Posted on 07/05/2017 11:28:10 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
... Imagine, if you will, that you spend your entire professional life trying to do one thing to the best of your ability. In my case, that one thing is to study the nature and causes of climate change. You put in a long apprenticeship. You spend years learning about the climate system, computer models of climate and climate observations. You start filling a tool kit with the statistical and mathematical methods you’ll need for analyzing complex data sets.
After decades of seeking to advance scientific understanding, reality suddenly shifts, and you are back in the cold darkness of ignorance. The ignorance starts with President Trump. It starts with untruths and alternative facts. The untruth that climate change is a “hoax” engineered by the Chinese. The alternative fact that “nobody really knows” the causes of climate change. Ignorance trickles down from the president to members of his administration, eventually filtering into the public’s consciousness.
Trump has referred to a dark cloud hanging over his administration. The primary cloud I see is the self-created cloud of willful ignorance on the science of climate change. That cloud is a clear and present threat to the lives, livelihoods and health of every person on the planet, now and in the future. This cloud could be easily lifted by the president himself.
But for my own part, I don’t intend to spend the rest of my life in darkness or silently accepting trickle-down ignorance.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
“Why did that happen?”
Neanderthals started driving SUV’s...perfect for hauling around mastodon meat and stone money!;)
>>But I see he wants to discuss Climate Change as a feature of political ideology.
Of course he does. He has built his professional career around this particular gravy train, unfortunately. The current status of things is a threat to his livelihood. He probably has a mortgage, kids who need braces and a college education, etc. Always follow the money.
Our Left for decades quoted Eisenhower’s farewell speech in warning against the military-industrial complex. And they were probably correct in doing so, but they probably went overboard in many cases.
In that same speech, Eisenhower also warned against Big Science. We see with Climate Alarmism he was correct there, too.
The only cloud over the administration would be the swamp, GopE, dems and rinos.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/01/09/ben-santer-tries-to-explain-the-pause-in-global-warming/
Here is a good qoute from Santer:
"we do not compare model results with radiosonde-based atmospheric temperature measurements, as has been done in a number of previous studies"
Models are more relevant then actual data. WTF?
There are real climate scientists and this guy, Ben Santer, is not one of them.
The argument “I’m a climate scientist listen to me” is problematic. Anyone can reason scientifically. You don’t need credentials to reason scientifically. One would hope that someone with scientific credentials would reason scientifically. That is not always the case.
Probably the main argument for the global warming and climate change theories has been the argument from authority. It is a known fallacy. The claims themselves are disputed, but even if true, the argument is a fallacy. Perhaps Michael Crichton said it best when he said that consensus is a virtue in politics, but not in science.
When did climate become a “science?” I certainly agree that it is an interesting, if highly speculative, topic, but a science? Like physics or chemistry? I don’t think so. It is more of an applied topic, like engineering.
I’m an economist. I think a lot of micro-economics is pretty solid. Macro-economics is not solid. Marxist economics is as bogus as anything infected by Marxism, perhaps the queen of the junk sciences.
Global warming and climate change are infected by Marxism. I feel sorry for the few real climate scientists out there. Their discipline has been hijacked by people who are more interested in taking rich, capitalist America down a few pegs, than in telling the truth. That is Marxism in a nutshell, and it is not a proper foundation for science.
Like the typical left wing... Confusing/mixing multiple issues to create a paranoia is not science.
Is the climate changing? Yes, the climate is ALWAYS changing.
Is the the any pet cause of climate change human activity? Probably
How much of this change is due to human activity? Probably very little
Is this Change due to human activity anything of the scope and scale that it will result is massive difference from the changes due to natural factors? Probably not.
Science uses the scientific method.
Climate “science” does not use the scientific method.
Any questions?
Climatology is to science as rat catching is to gymnastics.
“Weather-Guessers,” AKA “Climate Scientists” are the ONLY “professional” people in the world (outside of professional baseball players (who only have to bat .300 or so) and the dingbats in the Congressional Budget Office) who can be wrong 50% of the time and still keep their jobs!
“You put in a long apprenticeship. You spend years learning about the climate system, computer models of climate and climate observations. You start filling a tool kit with the statistical and mathematical methods you’ll need for analyzing complex data sets.”
What would be really sad is to put in all this effort only to find out that your complex methods were great, but the data you relied on was flawed, inadequate, or deliberately falsified. Or all three, as seems to be the case.
Even sadder would be to have to trot out another man of straw, in this case, the canard that your opponents deny that the climate changes. Precisely who thinks that? To establish himself a scientific genius, he should proclaim his opponents all deny the existence of the gravity, entropy, and the wheel.
The important question is whether, or to what degree, human activities are critical factors driving climate change, and whether the proposed measures to reverse the theoretical impact would work at all, and even if they did, would be worth the enormous cost. Tilting at straw men and playing hide-the-ball does not scientific credibility make.
What he really means is: “I’m a climate scientist and I’m not letting my gravy train end.”
“...You spend years learning about the climate system, computer models of climate and climate observations.....
Computer models don’t work that well in predicting short range weather forecasting.
Computer models = GIGO.
Garbage In, Garbage Out.
. . . a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity . . . The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money . . . is gravely to be regarded.Yet . . . we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite. Eisenhower’s Farewell Address
Brian May of Queen is more of a scientist than Bill Nye ever will be.
L
Oh indeed
Man Made Global Warming is a FRAUD!!!
the Climate has been changing for Billions of Years and the last 10,000 or so have brought us OUT of the Last Ice Age.
Beware the “Maunder Minimum”
Right. The ‘ozone hole.’ That was another one.
Oh, is that anything like a "pizza scientist"?
I’m not letting trickle-down ignorance win
By the look of your position...it looks like it has. By the look of your picture, you're a smarmy little twit....probably queer.
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.