Poptech Posted August 2, 2010 Author Share Posted August 2, 2010 A few summers ago, right here in Sheffield, we had the wettest day on record and the hottest day on record a couple of weeks apart. What do your Eminent Physicists think of that? Weather is not climate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vague_Boy Posted August 2, 2010 Share Posted August 2, 2010 One of your nobel prizewinners doesn't say that AGW is not real, he just thinks there is nothing that can be done about it. Do you mean this quote? "The geologic record suggests that climate ought not to concern us too much when we’re gazing into the energy future, not because it’s unimportant, but because it’s beyond our power to control." - Robert Laughlin He doesn't say anything about AGW (Anthropomorphic Global Warming), just climate change. To save you a trip to Google, AGW relates to the idea than global warming or climate change is related to human activity. This is distinct from the concept of climate change as something that has occurred naturally throughout all of history, hence Laughlin's reference to the geologic record. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted August 2, 2010 Share Posted August 2, 2010 I think a hefty dose of Clarke's Law might be applicable here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted August 3, 2010 Share Posted August 3, 2010 Do you mean this quote? He doesn't say anything about AGW (Anthropomorphic Global Warming), just climate change. To save you a trip to Google, AGW relates to the idea than global warming or climate change is related to human activity. This is distinct from the concept of climate change as something that has occurred naturally throughout all of history, hence Laughlin's reference to the geologic record. I'm well conversant with what AGW is thanks, that's why I used it. I suggest you use google however and look for "patronising" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted August 3, 2010 Share Posted August 3, 2010 Not true four of them have published papers on it. I think they are all capable of understanding atmospheric physics. I'll lay odds that they are not as it's not their field. You wouldn't expect a paeloclimate specialist to understand the minuate of the Tellar-Ulam system after all... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poptech Posted August 3, 2010 Author Share Posted August 3, 2010 He doesn't say anything about AGW (Anthropomorphic Global Warming), just climate change. To save you a trip to Google, AGW relates to the idea than global warming or climate change is related to human activity. This is distinct from the concept of climate change as something that has occurred naturally throughout all of history, hence Laughlin's reference to the geologic record. Actually he does in the article that quote was taken from. Which is why the quote explicitly states "the energy future". Effectively stating that it is meaningless to worry about how we use energy since we cannot control the climate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poptech Posted August 3, 2010 Author Share Posted August 3, 2010 I'll lay odds that they are not as it's not their field. You wouldn't expect a paeloclimate specialist to understand the minuate of the Tellar-Ulam system after all... All the scientists listed are capable of understanding atmospheric physics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
back2basics Posted August 3, 2010 Share Posted August 3, 2010 So 7 out of tens of thousands of Physicists believe this. I bet I could find more who believe in talking snakes, UFO's or ghosts. It’s also rather horrible to rehash a dead persons opinions from 10 years ago to back up your argument. He may have changed his mind with the last 10 years of research. Once again what’s your point? You executing a fallacy called argument from authority. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted August 3, 2010 Share Posted August 3, 2010 If you don't believe in human causation climate change what's the worst that can happen if everyone else does? Clean water, cheap energy, fresh local food, traffic free roads, enormous rain forests and lots of tigers? That sounds like my kind of hell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garrence Posted August 3, 2010 Share Posted August 3, 2010 All the scientists listed are capable of understanding atmospheric physics. "capable of"... but don't. It's easy to debunk the site. Only one in a thousand names understand climate science. Most names have no indication of their qualifications or even if they are real people. Signed by an orthopedic surgeon and an architect! What do they know? The site is a nonsense. It's amazing how low the global warming deniers have now sunk and how little credibility they now have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.