Posted on 12/08/2009 7:31:58 AM PST by IrishMike
THE UN Climate Change Summit started this week in Copenhagen with far more dissent than its organisers hoped for from two extremes of the climate change debate . We had the "grandfather of climate change", James Hansen, describing the proceedings as counter-productive and "a farce", while the chief Saudi Arabian negotiator to the summit, Mohammed al-Sabban, doubts the current science and suggests there is no longer any point in seeking agreement to reduce emissions.
It is therefore certain that the global political debate on managing carbon emissions and climate change will continue well beyond the Copenhagen summit. It is to be hoped that the scientific debate is also permitted to continue.
Results released this year suggest that the degree of scientific certainty falls short of that desirable before we set binding targets and dollar values on carbon emissions. Indeed, Tim Flannery, chairman of the Copenhagen Climate Council admitted that: "We can't pretend we have perfect knowledge: we don't."
This is a refreshingly honest comment when contrasted with some of the statements in the hacked emails of the Climatic Research Unit, UK, made by leading British and US climate scientists, who were caught with their fingers on the "delete button" when faced with climate data that failed to agree with their computer models.
Meanwhile two recent results published by top scientists cast doubt on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's theory about the link between atmospheric carbon dioxide and global warming. These are of of significance because whereas the climate models used by the IPCC rely on software to represent a large number of highly complex Earth processes, these results are equivalent to experimental observations on the Earth itself.
(Excerpt) Read more at theaustralian.com.au ...
If that's an example of the way Feynman things I can see why he won the prize...
If that's an example of the way Feynman thinks I can see why he won the prize... now why did Obama win again?
If that's an example of the way Feynman things I can see why he won the prize....
Try slipping that quote around attribued to "Mr. Richard Roe," and see how many people scoff at it...
The result of their analysis is a CO2-induced amplification factor close to one, which has implications clearly at odds with the earlier IPCC position.... What this means is that the IPCC model for climate sensitivity is not supported by experimental observation on ancient ice ages and recent satellite data.
What a relief...conclusions supported by real data. In my gloomier moods, I wonder how long it'll be before real scientists are smeared out of the field entirely. It's not as hard as it looks if the genuine article is close to retirement age and the imposters are on the verge of taking over the temple...
Really don’t know who Feynman is. Hopefully this is not just a one off statement and maybe there are a few more thatthink like this AND will speak up.
Nobel prize winning physicist Richard Feynman...
The audacity and hypocrisy of these batchit crazy people is the stuff of gaping gazes. I just can’t believe the discourse has devolved to this. Science is now consensus. Facts shouted down. Serious questions ridiculed.
Unbelievable.
“doctor” hanson is not a “scientist”. He is a fool, a moron, a loser, a mental midget, an embarrassment to science, a fraud, an idiot and (to top it off) a government employee. He needs to resign, flog himself as he roams the country seeking absolution. His family probably has already abandoned him because they realize he is a fool.
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.