Global Warming backdown

[Shady]

255 members of the US National Academy of Sciences including 11 Nobel Laureates have signed an open letter in opposition to the attacks on science and scientists from global warming deniers:

Who cares? There's hundreds of members of the scientific community that disagree or have serious questions about AGW. But it's more than ironic that these particular individuals are complaining of McCarthy-like tactics, while at the same time accusing everyone who has questions as deniers!

Pot meet McCarthy!

[Keepitsimple]

no backdown! 255 members of the US National Academy of Sciences including 11 Nobel Laureates have signed an open letter in opposition to the attacks on science and scientists from global warming deniers: from the journal Science:

Waldo - that was the topic that I deleted.....but since you decided it was worth mentioning:

Many signatories of controversial letter on climate science not working in climate related fields

However, an investigation into the professional backgrounds of the scientists finds that many do not work in climate science and some work in fields not even remotely related to it. In fact, among the first 20 listed, none work in climate science.

Pediatric surgeons, an expert in the Maya and the Olmec civilizations, a chemist that studies bacteria, a computer pioneer with Microsoft, an electrical engineer, the chairman of a biotechnology firm, and even an expert studying corn are but a few of the 255 experts that signed the letter.

There are many other questionable signatories on the letter that tries to convey the message that the science is sound. This is of course leading one to question why their statements should be leant any great deal of credence, particularly since the credentials of climate change skeptics are similarly questioned.

Meteorologists, arguably the most publically visible face of those in climate science related fields, have proven to be among the most skeptical of scientists. When this point is raised, alarmists oftentimes say that meteorologists only deal with short term trends and as such dont have the proper expertise. There are however multiple meteorologists among those that signed the letter and the public is supposed to trust them.

An example why global warming alarmists are losing ground Further, thousands of scientists, admittedly some in non-climate fields, have signed a statement saying, There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. Is their opinion worth less than the signatories on the recently released letter?

Link: http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-25061-Climate-Change-Examiner~y2010m5d10-Many-signatories-of-controversial-letter-on-climate-science-not-working-in-climate-related-fields

Edited May 13, 2010 by Keepitsimple

[M.Dancer]

Waldo - that was the topic that I deleted.....but since you decided it was worth mentioning:

Link: http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-25061-Climate-Change-Examiner~y2010m5d10-Many-signatories-of-controversial-letter-on-climate-science-not-working-in-climate-related-fields

That is much like a list of climate deniers..so called scientists taht included dentists, GPs, math teachers...

[Guest TrueMetis]

Link: http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-25061-Climate-Change-Examiner~y2010m5d10-Many-signatories-of-controversial-letter-on-climate-science-not-working-in-climate-related-fields

I take issue with what it said in the article you linked simple.

An example why global warming alarmists are losing ground Further, thousands of scientists, admittedly some in non-climate fields, have signed a statement saying, “There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate.” Is their opinion worth less than the signatories on the recently released letter?

When did some become the majority? Here is a list of the scientists who signed the petition they are talking about that actually have any qaulification in enviromental systems.

Atmosphere, Earth, & Environment (3,804)

1. Atmosphere (579)

I) Atmospheric Science (112)

II) Climatology (39)

III) Meteorology (343)

IV) Astronomy (59)

V) Astrophysics (26)

2. Earth (2,239)

I) Earth Science (94)

II) Geochemistry (63)

III) Geology (1,683)

IV) Geophysics (341)

V) Geoscience (36)

VI) Hydrology (22)

3. Environment (986)

I) Environmental Engineering (487)

II) Environmental Science (253)

III) Forestry (163)

IV) Oceanography (83)

All of ten percent, less when you filter out those that don't have anything to do with the climate sciences. I would like to email the 39 climatlogists to see what they have to say, but the petition site doesn't give names by qualification.

Is their opinion worth less than the signatories on the recently released letter?

Maybe not but the article sure as hell isn't worth anything.

Edited May 13, 2010 by TrueMetis

[waldo]

Waldo - that was the topic that I deleted.....but since you decided it was worth mentioning:

That is much like a list of climate deniers..so called scientists taht included dentists, GPs, math teachers...

ya, ya, Simple - so why did you delete it?

not really surprising (the both of) you would reach the way you have. Did you really think the letter was intended to add support/credence to the actual scientific foundations of the debate? Really? That was your take-away? Really? Do you not find it the least bit questionable that no actual prominent NAS climate scientists are signatories? Well, duh! Of course, if the names of prominent NAS climate scientists did appear, you'd probably accuse them of self-serving advocacy... of course you would! So... they're not there. Their colleagues are speaking on their behalf, and on the behalf of all scientists.

and yes, the NAS is one of the world's most prestigious scientific bodies that includes some of the world's most prominent and respected scientists... it has but a smallish 2100 total membership body, with strict qualification, nomination and election procedures... and it is the home of over 200 Nobel Prize recipients. The letter's emphasis on calling for an end to McCarthy-like threats of criminal prosecution is in direct challenge to the ongoing antics of U.S. Republicans, particularly U.S. Senator Jim Inhofe (R-OK) and Attorney General Kenneth Cuccinelli (R-VA). You know... the U.S. Republicans "war on science"! Specifically, from the letter:

We also call for an end to McCarthy-like threats of criminal prosecution against our colleagues based on innuendo and guilt by association, the harassment of scientists by politicians seeking distractions to avoid taking action, and the outright lies being spread about them.

[waldo]

Ding...ding...ding...ding...ding! We have a winner folks....the USA's National Adademy of Sciences!

I am honored that waldo has yet again chosen America over all other contenders....15 credits are awarded!

contenders for what? Let me know if any of those other world scientific bodies you prattled off have members that wrote similar letters as the one I referenced from NAS members... I'll certainly link to and quote from them. But, again, contenders for what?

[Keepitsimple]

ya, ya, Simple - so why did you delete it?

The reason I deleted it was that it would have encouraged an argument that led to nowhere.....a battle of petitions with each side claiming the the other side's signatories were questionable. To demonstrate how split the REAL scientific community is on "Global Warming", you don't have to go too much farther that the 255 signatories.....representing slightly over 10% of the NAS membership. If the matter was that grave, what happened to the other 90%? I recognize that it's difficult to organize such a petition.....but a mere 255 from as you put it, a smallish organization that should be fairly communicative? Is it possible that there's another 10% within the NAS that thinks otherwise? Just asking.

[waldo]

ya, ya, Simple - so why did you delete it?

The reason I deleted it was that it would have encouraged an argument that led to nowhere.....a battle of petitions with each side claiming the the other side's signatories were questionable. To demonstrate how split the REAL scientific community is on "Global Warming", you don't have to go too much farther that the 255 signatories.....representing slightly over 10% of the NAS membership. If the matter was that grave, what happened to the other 90%? I recognize that it's difficult to organize such a petition.....but a mere 255 from as you put it, a smallish organization that should be fairly communicative? Is it possible that there's another 10% within the NAS that thinks otherwise? Just asking.

just asking? Well... you still don't get the letter's intent - do you? As I said, the letter had little to do with reinforcing any side of the debate... it was a condemnation of the 'political assaults' on scientists, who in this case happen to be climate change researchers. Do you seriously think there's some contingent of scientists out there ready to bring forward a countering letter advocating for continued and increased politicization and assaults on scientists? Really?

as for your continued nonsense, there is no split within the, as you say, "REAL scientific community". Of course, the consensus is strong - and overwhelmingly accepting to the theory of AGW climate change.

[Keepitsimple]

as for your continued nonsense, there is no split within the, as you say, "REAL scientific community". Of course, the consensus is strong - and overwhelmingly accepting to the theory of AGW climate change.

Blah, blah, blah, blah.........

[bush_cheney2004]

As I said, the letter had little to do with reinforcing any side of the debate... it was a condemnation of the 'political assaults' on scientists, who in this case happen to be climate change researchers....

Then the

high priest

tore his clothes and said, "He has spoken blasphemy! Why do we need any more witnesses? Look, now you have heard the blasphemy.

Matthew 26:65

[waldo]

Then the

high priest

tore his clothes and said, "He has spoken blasphemy! Why do we need any more witnesses? Look, now you have heard the blasphemy.

Matthew 26:65

in your numbnut presumed cleverness who've nailed it - truly! Your favoured Republicans are the high priests assaulting science/scientists, calling them out as blasphemers, as they wage their "Republican war on science" (as I said, see recent initiatives by wingnut Republicans, U.S. Senator Jim Inhofe (R-OK) and Attorney General Kenneth Cuccinelli (R-VA)). Or better yet, see the recent May 6 U.S. Congressional hearings of the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming... the Democrats called forward 4 eminent scientists, while the Republicans chose as their single called witness, wait for it... wait for it... completely debunked purveyor of denier nonsense, Christopher Monckton!. That's right - the Viscount Munchausen was the "best" the Republicans could muster!

Apparently, the Republicans had difficulty in bringing forward any actual scientists willing to speak on their behalf - go figure.

[waldo]

just asking? Well... you still don't get the letter's intent - do you? As I said, the letter had little to do with reinforcing any side of the debate... it was a condemnation of the 'political assaults' on scientists, who in this case happen to be climate change researchers. Do you seriously think there's some contingent of scientists out there ready to bring forward a countering letter advocating for continued and increased politicization and assaults on scientists? Really?

as for your continued nonsense, there is no split within the, as you say, "REAL scientific community". Of course, the consensus is strong - and overwhelmingly accepting to the theory of AGW climate change.

Blah, blah, blah, blah.........

well, of course... you could continue blathering or you could bring forward reference to Billy-Bob and Jethro's, "Oregon Petition". Obviously you chose the high road!

[bush_cheney2004]

in your numbnut presumed cleverness who've nailed it - truly! Your favoured Republicans are the high priests assaulting science/scientists, calling them out as blasphemers, as they wage their "Republican war on science" (as I said, see recent initiatives by wingnut Republicans, U.S. Senator Jim Inhofe (R-OK) and Attorney General Kenneth Cuccinelli (R-VA)).

It only gets more laughable....you are now so far into the bum of American politics and institutions, you can't find your way out!

Apparently, the Republicans had difficulty in bringing forward any actual scientists willing to speak on their behalf - go figure.

I guess they are not into high priests bearing false witness (e.g.corrupted analysis).

[Pliny]

Thanks for the names, Waldo! The NAS is a great organization of government. They will send out their Priests to verify compliance with the scriptures and denounce the heathens and heretics that might deny government the ability to tax and redistribute the wealth in order that none will have the resources to threaten the sanctuary of their temple.

You know it seems impossible to distance government, be it the UN or any national government you care to mention from the science. Much like you can't distance government from big oil. It's all tied together, Waldo. Government get's a large percentage of it's revenues from oil. Yet you don't make the connection between governing bodies and big oil. I would think you would have made the connection and realize it is protecting it's depleting resources while looking for new sources of revenue.

I hate to be the one telling you of your actual support of big oil

corporations but it's about time you learned the truth and realized you have been duped into being a true believer.

Who else you got tacked up on the wall? Better take a second look and make the connection to big oil.

[waldo]

Ding...ding...ding...ding...ding! We have a winner folks....the USA's National Adademy of Sciences!

I am honored that waldo has yet again chosen America over all other contenders....15 credits are awarded!

contenders for what? Let me know if any of those other world scientific bodies you prattled off have members that wrote similar letters as the one I referenced from NAS members... I'll certainly link to and quote from them. But, again, contenders for what?

It only gets more laughable....you are now so far into the bum of American politics and institutions, you can't find your way out!

I guess they are not into high priests bearing false witness (e.g.corrupted analysis).

you still haven't addressed the question. Contenders for what?

actually, of course... it was simply you parodying yourself. Buddy, if your daily existence needs to have your lil' willy exercised by calling out anyone/everyone who might choose to draw any American reference... keep on, keeping on. Of course, equally, each and every time you pull your lame assed routine on me, I will equally highlight the ineptitude of your very MLW existence - one that truly shows your most significant and over-riding lack of self-confidence. C'mon, fess up... no real American would bother... would need to bother, with a day-in, day-out, multi-year campaign (as yours) presuming to call to attention/task any MLW member, making any American parallel/reference/commentary. One had thought your Saskatchewan outing would have given you the pause to reevaluate your failed and lacking MLW existence... apparently not.

as for the Republican war on science, it actually looks like many Republicans are beginning to distance themselves from both Inhofe and Cuccinelli - sanity may yet appear, although I'm more inclined to believe Frum nailed it perfectly... that Republicans are done like dinner, that they're so far out of touch and so ensconced with the likes of the "conservative entertainment industry (the Becks, Limpballs, etc.), with the looney-tune teabaggers, with the party wingnuts (Palin, Bachmann, etc.)

[waldo]

shortened Pliny: I got nuthin!

Blah, blah, blah, blah.........

[bush_cheney2004]

you still haven't addressed the question. Contenders for what?

Your affection & attention...of course! USA! USA! USA!

Of course, equally, each and every time you pull your lame assed routine on me, I will equally highlight the ineptitude of your very MLW existence - one that truly shows your most significant and over-riding lack of self-confidence. C'mon, fess up... no real American would bother... would need to bother, with a day-in, day-out, multi-year campaign (as yours) presuming to call to attention/task any MLW member, making any American parallel/reference/commentary. One had thought your Saskatchewan outing would have given you the pause to reevaluate your failed and lacking MLW existence... apparently not.

Nope...I am not phased in the least....great fun to watch you twist in the globally warmed wind.

as for the Republican war on science, it actually looks like many Republicans are beginning to distance themselves from both Inhofe and Cuccinelli - sanity may yet appear, although I'm more inclined to believe Frum nailed it perfectly... that Republicans are done like dinner, that they're so far out of touch and so ensconced with the likes of the "conservative entertainment industry (the Becks, Limpballs, etc.), with the looney-tune teabaggers, with the party wingnuts (Palin, Bachmann, etc.)

Great for you I guess...your domestic politics is so boring! Stay tuned!

[waldo]

Your affection & attention...of course! USA! USA! USA!

I see... you chose to highlight that affection/attention by drawing your own attention to a long list of other world scientific organizations... that somehow, affection/attention was drawn to NAS over them. It certainly wouldn't fit your schtick to recognize that no other of your listed scientific organizations, as I'm aware, has brought forward a similar letter. Of course, as the letter focuses on the "Republican war on science", it might be unexpected for other world scientific organizations or their grouped memberships to issue a letter drawing highlighted attention to the failed antics of anti-science Americans (Republicans).

Nope...I am not phased in the least....great fun to watch you twist in the globally warmed wind.

no - of course you were phased... and you'll continue to be phased. Your sorry existence begs for each and every opportunity - it's your mission. The actual great fun is watching your floundering and flailing, your flapping and flipping - you twist... as I make you twist!

Great for you I guess...your domestic politics is so boring! Stay tuned!

yes, that's right - Canadian domestic politics are just so boring to you! So boring to you that you had to invent your fake impostor American alter ego... you play your self-described "arrogant ugly American"... to a tee!

[bush_cheney2004]

I see... you chose to highlight that affection/attention by drawing your own attention to a long list of other world scientific organizations....

I guess they don't have any Republicans to draw your attention or affection. The science is secondary now (for you), as the desperate battle for spin control takes higher precedence! Where's Al Gore when you need him?

no - of course you were phased... and you'll continue to be phased. Your sorry existence begs for each and every opportunity - it's your mission. The actual great fun is watching your floundering and flailing, your flapping and flipping - you twist... as I make you twist!

Sure waldo....who is predator and who is prey? Methinks you are losing on all fronts.

yes, that's right - Canadian domestic politics are just so boring to you! So boring to you that you had to invent your fake impostor American alter ego... you play your self-described "arrogant ugly American"... to a tee!

And it works splendidly...providing the punching bag you need to feel alive. 'Cause we all know there is no hot climate change action in Winnipeg! LOL!

[Shady]

Waldo's switch to American so-called climate change references is due to the fact that EAU, and the IPCC have been so widely discredited.

[waldo]

I guess they don't have any Republicans to draw your attention or affection. The science is secondary now (for you), as the desperate battle for spin control takes higher precedence!

no - as I'm aware, none of the long list of world scientific associations you offered has brought forward a similar letter condemning what was the letter's focus... the "U.S. Republican party war on science". Deniers, like you, as you've self-stated, have no time or interest in the actual science... you... deny the science. Of course you do.

Sure waldo....who is predator and who is prey? Methinks you are losing on all fronts.

your presence is simply inconsequential, following only Shady's presence in measured comic relief value.

And it works splendidly...providing the punching bag you need to feel alive. 'Cause we all know there is no hot climate change action in Winnipeg! LOL!

no hardly; although I must confess, I always held a practiced position of refusing to formally ignore anyone on any discussion board. A couple of guys have thrown me a suggestion to simply put you on MLW ignore - since you really bring nothing, absolutely nothing, to any discussion. Your brazen trollish presence might constitute and satisfy your MLW time spent... reacting to it certainly doesn't define mine or influence in any significant manner.

[waldo]

Waldo's switch to American so-called climate change references is due to the fact that EAU, and the IPCC have been so widely discredited.

nothing to worry about Shady... in regards trumped up Hackergate, 3 out of 4 exonerations for EAU/CRU - stay tuned for #4, on it's way. Of course the IPCC remains as strong and viable as ever... a couple of inconsequential social science references within the WG2 subgroup report have no bearing on the actual physical science - they really only act to keep the deniers, like you, in check (give them/you something to flail wildly and madly over).

since you now infer that any references outside of EAU and IPCC are credible, I should think we won't see you continue to raise your baseless charges against them or against anyone who chooses to draw reference to them. Good on ya, Shady!

[Shady]

nothing to worry about Shady... in regards trumped up Hackergate, 3 out of 4 exonerations for EAU/CRU - stay tuned for #4, on it's way.

Nobody's shocked that they're exonerating themselves. The fact that you think it's legit is complete denial.

Of course the IPCC remains as strong and viable as ever... a couple of inconsequential social science references within the WG2 subgroup report have no bearing on the actual physical science

Climategate featured more than just a couple of inconsequential references. It featured a collaborative effort to hijack and distort the peer-review process. It featured the silencing of dissenting valid arguments. It featured the deletion of data as to bypass a freedom of informtion act. And most disturbingly of all, it featured the manipulation of data to create the desired conclusions of the AGW true-believers. That my friend is why you stopped referencing it!

since you now infer that any references outside of EAU and IPCC are credible

Your inference is incorrect.

[waldo]

Nobody's shocked that they're exonerating themselves. The fact that you think it's legit is complete denial.

of course... even though the reviews have been independent and transparent, they don't bring forward anything to support your denier life-breath. 3 out 4 Shady... one pending, in the pipe!

Climategate featured more than just a couple of inconsequential references. It featured a collaborative effort to hijack and distort the peer-review process. It featured the silencing of dissenting valid arguments. It featured the deletion of data as to bypass a freedom of informtion act. And most disturbingly of all, it featured the manipulation of data to create the desired conclusions of the AGW true-believers. That my friend is why you stopped referencing it!

no - none of that Shady... no data was deleted, none was manipulated. You can jump up and down till you're blue - it won't change the fact your denier fabrications have no weight/no substance. Of course, you could parrot something that would presume to say as much. Equally, it's a quick easy call to the many, many areas that have taken the effort to equally anally decipher the hacked emails to counter every denier fabrication. But we've danced this already... are you really up for it again? Have at er, lil' buddy. It's always great sport to make you look the fool.

[Pliny]

shortened Pliny: I got nuthin!

Spoken like a true believer!

I'm surprised,Waldo. You haven't made the connection between big government and big oil?

You always seem to discredit sources with any link to big oil.

Do you think you are being selective by ignoring it?

The only thing that seems to be coming form you as a real individual is your contempt for the human race - but wait that's part of the absolutist skeptics creed.

Well, you do a fine job of belittling everyone that has a disagreement with the scriptures from the anointed ones.