Bonam Posted July 8, 2009 Report Posted July 8, 2009 No, that's just plain wrong. Stephen Hawking is a physicist, specializing in areas of General Relativity, Quantum Mechanics and Cosmology. He's a bright guy, maybe, during his prime, one of the most brilliant human beings that ever lived. But he's not an expert in atmospheric sciences. While I suppose, to some extent, he might be better able to evaluate certain claims, this is not his field of inquiry. Scientists have embarrassed themselves on occasion by speaking out of their area of expertise (Hawking's old partner, Roger Penrose, made a mockery of himself with his Quantum Mind nonsense, and Sir Fred Hoyle's advocacy of panspermia and rejection of evolution certainly belongs in this category as well).It is because the consensus among experts whose fields do relate to climatology are, in very large part, in agreement on anthropomorphic climate change, that I accept it. Well to be honest the effects of greenhouse gases are explained by physics. Optics, absorption and emission, the spectra of the different elements; these are all explained and described by physics. It is because of this physical understanding of how greenhouse gases work that their effects are plainly obvious. Climatology then seeks to expand on that and predict by exactly how much the temperatures will be affected, how climates in different parts of the world will be affected, what effect it may have on seas, or deserts, or glaciers, etc. But the basic phenomenon is one that is described by physics. Quote
ToadBrother Posted July 8, 2009 Report Posted July 8, 2009 Well to be honest the effects of greenhouse gases are explained by physics. Optics, absorption and emission, the spectra of the different elements; these are all explained and described by physics. It is because of this physical understanding of how greenhouse gases work that their effects are plainly obvious. Climatology then seeks to expand on that and predict by exactly how much the temperatures will be affected, how climates in different parts of the world will be affected, what effect it may have on seas, or deserts, or glaciers, etc. But the basic phenomenon is one that is described by physics. Any phenomenon can ultimately be explained by physics, and yet I wouldn't show up at Michael Green's door with questions about paleontology or plate tectonics. Hawkings fields of expertise involve a number of principles shared with the atmospheric sciences, but his major work has been related to black hole research and towards unifying GR and QM. Quote
Argus Posted July 8, 2009 Report Posted July 8, 2009 I dunno how people can argue with the statement that increased concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere lead to higher temperatures. Well, gee, it could have something to do with the fact that climatologists don't say that, have never said that, and that no one has ever proven that to be the case. At best, what they say is that the models suggest that in all probability, there is a correlation. But they really aren't certain. The greenhouse effect is trivially explained scientifically, the temperature rise due to a greenhouse effect could be easily calculated (to first order) by any semi-competent university physics student, and it can be easily confirmed in small-scale experiments. And yet, astonishingly, has not been. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted July 8, 2009 Report Posted July 8, 2009 A model is only as good as the data which goes into it. If the data is inaccurate, incomplete or includes unknowns, the resulting information is not going to be accurate. The corrected data showed that it's been warmer in our time. So then we can sail wooden ships through the northwest passage like they used to, right? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted July 8, 2009 Report Posted July 8, 2009 The corrected data also has shown that the trend is warmer globally now. Cite? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
ToadBrother Posted July 8, 2009 Report Posted July 8, 2009 Well, gee, it could have something to do with the fact that climatologists don't say that, have never said that, and that no one has ever proven that to be the case. At best, what they say is that the models suggest that in all probability, there is a correlation. But they really aren't certain. Stop right there. Science proves nothing. There's an old saying in science that "proof is liquor". Science comes up with the best explanation based on the evidence. Every theory is, to one degree or another, tentative. But what precisely is wrong with modeling? You are aware, I trust, that damned near every modern scientific discipline uses models and statistical analysis. Deniers always walk around going "Pfft, it's just a model." Well, lots of things in science are models. Population dynamics is nothing but models, geology uses them with a veangance. Really hard sciences like sub-atomic physics and cosmology are littered with models. So why exactly does climatology get picked out for special treatment as opposed to the dozens of other disciplines that use similar techniques. Why, it's because billions of dollars are at stake. Alberta better face it. It's extremely dirty oil is going to become rather unpopular among many of major trading partners. Quote
Argus Posted July 8, 2009 Report Posted July 8, 2009 Stephen Hawking believes in man-made climate change and its perils, similar to that of most of peers.I'm no scientist, let alone a brilliant one, so if Stephen Hawking believes it, that's good enough for me. If any of you arm-chair scientists want to challenge the scientific opinion of Hawking and look like idiots to your radioactive grandchildren in 40 years be my guest. I don't know if you realize it, but your cite does not actually say anything about the causes of climate change, or what Hawking believes in that regard, other than that climate change exists. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
benny Posted July 8, 2009 Report Posted July 8, 2009 (edited) I don't know if you realize it, but your cite does not actually say anything about the causes of climate change, or what Hawking believes in that regard, other than that climate change exists. Professor Hawking said: "As scientists, we understand the dangers of nuclear weapons and their devastating effects, and we are learning how human activities and technologies are affecting climate systems in ways that may forever change life on Earth." Edited July 8, 2009 by benny Quote
Jerry J. Fortin Posted July 8, 2009 Report Posted July 8, 2009 Call it climate change instead of global warming if you want, but I will call it weather. I don't know whether or not nor do I even care whether or not we, mankind, is responsible for whatever flavour of the day trend some scientist or tree hugging citizen points a finger at. The sun will rise in the morning and it will set in the evening. Whether or not there are clouds or whether or not it will rain or snow because of them are things that we cannot control. Nor should we waste money trying to do so. The rule of thumb in nature is adapt or die, so we can either figure out how to live with the changes or die because of them. I do not think we are able to turn back the clock and change any damned thing at all. So why bother? We need to identify the effects of the changes that appear to be occurring and to act in a manner that would serve to reduce the impact to us through those actions. Cap and trade is little more than a tax scam that will result in increased prices to the consumer and realize no net impact to the environment. Quote
benny Posted July 8, 2009 Report Posted July 8, 2009 Call it climate change instead of global warming if you want, but I will call it weather. I don't know whether or not nor do I even care whether or not we, mankind, is responsible for whatever flavour of the day trend some scientist or tree hugging citizen points a finger at. The sun will rise in the morning and it will set in the evening. Whether or not there are clouds or whether or not it will rain or snow because of them are things that we cannot control. Nor should we waste money trying to do so.The rule of thumb in nature is adapt or die, so we can either figure out how to live with the changes or die because of them. I do not think we are able to turn back the clock and change any damned thing at all. So why bother? We need to identify the effects of the changes that appear to be occurring and to act in a manner that would serve to reduce the impact to us through those actions. Cap and trade is little more than a tax scam that will result in increased prices to the consumer and realize no net impact to the environment. If the weather is too cold for you in Alberta, move! Quote
Jerry J. Fortin Posted July 8, 2009 Report Posted July 8, 2009 If the weather is too cold for you in Alberta, move! I actually look forward to global warming, I call it summer usually. Quote
benny Posted July 8, 2009 Report Posted July 8, 2009 I actually look forward to global warming, I call it summer usually. If winter is too cold for you in Alberta, move! Quote
Argus Posted July 8, 2009 Report Posted July 8, 2009 Stop right there. Science proves nothing. There's an old saying in science that "proof is liquor". Science comes up with the best explanation based on the evidence. Every theory is, to one degree or another, tentative. Yes, until it's proven by observable fact. But what precisely is wrong with modeling? GIGO. I have to say that I have become quite wary of data modelling on this topic given the notorious earlier efforts, and the willingness of some of the primary advocates to lie. Al Gore himself was quite open about his feeling that lies were justified in order to get people involved. Alberta better face it. It's extremely dirty oil is going to become rather unpopular among many of major trading partners. Given the inevitable shortfall in supply vs demand, Alberta need not worry about their being many willing buyers of its oil deep into the future. I'm willing to bet China or Japan would eagerly pay for the construction of oil terminals in BC in order to transport the oil there. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
benny Posted July 8, 2009 Report Posted July 8, 2009 Given the inevitable shortfall in supply vs demand, Alberta need not worry about their being many willing buyers of its oil deep into the future. I'm willing to bet China or Japan would eagerly pay for the construction of oil terminals in BC in order to transport the oil there. If international conflicts surrounding energy supply and the environment grow, I would not be surprised if rather than being bought, Alberta is being bombed. Quote
Jerry J. Fortin Posted July 8, 2009 Report Posted July 8, 2009 If winter is too cold for you in Alberta, move! I will when I retire, but until then I am stuck here. Quote
Jerry J. Fortin Posted July 8, 2009 Report Posted July 8, 2009 If international conflicts surrounding energy supply and the environment grow, I would not be surprised if rather than being bought, Alberta is being bombed. By whom? It won't be Americans....... Quote
benny Posted July 8, 2009 Report Posted July 8, 2009 I will when I retire, but until then I am stuck here. no excuse Quote
Jerry J. Fortin Posted July 8, 2009 Report Posted July 8, 2009 no excuse Pardon me? I live here and I work here. Now I could lift my clearance and work anywhere west of Thunder Bay. But I don't want to do that because my family is here and their friends are here and the kids still have a few years of school left. I never said it was too cold here, and by the way I work outside all year round. I simply said that I like warm weather. Hey Benny, bite me! I am free to live where I want, and of all the places to live in Canada for me its either here or BC. If that doesn't suit you, then too bad for you. Quote
benny Posted July 8, 2009 Report Posted July 8, 2009 Pardon me? I live here and I work here. Now I could lift my clearance and work anywhere west of Thunder Bay. But I don't want to do that because my family is here and their friends are here and the kids still have a few years of school left. I never said it was too cold here, and by the way I work outside all year round. I simply said that I like warm weather. Hey Benny, bite me! I am free to live where I want, and of all the places to live in Canada for me its either here or BC. If that doesn't suit you, then too bad for you. The bombardments will be not too bad for you and your close ones since there is no excuse to ignore the risks you are imposing on the Earth population. Quote
Jerry J. Fortin Posted July 8, 2009 Report Posted July 8, 2009 (edited) The bombardments will be not too bad for you and your close ones since there is no excuse to ignore the risks you are imposing on the Earth population. Your tinfoil hat is screwed down too tightly. Edited July 8, 2009 by Jerry J. Fortin Quote
benny Posted July 8, 2009 Report Posted July 8, 2009 Your tinfoil hat is screwed down too tightly. I don't think so! Quote
Jerry J. Fortin Posted July 8, 2009 Report Posted July 8, 2009 I don't think so! Are you sure? I mean you think I am imposing risks on the population of this planet, right? Sounds kinda screwy to me. Quote
benny Posted July 8, 2009 Report Posted July 8, 2009 Are you sure? I mean you think I am imposing risks on the population of this planet, right? Sounds kinda screwy to me. By definition, we cannot be sure of a risk. Quote
Jerry J. Fortin Posted July 8, 2009 Report Posted July 8, 2009 By definition, we cannot be sure of a risk. So you suggest that there mat be some risk to the population of the planet due to....what? Quote
benny Posted July 8, 2009 Report Posted July 8, 2009 So you suggest that there mat be some... Learn to write! Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.