Posts Tagged ‘scientists’

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.

It seems that thoughtful questions about the environment are asked and then many or most answers say that there are no problems and scientists are full of it. And factual answers with information on helping our environment are given negative ratings.
Do these environment haters just like to force their views on us?
It really shows how many ignorant people there really are.

"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?

The climate has changed for billions of years.
It’s been much hotter and much colder.
The temperature has gone up and down slower and faster.
There has been much more and much less CO2 in the atmosphere.
The CO2 has increased and decreased at slower and faster rates as well before humans exsisted.
Also other planets in the solar system are changing at the same rate as earth.

Why is it any different now?

How can this be attributed to humans when this has all happend even before Humans were here?

It seems that the so called environ"MENTAL" crowd should be behind global warming, if it’s going to be as bad as they say. All of the catastrophy that they claim will happen
will only result in a reduction of population, a key component in there argument to stop global warming.

And if the debate is over, do the proponents of global warming/Climate change, understand they have lost?
So the whats normal change?
The Younger Dryas even changed by 10 to 18 degrees in approximately 10 years and then changed back.
But mankind couldn’t have had any effect at the time.
And patrick is right, scientists know nothing about Climate change so how can it be said the debate is over?

Ok, so it’s a fact that we’re destroying the environment. My question is, do you think it’s possible to save the environment and reverse the damage that has been done? Are scientists working actively with politicians to disciver alternative sources of energy that don’t cause global warming and excessive pollution? Or do we just not care? I am going to buy a hybrid so that I can do my part. I’m not a granola crunchy environmental freak, but I see way too many stories these days about climate changes and the ill effects of these changes on the world…like tsunamis, heat waves, etc.