Article: Phony Science and Public Policy - Very interesting

[davemo]

I teach writing and rhetoric, so let me parse some of this. First, there's the old argument by analogy, which is one of the weakest forms of argument possible. Yes, I realize that your claim about the "homocentric [sic] theory of global warming" is a slender connection to a geocentric model of the universe, but not that the Galileo reference doesn't necessarily prove anything pertaining to this discussion, for one simple reason: Galileo didn't prove all anthropocentric models wrong.

But the far more pressing issue is the slippery logic of "top scientists." People often claim they have "top" leaders in their respective fields on their side, but this is, more often than not, just a rhetorical bluff.

http://www.digitalnpq.org/global_services/nobel laureates/12.07.01.html

Here's a statement signed by a number of Nobel laureates about some of the most urgent challenges that we face. Global warming is one of them. I don't want to perpetuate the Nobel myth, but the prize does serve as a decent measure of who the "top" thinkers in various fields really are.

If you watch the video, their achievements are listed, so you can judge for yourself what their opinion is worth. And the point, in referring to Galileo, is that just because a large number of people believe something, even those who we should be able to trust, doesn't make it true; you have to actually look at the facts. I won't attempt to extol the virtues of my side of the debate as it is already done, very well, in the video I linked, and by people who actually research the topic.

But you ignore the ability to more accurately predict the weather using a model that does not take manmade global warming into account.

 

[erictheobscure]

If you watch the video, their achievements are listed, so you can judge for yourself what their opinion is worth. And the point, in referring to Galileo, is that just because a large number of people believe something, even those who we should be able to trust, doesn't make it true; you have to actually look at the facts. I won't attempt to extol the virtues of my side of the debate as it is already done, very well, in the video I linked, and by people who actually research the topic.

But you ignore the ability to more accurately predict the weather using a model that does not take manmade global warming into account.

Of course I agree that "just because a large number of people believe something [...] doesn't make it true." But I think that some reflection will show why "you have to actually look at the facts" is a difficult propostion; in most (if not all) cases, our access to the facts is heavily, heavily mediated. In this context, I physically cannot go measure, say, the rate of icebergs melting, or ozone levels in the upper atmosphere. All of the facts in this case are obtained and disseminated through a complex network.

This is not to suggest that the video you've linked is easily debunked, wrong, etc. It's just to suggest why I'm skeptical about it in the face of other ideas about global warming that suggest human actions have had everything to do with climate change. *Especially* because I think it's worth being skeptical about scientific theories that tend to refute other theories that mandate ethically responsible behavior.

 

[Sigarz]

As was, at one point, the geocentric view of the solar system. Galileo put that one to shame.


I posted a link to this documentary somewhere else, but everyone should at least be willing to watch it. Some of the top scientists in the fields relating to global warming (physics, oceanography, climatology, etc.) are ardently opposed to the homocentric theory of global warming. In fact, one of said scientists utilizes a theory that predicts the weather far more accurately than the theories that rely on man's contribution to global warming.

The Great Global Warming Swindle

Im going to split hairs and say that the credit should be given to Copernicus first Galileo second. but good point. :ss

 

[TU09]

Just a quick observation: the article posted was about second hand smoke. A debate on climate change might be better suited to the "Everything but Cigars" forum or, at a minimum, a thread that actually was intended to deal with the subject. Personally, I am quite interested in the second hand smoke article and would love to see more thoughtful commentary on that.

:2

 

[sepia5]

Just a quick observation: the article posted was about second hand smoke. A debate on climate change might be better suited to the "Everything but Cigars" forum or, at a minimum, a thread that actually was intended to deal with the subject. Personally, I am quite interested in the second hand smoke article and would love to see more thoughtful commentary on that.

:2

Fair enough. I was merely quoting his intro line about global warming as a reflection of the author's credibility, but I guess I should have made that intent apparent.

 

[grinch]

For those of you who are old enough to remember...........way back in 1999, leaders of countries, top computer scientists, and business leaders feared the great Y2K bug! Hmmmm.....whatever happened to the end of the world??

Ohh, I forgot that we lost track of the end of the world.....most were too busy counting the BILLIONS of dollars made off of one of the greatest NON-events, ever.:BS

 

[grinch]

For those of you who are old enough to remember...........way back in 1999, leaders of countries, top computer scientists, and business leaders feared the great Y2K bug! Hmmmm.....whatever happened to the end of the world??

Ohh, I forgot that we lost track of the end of the world.....most were too busy counting the BILLIONS of dollars made off of one of the greatest NON-events, ever.:BS

Should have mentioned, I'm enjoying a nice smoke right now.....an old Bahia maddie!

 

[Mowee]

Great article. I am smoking a La Aurora right now. As for all the Global Warming stuff....remember it is only a computer model. Anything for the future is model based. The best line came years ago from Dr. Neil Frank--former head of the National Hurricane Center who is now a tv meteorologist. He was asked about the global warming. He said, well since it is a computer model....let's run it backwards to project the temperature in say 1958.. they should work both forward and backwards. To date no one has run the model backwards.

 

[grinch]

Davemo,

I'm watching "The Great Global Warming Swindle" right now. This is a video that everyone should watch. It really gets to the objective understanding of what's going on. Thanks very much for the link!