There was a time when the scientific consensus believed ....

Forum rules
As the title "Thoughtful and Intelligent Debates" implies we want quality discussion in this forum. If you're going to post a new topic or reply to one here please make sure it fits the following guidelines.

  • Clear and descriptive title for your topic.
  • You don't need to write a book but please have a reasonable amount of material to support or dispute what you are discussing.
  • Outside references to material to support or dispute your argument can be used but they should not wholly make up your argument. If for example you reference a news article please explain exactly what you are referencing and why.
  • Stay on topic, while topics will wander in the general forums we want to keep them strictly on topic in this forum. Flaming will not be tolerated at all.

There was a time when the scientific consensus believed ....

PostBy: lsayre On: Sat Sep 07, 2013 7:40 am

There was a time when 99+% believed that the world was flat. They were wrong.

There was a time when more than 99% believed that the earth was the center of the universe, and the sun orbited the earth. That was wrong.

There was a time when science thought the sun was a burning ball of coal. They were wrong.

There was a time when the moon was thought to have its own light. That was wrong.

There was a time when science was convinced that heavy objects fall faster than light objects. That was 100% wrong.

There was a time when science believed that planets orbited in perfect circles. That was totally wrong.

There was a time (clear into the mid 1930's) when 100% of scientists thought that the entire universe was our milky-way galaxy. They were wrong.

There was a time when virtually 100% of scientists thought that Newtonian mechanics could explain everything. Then Einstein proved them totally wrong. Then quantum mechanics brought Einstein into serious question and proved that his theory was woefully inadequate and incomplete.

There was a time (clear into the 1960's) when 99.999% of scientists thought plate tectonics was a total joke. They were wrong.

Etc..., etc..., etc...

There is now a time when (supposedly) 97% of all scientists believe in global warming, and merely because they are in such agreement they absolutely can't be wrong.
lsayre
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: AHS S130 Coal Gun
Coal Size/Type: Anthracite Pea
Other Heating: Resistance Boiler (It has been fixed!)

Re: There was a time when the scientific consensus believed ....

PostBy: samhill On: Sat Sep 07, 2013 9:22 am

Then I would think that only time will tell but gee I wonder how many times if ever they were right? Seems to me that the odds are in the favor of being right since they keep coming up with more proof rather than less. There again I could be wrong. :lol:
samhill
 
Hot Air Coal Stoker Furnace: keystoker 160
Hand Fed Coal Stove: hitzer 75 in garage
Stove/Furnace Make: keystoker/hitzer
Stove/Furnace Model: koker 160/ hitzer 75

Re: There was a time when the scientific consensus believed ....

PostBy: jpete On: Sat Sep 07, 2013 10:13 am

What "proof"? I haven't seen any.

The only "proof" I need is the fact that there used to be a half mile of ice sitting on top of where my house is currently located.

The earth warms. There is no disputing that. And sometimes, it cools. And humans need not be involved to make that true.
jpete
 
Hand Fed Coal Stove: Harman Mk II
Coal Size/Type: Stove, Nut, Pea
Other Heating: Dino juice


Re: There was a time when the scientific consensus believed ....

PostBy: lsayre On: Sat Sep 07, 2013 10:22 am

Much of the proof comes from government backed scientists cooking the books. It is also apparently quite easy to get Federal and State grants for research if said research concludes global warming is real, and as hard as all get out to get grants if your data is proving otherwise.

This NASA scientist says the raw data does not show global warming. It is only when the actual data is properly massaged that global warming pops out of it.

"Climate scientist Roy Spencer, who oversees the NASA satellite instruments measuring global temperatures, reports that virtually all of the warming claimed by the overseers of U.S. surface temperature stations is the result of adjustments government-employed scientists make to the raw data. The objective, unaltered temperature readings show essentially no warming since 1973."

"Similarly, the government-employed scientists who report surface-based U.S. temperature data continually revise old temperature records to make earlier years seem colder than reported in the raw data, and more recent years warmer than reported in the raw data."

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor ... re-record/
lsayre
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: AHS S130 Coal Gun
Coal Size/Type: Anthracite Pea
Other Heating: Resistance Boiler (It has been fixed!)

Re: There was a time when the scientific consensus believed ....

PostBy: lsayre On: Sun Sep 08, 2013 8:12 am

How do you find out if 97.1% of climate scientists who have published perr reviewed papers on the matter endorse man made global warming. You ask those of them counted among the 97.1% directly. But when you do this you will find out that the vast majority of the peer reviewed scientific papers which were counted among the 97.1% who purportedly endorse man made global warming do not actually endorse it, per the authors (scientists) themselves.

http://www.populartechnology.net/2013/0 ... ml#Update2

The actual fact is that 66.7% of peer reviewed scientific papers published on the matter of global warming take no stance on whether said global warming is caused by man. Among the remaining 33.3% of scientists who have written peer reviewed studies on specifically "man made global warming", an amazing 97.1% endorsed it per the MSM (the media that reaches us average Joe's). But when you ask those counted among this group if they actually endorsed it, you generally find out that they are shocked to discover that their peer reviewed scientific paper was interpreted as such (apparently by an MSM bent on an agenda). It appears that to get the 97.1% all you need to do is (after excluding 66.7% of the papers published) see if the remaining papers make mention anywhere within of C02 being a greenhouse gas. If they appear to do so to any minute degree (even if the paper considers it insignificant), they are counted, and by doing this you eventually you get to 97.1%. This shocks the scientists, as it is not scientific at all.

When looked at scientifically, the evidence indicates that the actual consensus of global warming being specifically caused by man dwindles to a mere 0.3%.
http://www.wnd.com/files/2013/06/monckt ... 7-cm13.pdf

If there is a moral to this story, it is (in my opinion): Don't listen to the NYT or the Huffington Post (or their minions) when they tell you that 97.1% of scientists endorse global warming, as what these rags tell us is merely that by their own (ahem) standards, 97.1% endorse it. In the end this is agenda driven opinion masquerading as science for the masses.
lsayre
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: AHS S130 Coal Gun
Coal Size/Type: Anthracite Pea
Other Heating: Resistance Boiler (It has been fixed!)

Re: There was a time when the scientific consensus believed ....

PostBy: lsayre On: Sun Sep 08, 2013 8:48 am

I just read where the arctic has 60% more ice this year than it did last year. What a difference a year makes. Should I mention that CO2 levels were measured to have gone UP in the past year?
lsayre
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: AHS S130 Coal Gun
Coal Size/Type: Anthracite Pea
Other Heating: Resistance Boiler (It has been fixed!)

Re: There was a time when the scientific consensus believed ....

PostBy: samhill On: Sun Sep 08, 2013 9:18 am

I think they were talking about the rate of decline being less but it's still declining. There again I & this could be wrong. http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/
http://nsidc.org/icelights/2013/07/03/w ... ew-normal/
samhill
 
Hot Air Coal Stoker Furnace: keystoker 160
Hand Fed Coal Stove: hitzer 75 in garage
Stove/Furnace Make: keystoker/hitzer
Stove/Furnace Model: koker 160/ hitzer 75

Re: There was a time when the scientific consensus believed ....

PostBy: lsayre On: Sun Sep 08, 2013 9:30 am

From August 2012 to August 2013 it grew by 60%. It's been record cold up north. Cold enough down here too.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... tions.html
http://junkscience.com/2013/09/07/recor ... l-cooling/
http://engineeringevil.com/2013/09/07/r ... l-cooling/

And the 2007 prediction was for no remaining arctic ice by 2013.
lsayre
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: AHS S130 Coal Gun
Coal Size/Type: Anthracite Pea
Other Heating: Resistance Boiler (It has been fixed!)

Re: There was a time when the scientific consensus believed ....

PostBy: Flyer5 On: Sun Sep 08, 2013 9:59 am

An Ice age is coming, an Ice age is coming! It just may not happen for a few thousand years give or take. Or is it a heat wave is coming ? Fact is people in the right positions make tonnes of money from panic and fear of the people.
Flyer5
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: Leisure Line WL110
Hot Air Coal Stoker Stove: Leisure Line Pioneer

Re: There was a time when the scientific consensus believed ....

PostBy: franco b On: Sun Sep 08, 2013 10:04 am

One of the most disappointing realizations as I was growing up was that most experts weren't.
franco b
 
Hand Fed Coal Stove: V ermont Castings 2310, Franco Belge 262
Baseburners & Antiques: Glenwood Modern Oak 114
Coal Size/Type: nut and pea

Re: There was a time when the scientific consensus believed ....

PostBy: Richard S. On: Sun Sep 08, 2013 10:09 am

lsayre wrote:There is now a time when (supposedly) 97% of all scientists believe in global warming, and merely because they are in such agreement they absolutely can't be wrong.


About the only thing they are in agrement with is that the earth has warmed, how much and what the cause is where the debate is. The 97% figure has been pushed by the media and environmental groups. There is only a handful of studies suggesting this 97% figure and there is only one that has directly polled scientists. Since that is the one most widely cited I'll cover that.

http://tigger.uic.edu/~pdoran/012009_Doran_final.pdf

Briefly, they sent a questionnaire to approximately 10K scientists in various fields involved with climate. Climatologists, Physicists, geologists, etc. Approximately 3K responded which as I understand it is typical for such a poll. There is some technical issues such as they sent this to official emails and didn't verify exactly who was answering it, e.g. was it the secretary? The second and bigger issue is they were blocking IP's once that IP was used to vote, the problem there is entire campuses could be on the same IP. If someone knew about this ahead of time they could game the system by getting their vote in early. Another issue is who is likely to respond, e.g. if you had a poll on abortion you are certainly going to get a lot of responses from Catholics.


Those issues aside this questionnaire contained two question:.

1. When compared with pre-1800s levels, do you think that mean global temperatures have generally risen, fallen, or remained relatively constant?


90% answered risen which is to be expected.


2. Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?


82% answered yes. What is significant? You could argue as many of the scientists have that took this poll that if man was able to affect climate at all that is significant even if the result was inconsequential. "Significant" has no value and could mean completely different things to two different people.

As far as the 97%:

In our survey, the most specialized and knowledge-able respondents (with regard to climate
change) are those who listed climate science as their area of expertise and who
also have published more than 50% of their recent peer reviewed papers on the
subject of climate change (79 individuals in total). Of these specialists, 96.2%
(76 of 79) answered “risen” to question 1 and 97.4% (75 of 77) answered yes to question 2.


In this case the 97% consensus is from a pool of 77 scientists. The other issue is if you are geologist studying ancient climate are you specializing in climate or Geology?

Everyone of these studies has significant flaws similar to this.
Richard S.
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: Van Wert VA1200
Coal Size/Type: Buckwheat/Anthracite

Re: There was a time when the scientific consensus believed ....

PostBy: lsayre On: Sun Sep 08, 2013 10:39 am

This Wall Street Journal article implies that Global Warming is a religion.

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB1 ... 3761315576

Many of the traditional signs of religion are here:

Original sin: Mankind is responsible for the prophesied disasters to befall us due to global warming.
Requisite repentance and atonement: We must repent that our sinful carbon based nature is evil. We must atone via the acceptance of a carbon tax or cap-and-trade system.
Rituals: We must all stop burning carbon based fuels, and go with earth friendly alternatives such as solar and wind. Earth itself must be worshiped.
Indulgences: Movement leaders (ministers of the faith) like Al Gore can buy "carbon offsets" to fully compensate (atone) for their personal carbon-emitting sins, while still indulging in them fully.
Prophecy: We (all of us sans for those using the indulgences route) must act now before it is too late. If we don't act before 2017 it's game over for the earth.

http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Energy ... 321009920/
lsayre
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: AHS S130 Coal Gun
Coal Size/Type: Anthracite Pea
Other Heating: Resistance Boiler (It has been fixed!)

Re: There was a time when the scientific consensus believed ....

PostBy: gaw On: Sun Sep 08, 2013 11:25 am

If I was involved in manufacturing or selling alternative energy sources I would be more inclined to believe in man-made global “climate change”, “global warming” is so five minutes ago. :lol: We are not blowing up power plants and factories, surrounding mines and oil and gas wells with barbed wire and armed guards. No, the answer is the transfer of money from the hosts to the parasites. Follow the money. :idea:
In the grand scheme mankind is not even a pimple on the earth’s ass. To think otherwise would be indicative of an acute case of megalomania. :shock:
gaw
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: Keystoker KA-6
Coal Size/Type: Rice from Schuylkill County

Re: There was a time when the scientific consensus believed ....

PostBy: lsayre On: Sun Sep 08, 2013 2:48 pm

Since it appears that global warming was arrested in 1997, why don't those who are championing the global warming movement declare victory? They could say that due to their foresight and incessant cries, followed by the quick action taken by many of the worlds governments, global warming was arrested in 1997 and we are now on the road to cooling, thus erasing the evils of the past. Amidst all of the evidence of cooling, they could tout (honestly) that 1997 was the year the nations of the world agreed to the Kyoto Protocol.

Could it be that this movement is somewhat akin to the civil rights movement, the champions of which also never seem to declare victory?
lsayre
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: AHS S130 Coal Gun
Coal Size/Type: Anthracite Pea
Other Heating: Resistance Boiler (It has been fixed!)