| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"---Harley---" |
| Date: |
25 Jul 2006 06:32:52 PM |
| Object: |
MIT Meteorologist Says Global Warming Is Horseshit!!! |
An MIT meteorologist Wednesday dismissed alarmist fears about human induced
global warming as nothing more than 'religious beliefs.'
"Do you believe in global warming? That is a religious question. So is the
second part: Are you a skeptic or a believer?" said Massachusetts Institute
of Technology professor Richard Lindzen, in a speech to about 100 people at
the National Press Club in Washington, D.C.
"Essentially if whatever you are told is alleged to be supported by 'all
scientists,' you don't have to understand [the issue] anymore. You simply go
back to treating it as a matter of religious belief," Lindzen said. His
speech was titled, "Climate Alarmism: The Misuse of 'Science'" and was
sponsored by the free market George C. Marshall Institute. Lindzen is a
professor at MIT's Department of Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Sciences.
Once a person becomes a believer of global warming, "you never have to
defend this belief except to claim that you are supported by all
scientists -- except for a handful of corrupted heretics," Lindzen added.
According to Lindzen, climate "alarmists" have been trying to push the idea
that there is scientific consensus on dire climate change.
"With respect to science, the assumption behind the [alarmist] consensus is
science is the source of authority and that authority increases with the
number of scientists [who agree.] But science is not primarily a source of
authority. It is a particularly effective approach of inquiry and analysis.
Skepticism is essential to science -- consensus is foreign," Lindzen said.
Alarmist predictions of more hurricanes, the catastrophic rise in sea
levels, the melting of the global poles and even the plunge into another ice
age are not scientifically supported, Lindzen said.
"It leads to a situation where advocates want us to be afraid, when there is
no basis for alarm. In response to the fear, they want us to do what they
want," Lindzen said.
Recent reports of a melting polar ice cap were dismissed by Lindzen as an
example of the media taking advantage of the public's "scientific
illiteracy."
"The thing you have to remember about the Arctic is that it is an extremely
variable part of the world," Lindzen said. "Although there is melting going
[on] now, there has been a lot of melting that went on in the [19]30s and
then there was freezing. So by isolating a section ... they are essentially
taking people's ignorance of the past," he added.
'Repetition makes people believe'
The climate change debate has become corrupted by politics, the media and
money, according to Lindzen.
"It's a sad story, where you have scientists making meaningless or ambiguous
statements [about climate change]. They are then taken by advocates to the
media who translate the statements into alarmist declarations. You then have
politicians who respond to all of this by giving scientists more money,"
Lindzen said.
"Agreement on anything is taken to infer agreement on everything. So if you
make a statement that you agree that CO2 (carbon dioxide) is a greenhouse
gas, you agree that the world is coming to an end," he added.
"There can be little doubt that the language used to convey alarm has been
sloppy at best," Lindzen said, citing Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbles and
his famous observation that even a lie will be believed if enough people
repeat it. "There is little question that repetition makes people believe
things [for] which there may be no basis," Lindzen said.
He believes the key to improving the science of climate change lies in
altering the way scientists are funded.
'Alarm is the aim'
"The research and support for research depends on the alarm," Lindzen told
CNSNews.com following his speech. "The research itself often is very good,
but by the time it gets through the filter of environmental advocates and
the press innocent things begin to sound just as though they are the end of
the world.
"The argument is no longer what models are correct -- they are not -- but
rather whether their results are at all possible. One can rarely prove
something to be impossible," he explained.
Lindzen said scientists must be allowed to conclude that 'we don't have a
problem." And if the answer turns out to be 'we don't have a problem,' we
have to figure out a better reward than cutting off people's funding. It's
as simple as that," he said.
The only consensus that Lindzen said exists on the issue of climate change
is the impact of the Kyoto Protocol, the international treaty to limit
greenhouse gases, which the U.S. does not support.
Kyoto itself will have no discernible effect on global warming regardless of
what one believes about climate change," Lindzen said.
"Claims to the contrary generally assume Kyoto is only the beginning of an
ever more restrictive regime. However this is hardly ever mentioned," he
added.
The Kyoto Protocol, which Russia recently ratified, aims to reduce the
emission of greenhouse gases to 1990 levels by the year 2010. But Lindzen
claims global warming proponents ultimately want to see a 60 to 80 percent
reduction in greenhouse gasses from the 1990 levels. Such reductions would
be economically disastrous, he said.
"If you are hearing Kyoto will cost billions and trillions," then a further
reduction will ultimately result in "a shutdown" of the economy, Lindzen
said.
.
|
|
| User: "hob" |
|
| Title: Re: MIT Meteorologist Says Global Warming Is Horseshit!!! |
26 Jul 2006 01:56:35 AM |
|
|
"<<---Harley--->>" <minus@mok.5qwertyoiuuighynm8876> wrote in message
news:44c6a975$0$5253$88260bb3@news.teranews.com...
An MIT meteorologist Wednesday dismissed alarmist fears about human
induced
global warming as nothing more than 'religious beliefs.'
First, MIT doesn't have a meteorologist (weatherman).
Second, Lindzen teaches wave and boundary layers (basically, a rain and
tornado specialist); he is not a climatologist.
Third, he was talking about the religious aspects of assuming, saying that
it is lazier to just assume and use faith, rather than doing the work of
finding out the differences in several opinions and then logically
determining the veracity of the various facets in order to reach a rigorous
conclusion.
"Do you believe in global warming? That is a religious question. So is the
second part: Are you a skeptic or a believer?" said Massachusetts
Institute
of Technology professor Richard Lindzen, in a speech to about 100 people
at
the National Press Club in Washington, D.C.
"Essentially if whatever you are told is alleged to be supported by 'all
scientists,' you don't have to understand [the issue] anymore. You simply
go
back to treating it as a matter of religious belief," Lindzen said. His
speech was titled, "Climate Alarmism: The Misuse of 'Science'" and was
sponsored by the free market George C. Marshall Institute. Lindzen is a
professor at MIT's Department of Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary
Sciences.
Once a person becomes a believer of global warming, "you never have to
defend this belief except to claim that you are supported by all
scientists -- except for a handful of corrupted heretics," Lindzen added.
According to Lindzen, climate "alarmists" have been trying to push the
idea
that there is scientific consensus on dire climate change.
"With respect to science, the assumption behind the [alarmist] consensus
is
science is the source of authority and that authority increases with the
number of scientists [who agree.] But science is not primarily a source of
authority. It is a particularly effective approach of inquiry and
analysis.
Skepticism is essential to science -- consensus is foreign," Lindzen said.
Alarmist predictions of more hurricanes, the catastrophic rise in sea
levels, the melting of the global poles and even the plunge into another
ice
age are not scientifically supported, Lindzen said.
"It leads to a situation where advocates want us to be afraid, when there
is
no basis for alarm. In response to the fear, they want us to do what they
want," Lindzen said.
Recent reports of a melting polar ice cap were dismissed by Lindzen as an
example of the media taking advantage of the public's "scientific
illiteracy."
"The thing you have to remember about the Arctic is that it is an
extremely
variable part of the world," Lindzen said. "Although there is melting
going
[on] now, there has been a lot of melting that went on in the [19]30s and
then there was freezing. So by isolating a section ... they are
essentially
taking people's ignorance of the past," he added.
'Repetition makes people believe'
The climate change debate has become corrupted by politics, the media and
money, according to Lindzen.
"It's a sad story, where you have scientists making meaningless or
ambiguous
statements [about climate change]. They are then taken by advocates to the
media who translate the statements into alarmist declarations. You then
have
politicians who respond to all of this by giving scientists more money,"
Lindzen said.
"Agreement on anything is taken to infer agreement on everything. So if
you
make a statement that you agree that CO2 (carbon dioxide) is a greenhouse
gas, you agree that the world is coming to an end," he added.
"There can be little doubt that the language used to convey alarm has been
sloppy at best," Lindzen said, citing Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbles
and
his famous observation that even a lie will be believed if enough people
repeat it. "There is little question that repetition makes people believe
things [for] which there may be no basis," Lindzen said.
He believes the key to improving the science of climate change lies in
altering the way scientists are funded.
'Alarm is the aim'
"The research and support for research depends on the alarm," Lindzen told
CNSNews.com following his speech. "The research itself often is very good,
but by the time it gets through the filter of environmental advocates and
the press innocent things begin to sound just as though they are the end
of
the world.
"The argument is no longer what models are correct -- they are not -- but
rather whether their results are at all possible. One can rarely prove
something to be impossible," he explained.
Lindzen said scientists must be allowed to conclude that 'we don't have a
problem." And if the answer turns out to be 'we don't have a problem,' we
have to figure out a better reward than cutting off people's funding. It's
as simple as that," he said.
The only consensus that Lindzen said exists on the issue of climate change
is the impact of the Kyoto Protocol, the international treaty to limit
greenhouse gases, which the U.S. does not support.
Kyoto itself will have no discernible effect on global warming regardless
of
what one believes about climate change," Lindzen said.
"Claims to the contrary generally assume Kyoto is only the beginning of an
ever more restrictive regime. However this is hardly ever mentioned," he
added.
The Kyoto Protocol, which Russia recently ratified, aims to reduce the
emission of greenhouse gases to 1990 levels by the year 2010. But Lindzen
claims global warming proponents ultimately want to see a 60 to 80 percent
reduction in greenhouse gasses from the 1990 levels. Such reductions would
be economically disastrous, he said.
"If you are hearing Kyoto will cost billions and trillions," then a
further
reduction will ultimately result in "a shutdown" of the economy, Lindzen
said.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Moses" |
|
| Title: Re: MIT Meteorologist Says Global Warming Is Horseshit!!! |
26 Jul 2006 09:01:58 AM |
|
|
MIT needs better personnel
hob wrote:
"<<---Harley--->>" <minus@mok.5qwertyoiuuighynm8876> wrote in message
news:44c6a975$0$5253$88260bb3@news.teranews.com...
An MIT meteorologist Wednesday dismissed alarmist fears about human
induced
global warming as nothing more than 'religious beliefs.'
First, MIT doesn't have a meteorologist (weatherman).
Second, Lindzen teaches wave and boundary layers (basically, a rain and
tornado specialist); he is not a climatologist.
Third, he was talking about the religious aspects of assuming, saying that
it is lazier to just assume and use faith, rather than doing the work of
finding out the differences in several opinions and then logically
determining the veracity of the various facets in order to reach a rigorous
conclusion.
"Do you believe in global warming? That is a religious question. So is the
second part: Are you a skeptic or a believer?" said Massachusetts
Institute
of Technology professor Richard Lindzen, in a speech to about 100 people
at
the National Press Club in Washington, D.C.
"Essentially if whatever you are told is alleged to be supported by 'all
scientists,' you don't have to understand [the issue] anymore. You simply
go
back to treating it as a matter of religious belief," Lindzen said. His
speech was titled, "Climate Alarmism: The Misuse of 'Science'" and was
sponsored by the free market George C. Marshall Institute. Lindzen is a
professor at MIT's Department of Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary
Sciences.
Once a person becomes a believer of global warming, "you never have to
defend this belief except to claim that you are supported by all
scientists -- except for a handful of corrupted heretics," Lindzen added.
According to Lindzen, climate "alarmists" have been trying to push the
idea
that there is scientific consensus on dire climate change.
"With respect to science, the assumption behind the [alarmist] consensus
is
science is the source of authority and that authority increases with the
number of scientists [who agree.] But science is not primarily a source of
authority. It is a particularly effective approach of inquiry and
analysis.
Skepticism is essential to science -- consensus is foreign," Lindzen said.
Alarmist predictions of more hurricanes, the catastrophic rise in sea
levels, the melting of the global poles and even the plunge into another
ice
age are not scientifically supported, Lindzen said.
"It leads to a situation where advocates want us to be afraid, when there
is
no basis for alarm. In response to the fear, they want us to do what they
want," Lindzen said.
Recent reports of a melting polar ice cap were dismissed by Lindzen as an
example of the media taking advantage of the public's "scientific
illiteracy."
"The thing you have to remember about the Arctic is that it is an
extremely
variable part of the world," Lindzen said. "Although there is melting
going
[on] now, there has been a lot of melting that went on in the [19]30s and
then there was freezing. So by isolating a section ... they are
essentially
taking people's ignorance of the past," he added.
'Repetition makes people believe'
The climate change debate has become corrupted by politics, the media and
money, according to Lindzen.
"It's a sad story, where you have scientists making meaningless or
ambiguous
statements [about climate change]. They are then taken by advocates to the
media who translate the statements into alarmist declarations. You then
have
politicians who respond to all of this by giving scientists more money,"
Lindzen said.
"Agreement on anything is taken to infer agreement on everything. So if
you
make a statement that you agree that CO2 (carbon dioxide) is a greenhouse
gas, you agree that the world is coming to an end," he added.
"There can be little doubt that the language used to convey alarm has been
sloppy at best," Lindzen said, citing Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbles
and
his famous observation that even a lie will be believed if enough people
repeat it. "There is little question that repetition makes people believe
things [for] which there may be no basis," Lindzen said.
He believes the key to improving the science of climate change lies in
altering the way scientists are funded.
'Alarm is the aim'
"The research and support for research depends on the alarm," Lindzen told
CNSNews.com following his speech. "The research itself often is very good,
but by the time it gets through the filter of environmental advocates and
the press innocent things begin to sound just as though they are the end
of
the world.
"The argument is no longer what models are correct -- they are not -- but
rather whether their results are at all possible. One can rarely prove
something to be impossible," he explained.
Lindzen said scientists must be allowed to conclude that 'we don't have a
problem." And if the answer turns out to be 'we don't have a problem,' we
have to figure out a better reward than cutting off people's funding. It's
as simple as that," he said.
The only consensus that Lindzen said exists on the issue of climate change
is the impact of the Kyoto Protocol, the international treaty to limit
greenhouse gases, which the U.S. does not support.
Kyoto itself will have no discernible effect on global warming regardless
of
what one believes about climate change," Lindzen said.
"Claims to the contrary generally assume Kyoto is only the beginning of an
ever more restrictive regime. However this is hardly ever mentioned," he
added.
The Kyoto Protocol, which Russia recently ratified, aims to reduce the
emission of greenhouse gases to 1990 levels by the year 2010. But Lindzen
claims global warming proponents ultimately want to see a 60 to 80 percent
reduction in greenhouse gasses from the 1990 levels. Such reductions would
be economically disastrous, he said.
"If you are hearing Kyoto will cost billions and trillions," then a
further
reduction will ultimately result in "a shutdown" of the economy, Lindzen
said.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Roedy Green" |
|
| Title: Re: MIT Meteorologist Says Global Warming Is Horseshit!!! |
25 Jul 2006 08:14:02 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 18:32:52 -0500, "<<---Harley--->>"
<minus@mok.5qwertyoiuuighynm8876> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted
someone who said :
Richard Lindzen
By his own admission Professor Lindzen is a "dynamical meteorologist",
that is a fancy name for a weatherman. He has in INTEREST in climate,
but he is just an amateur. He has no published papers on climate in
peer reviewed journals.
Lindzen has tied to a number of unsavory types including big tobacco,
Sun Myung Moon, the asbsestos industry (see
http://mindprod.com/politics/asbestos.html)
oil and coal industries.
Then the other point is there are only a handful of people with any
scientific credentials who say such things. Why do you prefer to
believe this minority of amateurs who have suspect motives?
Are you paid to do this or are you just stupid?
--
Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green, http://mindprod.com
Who's in charge Cheney or Bush? Ask the people who work for them:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/darkside/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Captain Compassion" |
|
| Title: Re: MIT Meteorologist Says Global Warming Is Horseshit!!! |
26 Jul 2006 12:57:47 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 26 Jul 2006 01:14:02 GMT, Roedy Green
<see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> wrote:
On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 18:32:52 -0500, "<<---Harley--->>"
<minus@mok.5qwertyoiuuighynm8876> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted
someone who said :
Richard Lindzen
By his own admission Professor Lindzen is a "dynamical meteorologist",
that is a fancy name for a weatherman. He has in INTEREST in climate,
but he is just an amateur. He has no published papers on climate in
peer reviewed journals.
Amateur eh?
Richard S. Lindzen has been the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of
Meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology since 1983.
He is the author of over 200 books and papers in the scientific
literature. He was a lead author on chapter 7 (on physical processes)
of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s Third Assessment
Report (2001). One of the world’s foremost atmospheric scientists,
Dr. Lindzen was elected in 1977 to both the National Academy of
Sciences and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. He has
received the Macelwane Medal of the American Geophysical Union and the
Meisinger and Charney Awards as well as the Haurwitz Lectureship of
the American Meteorological Society. He previously worked at the
National Center for Atmospheric Research and taught at the University
of Chicago and at Harvard University, where he held the Burden Chair
in dynamic meteorology. His A.B., S.M., and Ph.D. degrees are from
Harvard University.
Lindzen has tied to a number of unsavory types including big tobacco,
Sun Myung Moon, the asbsestos industry (see
http://mindprod.com/politics/asbestos.html)
oil and coal industries.
Then the other point is there are only a handful of people with any
scientific credentials who say such things. Why do you prefer to
believe this minority of amateurs who have suspect motives?
Are you paid to do this or are you just stupid?
--
"Science is the record of dead religions." -- Oscar Wilde
"There are no absolute certainties in this universe. A man must try to
whip order into a yelping pack of probabilities, and uniform success is
impossible." -- Jack Vance
"Civilization is the interval between Ice Ages." -- Will Durant.
"War is God's way of teaching Americans geography" -- Ambrose Bierce
"Progress is the increasing control of the environment by life.
--Will Durant
Joseph R. Darancette
daranc@NOSPAMverizon.net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bama Brian" |
|
| Title: Re: MIT Meteorologist Says Global Warming Is Horseshit!!! |
26 Jul 2006 09:45:00 AM |
|
|
Roedy Green wrote:
On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 18:32:52 -0500, "<<---Harley--->>"
<minus@mok.5qwertyoiuuighynm8876> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted
someone who said :
Richard Lindzen
By his own admission Professor Lindzen is a "dynamical meteorologist",
that is a fancy name for a weatherman. He has in INTEREST in climate,
but he is just an amateur. He has no published papers on climate in
peer reviewed journals.
Really? Here's Lindzen's proper job title: Alfred P. Sloan Professor
of Meteorology, Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences,
at MIT.
Lindzen has tied to a number of unsavory types including big tobacco,
Sun Myung Moon, the asbsestos industry (see
http://mindprod.com/politics/asbestos.html)
oil and coal industries.
This argumentative fallacy is called "poisoning the well". IOW, any
evidence of wrong-doing (whether real or imagined) is used to discredit
the real argument.
Then the other point is there are only a handful of people with any
scientific credentials who say such things. Why do you prefer to
believe this minority of amateurs who have suspect motives?
Are you paid to do this or are you just stupid?
Lindzen's not an amateur. Go see his short bio at:
http://www-eaps.mit.edu/faculty/lindzen.htm
Cheers,
Bama Brian
Libertarian
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "A Beautiful Mind" |
|
| Title: Re: MIT Meteorologist Says Global Warming Is Horseshit!!! |
25 Jul 2006 08:25:07 PM |
|
|
Roedy Green wrote:
On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 18:32:52 -0500, "<<---Harley--->>"
<minus@mok.5qwertyoiuuighynm8876> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted
someone who said :
Richard Lindzen
By his own admission Professor Lindzen is a "dynamical meteorologist",
that is a fancy name for a weatherman. He has in INTEREST in climate,
but he is just an amateur. He has no published papers on climate in
peer reviewed journals.
Which still makes him 5 times smarter than Algore, who had to put out a
vanity movie to impress his associates.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Captain Compassion" |
|
| Title: Re: MIT Meteorologist Says Global Warming Is Horseshit!!! |
25 Jul 2006 08:57:19 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 18:32:52 -0500, "<<---Harley--->>"
<minus@mok.5qwertyoiuuighynm8876> wrote:
An MIT meteorologist Wednesday dismissed alarmist fears about human induced
global warming as nothing more than 'religious beliefs.'
"Do you believe in global warming? That is a religious question. So is the
second part: Are you a skeptic or a believer?" said Massachusetts Institute
of Technology professor Richard Lindzen, in a speech to about 100 people at
the National Press Club in Washington, D.C.
"Essentially if whatever you are told is alleged to be supported by 'all
scientists,' you don't have to understand [the issue] anymore. You simply go
back to treating it as a matter of religious belief," Lindzen said. His
speech was titled, "Climate Alarmism: The Misuse of 'Science'" and was
sponsored by the free market George C. Marshall Institute. Lindzen is a
professor at MIT's Department of Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Sciences.
Once a person becomes a believer of global warming, "you never have to
defend this belief except to claim that you are supported by all
scientists -- except for a handful of corrupted heretics," Lindzen added.
According to Lindzen, climate "alarmists" have been trying to push the idea
that there is scientific consensus on dire climate change.
"With respect to science, the assumption behind the [alarmist] consensus is
science is the source of authority and that authority increases with the
number of scientists [who agree.] But science is not primarily a source of
authority. It is a particularly effective approach of inquiry and analysis.
Skepticism is essential to science -- consensus is foreign," Lindzen said.
Alarmist predictions of more hurricanes, the catastrophic rise in sea
levels, the melting of the global poles and even the plunge into another ice
age are not scientifically supported, Lindzen said.
"It leads to a situation where advocates want us to be afraid, when there is
no basis for alarm. In response to the fear, they want us to do what they
want," Lindzen said.
Recent reports of a melting polar ice cap were dismissed by Lindzen as an
example of the media taking advantage of the public's "scientific
illiteracy."
"The thing you have to remember about the Arctic is that it is an extremely
variable part of the world," Lindzen said. "Although there is melting going
[on] now, there has been a lot of melting that went on in the [19]30s and
then there was freezing. So by isolating a section ... they are essentially
taking people's ignorance of the past," he added.
'Repetition makes people believe'
The climate change debate has become corrupted by politics, the media and
money, according to Lindzen.
"It's a sad story, where you have scientists making meaningless or ambiguous
statements [about climate change]. They are then taken by advocates to the
media who translate the statements into alarmist declarations. You then have
politicians who respond to all of this by giving scientists more money,"
Lindzen said.
"Agreement on anything is taken to infer agreement on everything. So if you
make a statement that you agree that CO2 (carbon dioxide) is a greenhouse
gas, you agree that the world is coming to an end," he added.
"There can be little doubt that the language used to convey alarm has been
sloppy at best," Lindzen said, citing Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbles and
his famous observation that even a lie will be believed if enough people
repeat it. "There is little question that repetition makes people believe
things [for] which there may be no basis," Lindzen said.
He believes the key to improving the science of climate change lies in
altering the way scientists are funded.
'Alarm is the aim'
"The research and support for research depends on the alarm," Lindzen told
CNSNews.com following his speech. "The research itself often is very good,
but by the time it gets through the filter of environmental advocates and
the press innocent things begin to sound just as though they are the end of
the world.
"The argument is no longer what models are correct -- they are not -- but
rather whether their results are at all possible. One can rarely prove
something to be impossible," he explained.
Lindzen said scientists must be allowed to conclude that 'we don't have a
problem." And if the answer turns out to be 'we don't have a problem,' we
have to figure out a better reward than cutting off people's funding. It's
as simple as that," he said.
The only consensus that Lindzen said exists on the issue of climate change
is the impact of the Kyoto Protocol, the international treaty to limit
greenhouse gases, which the U.S. does not support.
Kyoto itself will have no discernible effect on global warming regardless of
what one believes about climate change," Lindzen said.
"Claims to the contrary generally assume Kyoto is only the beginning of an
ever more restrictive regime. However this is hardly ever mentioned," he
added.
The Kyoto Protocol, which Russia recently ratified, aims to reduce the
emission of greenhouse gases to 1990 levels by the year 2010. But Lindzen
claims global warming proponents ultimately want to see a 60 to 80 percent
reduction in greenhouse gasses from the 1990 levels. Such reductions would
be economically disastrous, he said.
"If you are hearing Kyoto will cost billions and trillions," then a further
reduction will ultimately result in "a shutdown" of the economy, Lindzen
said.
An obviously heretic who should be burned at the stake with low CO2
omitting wood.
--
"Science is the record of dead religions." -- Oscar Wilde
"There are no absolute certainties in this universe. A man must try to
whip order into a yelping pack of probabilities, and uniform success is
impossible." -- Jack Vance
"Civilization is the interval between Ice Ages." -- Will Durant.
"War is God's way of teaching Americans geography" -- Ambrose Bierce
"Progress is the increasing control of the environment by life.
--Will Durant
Joseph R. Darancette
daranc@NOSPAMverizon.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: MIT Meteorologist Says Global Warming Is Horseshit!!! |
25 Jul 2006 09:06:11 PM |
|
|
Captain Compassion wrote:
On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 18:32:52 -0500, "<<---Harley--->>"
<minus@mok.5qwertyoiuuighynm8876> wrote:
An MIT meteorologist Wednesday dismissed alarmist fears about human induced
global warming as nothing more than 'religious beliefs.'
"Do you believe in global warming? That is a religious question. So is the
second part: Are you a skeptic or a believer?" said Massachusetts Institute
of Technology professor Richard Lindzen, in a speech to about 100 people at
the National Press Club in Washington, D.C.
"If you are hearing Kyoto will cost billions and trillions," then a further
reduction will ultimately result in "a shutdown" of the economy, Lindzen
said.
An obviously heretic who should be burned at the stake with low CO2
omitting wood.
Into the peat bogs and save on the C02.
But the aspiring well paid and overreaching weatherman is right on the
Kyoto bit..
Kyoto just gave carte-blanche to our industrial replacements; China and
India.
Globalists, it seems, plan ahead. About 15 years ahead.
PS: The EU just blew the doors off of their own emmission limits last
year. Embarrassing.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "PagCal" |
|
| Title: Re: MIT Meteorologist Says Global Warming Is Horseshit!!! |
25 Jul 2006 11:31:31 PM |
|
|
Richard Lindzen, the famously discredited global warming skeptic,
surfaced again yesterday on the Opinion pages of the Wall Street
Journal, the preeminent "safety school" of choice among industry-funded
mouthpieces looking to bash the hard facts and real science on global
warming.
The Journal's editorial pages have long denounced global warming (even
when its news pages have run great stories about its real effects), so
it's not surprising that they would give Lindzen ample column inches to
strut his tired, old stuff again.
In today's long-winded and convoluted attack on what he calls "the iron
triangle of climate scientists, advocates and policymakers" who are
addressing global warming, Lindzen moans and groans about how hard it is
for shills like him to find funding these days. Now that even President
Bush has accepted that global warming is real (although doing nothing
about it), Lindzen whines that those of his ilk "have seen their grant
funds disappear, their work derided, and themselves libeled as industry
stooges, scientific hacks or worse." (Duh!)
Lindzen's clunky "I am not a shill!" defense quickly evaporates upon
closer look. According to Ross Gelbspan's Boiling Point book, Lindzen
received $2,500 a day to consult with coal and oil interests here and
abroad in the 1990s, a fact Lindzen does not refute.
It's a sure sign of progress when skeptics like Lindzen publicly admit
that their funding is drying up. The debate is over....global warming is
real and humans are causing it. By the sound of Lindzen's whining, the
polluters seem to have caught on that their efforts at clouding the
facts have failed, miserably. The American public is smarter than they
thought.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/laurie-david/richard-lindzen-global-w_b_19010.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "David Hartung" |
|
| Title: Re: MIT Meteorologist Says Global Warming Is Horseshit!!! |
26 Jul 2006 06:16:32 AM |
|
|
PagCal wrote:
Richard Lindzen, the famously discredited global warming skeptic,
surfaced again yesterday on the Opinion pages of the Wall Street
Journal, the preeminent "safety school" of choice among industry-funded
mouthpieces looking to bash the hard facts and real science on global
warming.
The Journal's editorial pages have long denounced global warming (even
when its news pages have run great stories about its real effects), so
it's not surprising that they would give Lindzen ample column inches to
strut his tired, old stuff again.
In today's long-winded and convoluted attack on what he calls "the iron
triangle of climate scientists, advocates and policymakers" who are
addressing global warming, Lindzen moans and groans about how hard it is
for shills like him to find funding these days. Now that even President
Bush has accepted that global warming is real (although doing nothing
about it), Lindzen whines that those of his ilk "have seen their grant
funds disappear, their work derided, and themselves libeled as industry
stooges, scientific hacks or worse." (Duh!)
Lindzen's clunky "I am not a shill!" defense quickly evaporates upon
closer look. According to Ross Gelbspan's Boiling Point book, Lindzen
received $2,500 a day to consult with coal and oil interests here and
abroad in the 1990s, a fact Lindzen does not refute.
It's a sure sign of progress when skeptics like Lindzen publicly admit
that their funding is drying up. The debate is over....global warming is
real and humans are causing it. By the sound of Lindzen's whining, the
polluters seem to have caught on that their efforts at clouding the
facts have failed, miserably. The American public is smarter than they
thought.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/laurie-david/richard-lindzen-global-w_b_19010.html
Five paragraphs, no substance.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bama Brian" |
|
| Title: Re: MIT Meteorologist Says Global Warming Is Horseshit!!! |
26 Jul 2006 09:53:02 AM |
|
|
PagCal wrote:
Richard Lindzen, the famously discredited global warming skeptic,
surfaced again yesterday on the Opinion pages of the Wall Street
Journal, the preeminent "safety school" of choice among industry-funded
mouthpieces looking to bash the hard facts and real science on global
warming.
Here's Lindzen's job title and bio from MIT:
Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology, Department of Earth,
Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences
http://www-eaps.mit.edu/faculty/lindzen.htm
I'll take his opinion over Michael Mann's discredited hockey stick
anytime - or Laurie David's smear of him.
"Professor Lindzen is a dynamical meteorologist with interests in the
broad topics of climate, planetary waves, monsoon meteorology, planetary
atmospheres, and hydrodynamic instability. His research involves studies
of the role of the tropics in mid-latitude weather and global heat
transport, the moisture budget and its role in global change, the
origins of ice ages, seasonal effects in atmospheric transport,
stratospheric waves, and the observational determination of climate
sensitivity. He has made major contributions to the development of the
current theory for the Hadley Circulation, which dominates the
atmospheric transport of heat and momentum from the tropics to higher
latitudes, and has advanced the understanding of the role of small scale
gravity waves in producing the reversal of global temperature gradients
at the mesopause. He pioneered the study of how ozone photochemistry,
radiative transfer and dynamics interact with each other. He is
currently studying the ways in which unstable eddies determine the pole
to equator temperature difference, and the nonlinear equilibration of
baroclinic instability and the contribution of such instabilities to
global heat transport. He has also been developing a new approach to
air-sea interaction in the tropics, and is actively involved in
parameterizing the role of cumulus convection in heating and drying the
atmosphere. He has developed models for the Earth's climate with
specific concern for the stability of the ice caps, the sensitivity to
increases in CO2, the origin of the 100,000 year cycle in glaciation,
and the maintenance of regional variations in climate. In cooperation
with colleagues and students, he is developing a sophisticated, but
computationally simple, climate model to test whether the proper
treatment of cumulus convection will significantly reduce climate
sensitivity to the increase of greenhouse gases. Prof. Lindzen is a
recipient of the AMS's Meisinger, and Charney Awards, and AGU's
Macelwane Medal. He is a corresponding member of the NAS Committee on
Human Rights, a member of the NRC Board on Atmospheric Sciences and
Climate, and a Fellow of the AAAS1. He is a consultant to the Global
Modeling and Simulation Group at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center, and
a Distinguished Visiting Scientist at California Institute of
Technology's Jet Propulsion Laboratory. (Ph.D., '64, S.M., '61, A.B.,
'60, Harvard University)"
The Journal's editorial pages have long denounced global warming (even
when its news pages have run great stories about its real effects), so
it's not surprising that they would give Lindzen ample column inches to
strut his tired, old stuff again.
In today's long-winded and convoluted attack on what he calls "the iron
triangle of climate scientists, advocates and policymakers" who are
addressing global warming, Lindzen moans and groans about how hard it is
for shills like him to find funding these days. Now that even President
Bush has accepted that global warming is real (although doing nothing
about it), Lindzen whines that those of his ilk "have seen their grant
funds disappear, their work derided, and themselves libeled as industry
stooges, scientific hacks or worse." (Duh!)
Lindzen's clunky "I am not a shill!" defense quickly evaporates upon
closer look. According to Ross Gelbspan's Boiling Point book, Lindzen
received $2,500 a day to consult with coal and oil interests here and
abroad in the 1990s, a fact Lindzen does not refute.
Argumentative fallacy called "poisoning the well" at work here.
It's a sure sign of progress when skeptics like Lindzen publicly admit
that their funding is drying up. The debate is over....global warming is
real and humans are causing it. By the sound of Lindzen's whining, the
polluters seem to have caught on that their efforts at clouding the
facts have failed, miserably. The American public is smarter than they
thought.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/laurie-david/richard-lindzen-global-w_b_19010.html
For anyone about to knee-jerk flame me, one question: How did the last
Ice Age, 10,000 years back, end? What was the mechanism?
Cheers,
Bama Brian
Libertarian
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Nostrafuckingdamus" |
|
| Title: Re: MIT Meteorologist Says Global Warming Is Horseshit!!! |
25 Jul 2006 07:38:49 PM |
|
|
There is always money to be made by pandering to the ignorant.
--
"I pray my demise isn't on a coffin bearing green mantles. I wish my demise
to be in the eagle's belly."
Osama bin Laden
.
|
|
|
| User: "A Beautiful Mind" |
|
| Title: Re: MIT Meteorologist Says Global Warming Is Horseshit!!! |
25 Jul 2006 08:23:55 PM |
|
|
Nostrafuckingdamus wrote:
There is always money to be made by pandering to the ignorant.
Duh, Algore said that first, as he donned his tinfoil hat.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
