FReepmail me to get on or off
Click on POGW graphic for full GW rundown
Dr. John Ray's
GREENIE WATCH
I'm thinking... no kidding.... Really? ...Whoodathunkit...
Posted on 06/04/2007 9:00:14 PM PDT by Reform Canada
ping
Ping.
Who are you going to believe? This eminent Climatologist or the C-Minus Harvard Grad who flunked outta Divintiy School?
Shazzam. Very interesting.
Global Warming is a house of cards, just bad science on top of bad science sprinkled with a little real science to give all the crap credibility.
The climatically inefficient and economically disastrous Kyoto Protocol, based on IPCC projections, was correctly defined by President George W. Bush as “fatally flawed”.
It’s not it’s not it’s not! La La La La I can’t hear you.
Thanks and bookmarked
BTT for later.
===
If you look at the players involved in spreading this dystopianism it starts to look much more like another mutation of neo-marxist radicalism for the sake of radicalism.
This stopped needing any sort of science a while ago. Now it’s a hybrid political philosophy and misanthropic religion.
Interesting proposition.
But the global warming community will never accept the proposition as fact.
Because it would destroy the central theory of global warming that increased CO2 directly translates into increased temperature. CO2 levels close to modern levels during the Little Ice Age would disprove the CO2 temperature link.
I suppose it is possible to prove it beyond doubt over and over again. But the global alarmists do not accept any fact that goes against their theory. They just rewrite it out of the historical record. More than just an uphill battle.
This is why I love science; it is one of humanity’s noblest endeavors. When I wrote my master’s thesis I noted that all previous researchers referenced a particular paper that they said proved beyond doubt a widely believed hypothesis. I read that paper very carefully and found that the author stated, “I selected this set of data because it favored the proof of my hypothesis”. I found that he had ignored a lot of other data that DISPROVED his hypothesis. Apparently, no one else read his entire paper. Challenging basic assumptions is always wiser.
ping
This hypothesis has been around for a long time... I really don’t know enough to determine how much faith to put into Jaworowski’s take on this issue. I’m concerned that very little effort has been made to verify or dispute his concern, but with the major bias toward funding alarmists instead of those who are interested in real science, it’s not indicative that he’s considered to be off his rocker.
If you google the guy, you get a fair number of attacks on him, including this one: http://www.someareboojums.org/blog/?p=7, which includes a fairly extensive discussion in the comments. That post accuses Jaworowski of misreprentations, etc. I can’t sort all that out. The guy claims the ice core samples are valid after all, etc.
bump
Do you know of anything rebutting this paper?
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.