Skip to comments.The verdict is in on climate change
Posted on 01/22/2012 8:03:23 AM PST by Oldeconomybuyer
When it comes to climate change, open-mindedness is the wrong approach.
I study the history of climate science, and my research has shown that the think tanks and institutes that deny the reality or severity of climate change, or promote distrust of climate science, do so out of self-interest, ideological conviction or both.
In my travels, I have met many, many people who have told me that they are not in denial about climate change; they simply don't know enough to decide.
Since the mid-1990s, there has been clear-cut evidence that the climate is changing because of human activities: burning fossil fuels and cutting down forests. For the last decade or so it has been increasingly clear that these changes are accelerating, and worrisome.
Yet many Americans cling to the idea that it is reasonable to maintain an open mind. It isn't, at least not to scientists who study the matter.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
there has been clear-cut evidence that the climate is changing because of human activities:
And why no one listens to such ideological crapola.
you mean he’s a real “wanker”?
As far as I can tell, we have had “global warming” and “global cooling” through the ages, regardless of what is going on with the human population.
Here's the problem...Why does it change?? Since we have gone through hot to cold and back again and still don't know the why, when or how it reverses, we know only hindsight and we don;t even have the answers to what has already occurred.
And we use those unknowns as a basis for predicting the future??? How stupid is that??
“Naomi Oreskes-Wanker is a professor of history at UC San Diego.”
Hey Naomi, stick to rewriting history and leave science to the scientists.
I will agree the climate is changing but there is no demonstrable evidence it is man caused.
There is a discussion on FNS right now that claims “2 pieces of bacon causes CANCER.
More BS. It may cause cancer just as wearing a tee shirt might cause cancer.
You might know that carrots will kill you. Every person that has ever eaten a carrot has or will die. PROOF, MY BUTT.
These are “researchers” that are trying to get bigger GRANTS.
I suspect that Prof. Naomi Orskes-Wanker is looking for more federal grant money. The feds just love giving grant money to people like her.
What a maroon. Typical liberal asshat.
Scratching for her 15 minutes of fame!
I study the history of climate science, and my research has shown that the think tanks and institutes that HYPE the severity of climate change, or promote the certainty of climate science, do so out of self-interest, ideological conviction or both.
“How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming.”
IMO I believe these obscurities are based on availability of government grants. Follow the money.
The earth has been warming and cooling for 4.3 billion years.
The professor should stick to history...
And through most of those ages there were no humans and the changes were profound. I live on one of those changes, Lake Erie which was formed by the glacial movements.
My Pop wasn’t a scientist, nor a Professor of history. He was, in part a Shylock and a bookie. And one thng he knew and passed along was that if someone “cooked the books”, say like your priesthood of human caused global warming, there was a reason WHY the books were cooked. Just sayin’.
That should be ‘wanking’ for her 15 minutes of fame.
Wow! An Op-Ed in the LA Times stating that Man-made Global Warming is real. Whatever will they think of next? I am soooo very shocked by this. /sarc
Human activity has so little effect on the global atmospheric environment it is like pissing in the ocean. Not that I ever did that.
It’s her job to study climate. If she came out and said, “the weather all depends on the weather”, she’d be out of a job. So she says, :the weather is all our fault and you need experts like me to help stop it”. BS!
1.) Relinquishing our sovereignty
2.) Crippling our entire industrial base on our own
3.) Taking trillions of dollars out of our economy, for something that is not only not proven, but the trillions of dollar will have no effect on slowing down.
Second, regarding this author Naomi Oreskes:...
The “history” Wanker said that, everywhere she goes, she studies “the history” of “climate change” not the science of “climate change”. There is a huge difference. These days, on college campuses, what occurred in “history” depends on the professor’s opinion and their agenda. What actually occurred is irrelevant to them.
I maintain an open mind for many reasons, and in fact, I still maintain that there might be something to the AGW idea. Fact is though, regardless, there is really very little we can do about it, so best we learn to just live with whatever comes our way.
Man, if two pieces of bacon causes cancer, I am one, giant walking, seething mass of tumor!
Either that, or I am irrefutable proof that for some people, two slices of bacon must be as safe as getting out of bed.
Can we just stick to the SCIENCE and skip the politics? THE NUMBER ONE greenhouse gas in the atmosphere is water vapor - 95% Of the remaining 5%, only a small fraction of greenhouse (warming) can be attributed to human activities. The substantial ability of the oceans, to absorb and release carbon dioxide is rarely, if ever, factored into the conversation about atmospheric carbon dioxide.
Why is it that “climate scientists” are so quick to hypothesize that the small percentage change of carbon dioxide caused by man is the source of “climate change” when the effect of water vapor, condensation and freezing, is SO DRAMATICALLY MORE PRONOUNCED about our daily weather experience?
My guess is that the OCEANS, which cover 70% of the surface of the planet, to a depth of thousands of feet, do not have a bank account, cannot be taxed, and have no political party.
But aside from the oceans, and the physcial properties of water as it interacts with the atmosphere, the SUN, also has a vote in the climate of Earth. This thermonuclear hot spot has many, many more times the effect on climate, than any marginal input from a minor player in the green house gas play list. Our SUN, according to all measurements, is a variable star, whose output changes over time.
“The verdict is in on climate change”
Verdict is in, my eye. You liar! Climate changes all the time without Man. So does weather. Where’d the Ice Age go?? You want to be taxed and controlled, knock your self out—but leave the rest of us alone to thrive on our own.
Yes, and the verdict is “Steaming pile of BS invented by fascist wanna bes in the “Green” movement”
She looks like former Rep Anthony Weiner.
She just nailed the group-think of those promoting the global warming scam.
How could you doubt anybody named “Naomi Oreskes-Wanker” who also happens to be a “College History Professor”? Give me a break!
How does this woman explain that Wednesday, January 19, 2012 was the coldest day in the last 10 years according to the satellite measurements from the University of Alabama, Huntsville?
Everybody talks about the weather, but nobody does anything.
PSSSST! Naomi that’s a joke intended for idiots. You can’t control the weather.
Do you get it now?
The verdict is in. Naomi is guilty of spreading falsehoods and fraud.
I’m still waiting for polar bears to wash up on shores with rising tides that are inundating coastal communities.
Now that takes the cake. LOL.
The verdict is in on climate change
Any “scientist” who agrees that there should be no “open mindedness” is no scienist.
Hey, let’s not forget that the editors at the LA Times gave this “scientist” space on their op-ed page to continue to proselytize this BS.
“I enjoy softball, the LPGA, and...”
These partisan academics (read Democrats) keep saying there is clear-cut evidence but they never produce any of this evidence; all they manage to produce is the opinion of scientists who make their living off of government grants that are only given to those climatologists who support man-made climate change theories.
Repeatedly claiming there is clear-cut evidence and never producing it is getting tiresome.
Ha! The hometown newspaper of a city with a population dumb enough to elect Antonio Villaraigosa mayor.
Just for the sake of argument, assume everything that she says is true as far as global warming. We still get what to do about it. This is where the public, not the scientists, is the jury, judge, and executioner.
Further, the assumption that we should accept an authority is wrong we have minds and can make our own decisions based on the evidence,,p. when the prosecutors, the so-called scientists, present their evidence, then we can decide
Don’t let these liars confuse you.
I am a denier - yet the comment you quoted is true.
Human activity includes building cities - heat island effect - and deforestation. Etc
They play with words.
I don’t give a fig about Climate Science. It’s the evil Climate Politicians that have designs on our prosperity that I despise.
And the Climate Politician only care about science in as much as they can use it to further their nefarious plans.
This woman would probably reply, "It is well understood among those of us who are more intelligent than you appear to be that Global Warming can also cause Planetary Cooling." And she wouldn't even bat an eye at the absurdity of this reply.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.