Posted By: geoff on Saturday, July 19, 2008
Uhm... all kind of vague, isn't it (which letter by which Nobel prize winners?)? & who exactly is the "Space and Science Research Center"? Something like those "independent" scientists who claimed smoking was "good" for you? A Bulgarian physicist, a Tanzanian radio communications expert and a former "consultant" to NASA... Really convincing, dude...
Posted By: Thomas on Saturday, July 19, 2008
Global warming isn't science--it's political science. It's a faith-based initiative of the left. A sign of this is the vitriolic denial by global warming advocates of any discussion which doesn't fit their faith.
Thomas: it's only an issue in the US, and in a few discredited videos shown on British television but apparently funded by Exxon. The "Conservative" (i.e. "Christian Democratic") gov't in Germany has seen more than enough evidence to convince them that they have to pressure Mercedes & Porsche & all those big steel companies to start getting serious.Otherwise: look at the website for this so-called "Space and Science Research Center" for yourself; google it, or check out the qualifications of the people in charge at: http://www.spaceandscience.net/id1.html.Then tell me if and/or why I should be convinced. Otherwise, I don't see how anything I've said or seen has been particularly vitriolic, and I don't see how "faith" has anything to do with being sceptical of any of the so-called "experts" Mr. Brennan cites: an organisation headed by a Bulgarian physicist and a Tanzanian radio communications expert, a former "consultant" to NASA (surely he could have afforded to have someone could have corrected the typing errors on his webpage: "sspace"), an article in an Australian astronomy journal...You could only swallow such garbage on faith...
Posted By: Coolit on Saturday, July 19, 2008
Al Gore deserves to be shipped to a Nudist Camp in Anartica.
Posted By: Chris on Sunday, July 20, 2008
Ah, the classic fallacy the deniers use, the Appeal to Authority. An authority can claim that something is true all they want(I.E. Hitler having scientists claim Jews where a biologically different race of humans), but that doesn't make it true. On top of that, the authorities that Mr. Brennan cites seem incredibly weak. Since when do physicists know the detailed workings of something as immensely complicated and unimaginably fragile the climate?
Posted By: geoff on Sunday, July 20, 2008
Coolit: why? Because he might be right?
Posted By: Buddy on Monday, July 21, 2008
Please, somebody tell Chris that individuals who study climate are educated first in physics and then meteorology. The two kind of go together. If not then a lot of people wasted four years of their lives busting their butts for a physics degree that was not needed for their study of meterology. It's the same as saying physics is not necessary for the study of astonomy.
Posted By: geoff on Monday, July 21, 2008
Buddy: check out these guys' CVs: they're on their web page; one was involved in engineering rockets, the other looks at sunspots & their effects on climate: doesn't say anything about meteorology whatsoever.But don't trust me: check it out yourself, dude (or google them): http://www.spaceandscience.net/id1.html
Buddy: sorry: the "radio communications" guy from Tanzania has some meteorology under his belt.
Posted By: Martin Cooper on Monday, July 28, 2008
Do the people who write these articles, think that we can keep pumping pollutants into the atmosphere, onto the land and into the water, and it doesn't matter, so long as specific arguments are countered?And as for the statement that the period of global warming is coming to an end; well, I've been hearing for years that this is contentious from columnists like this one. Now apparently, we were actually right, but not any more, so you can admit it now, that Nature has proved you right.I believe the people that want to clean the Earth up, not the people who are complaining that they'll lose their jobs to other people if this theory is correct, and that there's nothing really wrong with things, trust us you silly people and stop worrying.What's wrong with cleaning up all the pollution and finding an alternative to Oil? Really, even if it turns out that we didn't have to, we'd still be living on a much, much nicer planet. Win-win situation. If we do nothing, and it turns out we didn't have to, then it's win-lose. So, why not go with win-win? Why not clean everything up?
