.A.O. Here is the link to that office:

http://www.gao.gov/

by manos_simonides

Question: More proof that climate change scientists skew their work for profits?
Climate change scientist Hanson has violated ethics rules by making millions in speaking fees from global warming supporters, such as the Tides foundation and George Soros , while collecting his government pay as a NASA scientist.
Another Al Gore?

Answer:

Answer by I still heart fugin
YES!! because we all know scientist go into that field for one reason only. PROFIT! XD

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.