Skip to comments.
Skeptics and Deniers of Global Warming. Its not a settled science. Debate continues. 10 part series
Financial Post/National Post ^
| February 02, 2007
| Lawrence Solomon
Posted on 02/09/2007 9:09:59 AM PST by Tolik
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-49 last
To: Fraxinus
I have yet to see a model that has been verified by inputting the starting conditions of the previous century, and coming out with something approximating the current conditions. Actually, several do just that...but what they don't do is continue to work if you wait several years after they are written and input the data from those years. They are *trained* to mimic the curve of the historical record, not to actually model the climate to a precise degree.
41
posted on
02/09/2007 8:18:31 PM PST
by
lepton
("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
To: Tolik
42
posted on
02/09/2007 9:26:35 PM PST
by
JMJJR
(Paristan, Londonstan, Denmarkstan, Washigntonstan, how will you look in YOUR new burka ?)
To: Tolik
I think the checkmate point for a denier to win against the global warming crowd...is to have a historian standing amongst them...and asking "If we accomplish all that you ask...in taking down the economy of the civilized world...and your change occurs which makes your mission successful...and then the natural occurrence of the glacier/ice age returns (as history so boldly says it will....over and over)...will you simply accept that period of life?"
My guess is that the crowd will not be able to answer that on camera and simply remove themselves from the question. For the public...that question would really sink in and make them all consider absolute facts that you cannot argue about. We will confront another ice age...it is only a matter of time. For an environmentalist...this is not within their mindset....nor would they ever worry about such a thing. In showing that behavior...you really understand the nature of the beast.
To: Tolik
You DA MAN for posting all of these articles! KUDOS! :-)
44
posted on
02/10/2007 4:39:10 AM PST
by
ConservativeStLouisGuy
(11th FReeper Commandment: Thou Shalt Not Unnecessarily Excerpt)
To: Tolik
45
posted on
02/11/2007 7:39:44 AM PST
by
foolscap
To: Tolik
46
posted on
02/11/2007 7:42:25 AM PST
by
oh8eleven
(RVN '67-'68)
To: oh8eleven
If you are a researcher today in any natural science, then a good step to take is to add the word global warming to your research paper and in your academic thesis. It will make sure you get your paper published in peer review publication. You can then advance in your academic career and get a higher salary.
At a Danish TV show about Henrik Svensmarks works which I saw, he was interviewed. He told that when he presented his theory about 10 years ago at a conference it created a very strong emotional reaction from climatologists and the head of IPCC even told him that the work he was doing was irresponsible.
I show on my website data over the two existing theories.
To: PerStrand
PerStrand
Since Mar 3, 2007
Welcome to FR
48
posted on
03/03/2007 12:12:14 PM PST
by
oh8eleven
(RVN '67-'68)
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach; 75thOVI; AFPhys; Alice in Wonderland; AndrewC; aristotleman; Avoiding_Sulla; ..
Note: this topic is from February!!!
49
posted on
06/27/2007 1:23:49 AM PDT
by
SunkenCiv
(Time heals all wounds, particularly when they're not yours. Profile updated June 27, 2007.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-49 last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson