Posted on 02/14/2009 2:40:02 PM PST by Free ThinkerNY
Chris Field sits at the foot of Owl Gore.
Stanford Report, October 12, 2007
Stanford researchers who worked with Nobel-winning climate-change panel join Al Gore at press conference
When Al Gore met the press Friday morning in Palo Alto, four Stanford researchers stood by his side: Stephen Schneider, Terry Root, Chris Field and Thomas Heller.
Chris Field, professor of biological sciences and director of the Carnegie Institution’s Department of Global Ecology at Stanford.
I’m just glad Obama is in office. Because he may have to lower the sea levels.
This article is classical “headline” news, with no substance to back it up.
Newspapers do it all the time. They ‘interpret’ the quotes in such a way as to create a sensational headline, which falls flat when compared with the actual quotes, etc.
I worked at several newspapers and we did it (the editors, that is) all the time.
Folow the Money.
Somewhere along the line this clown plans on making money off Global warming.
Sounds like Global Warming is taking a cue and following success....
Exactly. Anyone who believes, against al evidence, that the Porkulous bill will actually help the economy will also believe that their is global warming caused by man even though all evidence shows the earth is cooling.
I’m not certain of this, but wouldn’t the D.C. gas emissions consist mostly of carbon monoxide?
Hasn't the recent downturn caused these countries to have a sharp decrease on greenhouse emissions?
Field apparently is a scientist who publishes alarmist papers on the biological effects of climate change. So that makes him, for Reuters, a top climate scientist, even if he couldn't rank the altitudes of the thermosphere, ionosphere and mesosphere.
Campbell, J. E. and D. B. Lobell. R. C. Genova, C. B. Field. 2008. The Global Potential of Bioenergy on Abandoned Agriculture Lands. Environmental Science and Technology 42:5791–5794.
Field, C. B., J. E. Campbell, and D. B. Lobell. 2008. Biomass energy: the scale of the potential resource. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 23:65-72.
Houlton, B.Z., Y-P. Wang, P.M. Vitousek, and C.B. Field. 2008. A unifying framework for dinitrogen fixation in the terretrial biosphere. Nature (Letters), doi:10.1038/nature07028.
Lobell, D. B. and C. B. Field. 2008. Estimation of the carbon dioxide (CO2) fertilization effect using growth rate anomalies of CO2 and crop yields since 1961. Global Change Biology 14:39-45.
Nicholas Cahill, K. and C. B. Field. 2008. Future of the wine industry: Climate change science. Practical Winery and Vineyard 29(6):16-33.
No evidence is given anywhere in the article that this is the case.
"We now have data showing that from 2000 to 2007, greenhouse gas emissions increased far more rapidly than we expected, primarily because developing countries, like China and India, saw a huge surge in electric power generation, almost all of it based on coal," Field said.
He said that trend was likely to continue if more countries turned to coal and other carbon-intensive fuels to meet their energy needs. If so, he said the impact of climate change would be "more serious and diverse" than the IPCC's most recent predictions.
So what you're saying then is that there's no evidence whatsoever that things will be worse than in your original predictions. You're just saying that, had your questionable theories about greenhouse gases and doom been valid, all this extra CO2 would have made the situation worse. But your theories, and the models built around them, just haven't demonstrated any predictive powers. The fact that there may be more of the gas shown to have no effect on much of anything other than plants, just doesn't impress or frighten anymore. Sorry.
BTTT!
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.