MIT Professor of Atmospheric Science claims global-warming alarmists intimidate dissenting scientists into silence: http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110008220
A good article. The Sargasso Sea data http://www.whoi.edu/oceanus/viewImage.do?id=8722&aid=3842 and the Greenland ice cores don't lie and they show that the current global warming can be easily explained by natural perturbations. The "green lobby" is very powerful and the muzzling of prominent scientists worrisome. Many in the natural resource industry have changed there tune, not because they believe in man caused global warming, but because of the big bucks in carbon sequestration. Clear Skies Don -----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces+djcolton=piol.com@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces+djcolton=piol.com@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of cpclark@xmission.com Sent: Saturday, April 15, 2006 9:43 PM To: utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com Subject: [Utah-astronomy] OT: Climate of Fear MIT Professor of Atmospheric Science claims global-warming alarmists intimidate dissenting scientists into silence: http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110008220 _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.utahastronomy.com
Two excellent points, Don. I especially liked the chart -- it was quite alarming until I saw that the present was on the left and years before present on the right! I had thought it read left to right. Also, the comments by Richard Lindzen, the Alfred P. Sloan professor at MIT, should be taken seriously. Thanks for shedding light on the debate. -- Joe
I understand and accept that there are other interpretations of the current global warming trend. Two questions/points: 1. Do most scientists agree that global temperatures are indeed increasing, even though they may not agree on the causes? I just don't know, but in all of the popular literature that I read it appears that there is consensus on this, at least. Is this true? 2. Let's say for a moment that the current warming trend (if it does exist) is entirely due to natural phenomena. What is the downside to reducing carbon/CO2 emissions? Is there a downside other than economic change? Again, I don't know - just asking. Kim -----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces+kimharch=cut.net@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces+kimharch=cut.net@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Joe Bauman Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 10:32 AM To: Utah Astronomy Subject: RE: [Utah-astronomy] OT: Climate of Fear Two excellent points, Don. I especially liked the chart -- it was quite alarming until I saw that the present was on the left and years before present on the right! I had thought it read left to right. Also, the comments by Richard Lindzen, the Alfred P. Sloan professor at MIT, should be taken seriously. Thanks for shedding light on the debate. -- Joe _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.utahastronomy.com ______________________________________________________________________ This e-mail has been scanned by Cut.Net Managed Email Content Service, using Skeptic(tm) technology powered by MessageLabs. For more information on Cut.Nets Content Service, visit http://www.cut.net ______________________________________________________________________
Kim If you look at the Sargasso Sea data http://www.whoi.edu/oceanus/viewImage.do?id=8722&aid=3842 it is clear that global warming is occurring (be sure to note that the most recent data is on the left) but it is also clear that the current warming is consistent with similar fluctuations that have occurred in the past. It is also interesting to see how recently some scientists have changed there tune: Science magazine (Dec. 10, 1976) warned of "extensive Northern Hemisphere glaciations." Science Digest (February 1973) reported that "the world's climatologists are agreed" that we must "prepare for the next ice age." The Christian Science Monitor ("Warning: Earth's Climate is Changing Faster than Even Experts Expect," Aug. 27, 1974) reported that glaciers "have begun to advance," "growing seasons in England and Scandinavia are getting shorter" and "the North Atlantic is cooling down about as fast as an ocean can cool." Newsweek agreed ( "The Cooling World," April 28, 1975) that meteorologists "are almost unanimous" that catastrophic famines might result from the global cooling that The New York Times (Sept. 14, 1975) said "may mark the return to another ice age." The Times (May 21, 1975) also said "a major cooling of the climate is widely considered inevitable" now that it is "well established" that the Northern Hemisphere's climate "has been getting cooler since about 1950." from http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,635195776,00.html As one who read an article about global cooling in Parade Magazine by Carl Sagan in the 1970's, I remain skeptical - not about the hard data but about the leaps of faith made by many. Clear Skies Don -----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces+djcolton=piol.com@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces+djcolton=piol.com@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Kim Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 10:56 AM To: 'Utah Astronomy' Subject: RE: [Utah-astronomy] OT: Climate of Fear I understand and accept that there are other interpretations of the current global warming trend. Two questions/points: 1. Do most scientists agree that global temperatures are indeed increasing, even though they may not agree on the causes? I just don't know, but in all of the popular literature that I read it appears that there is consensus on this, at least. Is this true? 2. Let's say for a moment that the current warming trend (if it does exist) is entirely due to natural phenomena. What is the downside to reducing carbon/CO2 emissions? Is there a downside other than economic change? Again, I don't know - just asking. Kim -----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces+kimharch=cut.net@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces+kimharch=cut.net@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Joe Bauman Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 10:32 AM To: Utah Astronomy Subject: RE: [Utah-astronomy] OT: Climate of Fear Two excellent points, Don. I especially liked the chart -- it was quite alarming until I saw that the present was on the left and years before present on the right! I had thought it read left to right. Also, the comments by Richard Lindzen, the Alfred P. Sloan professor at MIT, should be taken seriously. Thanks for shedding light on the debate. -- Joe _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.utahastronomy.com ______________________________________________________________________ This e-mail has been scanned by Cut.Net Managed Email Content Service, using Skeptic(tm) technology powered by MessageLabs. For more information on Cut.Nets Content Service, visit http://www.cut.net ______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.utahastronomy.com
participants (4)
-
cpclark@xmission.com -
Don J. Colton -
Joe Bauman -
Kim