98 out of 100 scientists conclude that climate change is largely caused by human activity.
Rick Perry thinks that we still "need to find out what the science is."
Sounds like a great person to lead the nation.
Riverside Info » About Riverside
Rick Galileo Perry
(26 posts)-
Posted Monday Sep 12, 2011 22:58 #
-
He's all hat and no cows.
Posted Monday Sep 12, 2011 23:03 # -
I recall there being a local "conservative interest" in this specific subject...
Hail to Heartland -- for bringing "global warming" home
by Chris Robling
Posted Tuesday Sep 13, 2011 02:21 # -
Tom Jacobs - When stating Facts like "98 out of 100 scientists" please cite your source.
Also - how did the ice age end?
Posted Tuesday Sep 13, 2011 07:15 # -
National Academy of Sciences
Posted Tuesday Sep 13, 2011 07:24 # -
Could not find any survey that says "climate change is largely caused by human activity."
Did find this article in Forbes
Tom - Still no answer to my second question
How about the Little Ice Ages of the last millennium? How did those end?
Posted Tuesday Sep 13, 2011 11:14 # -
There is very little debate in the scientific community regarding man-made climate change--the generally accepted hypothesis is that it exists. In 2010, the National Academy of Sciences released a series of peer-reviewed reports stating that man-made climate change was real, was happening and needed to be addressed. The National Academy of Sciences (and its affiliated arm, The National Research Council) are independent organizations comprised of the nation's most eminent scientists and researchers, and have historically provided independent, non-partisan advice on science, medicine and technology to government and industry for the purposes of public policy discussion.
You can deny it all you want. You can consider the opinion of Rick Perry and Forbes Magazine to be on par of that of the NAS. You can also believe that dinosaurs and humans walked the earth at the same time and that evolution is a lie promulgated by a cabal of anti-religious zealots. You can believe all these things, but the scientific evidence points to the contrary.
At one point, in the memory of living men, it was possible to be a Republican--even a conservative Republican--and not fear and denigrate science. Unfortunately, it appears there is no room for this kind of thinking in today's party.
(I don't know that there is a consensus on what ended the last Little Ice Age. Why don't you tell us what you think?)
Posted Tuesday Sep 13, 2011 13:18 # -
"Curious Resident" misrepresents my notes above, missing their key pedagogical point: How to teach the evolution of knowledge until recently thought complete.
It is not an idle point. Understanding increases, knowledge frontiers advance, there are new points to know -- and to teach. Maybe "Resident" just does not get it.
"Resident" wrongly relates the pedagogy of new science, and in some respects the uncovering of flawed science, to its interest in global warming. I don't express a point of view on that issue, since as a non-PhD i rely on qualified observes to educate the rest of us.
One of these is the InterAcademy Council, the society of mational academies of science (note: this is not a tea-party affiliated organizaton).
One year ago it released an audit of the slipshod scientific work and standards of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, based in part on the developments to which i referred.
Here are links to the InterAcademy Council's audit, IPCC and the Huffington Post article about the audit's release (note: the Huffington Post is not affiliated with any tea party organization):
The InterAcademy Council's review: http://reviewipcc.interacademycouncil.net/
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: http://www.ipcc.ch/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/31/interacademy-council-says_n_700263.html
On a thread nearby one finds a recent call for intellectual honesty. For instance, if one of us chooses to bring in another's work, let's agree to represent it accurately. Doing so respects both author and fellow readers.
Of course "Curious Resident," which has never revealed its household interest in the payroll of a certain local unit of government, while arguing the rest of us should pay more for that governmental unit, so that it will increase its payroll, is hardly capable of leading us in the quest after openness and honesty. As it has done in those many discussions, here again it abuses the readers whose trust it must secure for relevance, to say nothing of the writer it mis-quotes.
Posted Tuesday Sep 13, 2011 13:19 # -
Least we forget. Perry doesn't believe in evolution either.
Posted Wednesday Sep 14, 2011 17:25 # -
As i was saying (above just a smidge):
Nobel Prize-Winning Physicist Resigns Over Global Warming
Published September 14, 2011
FoxNews.comNASA
The global warming theory left him out in the cold.Dr. Ivar Giaever, a former professor with Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute and the 1973 winner of the Nobel Prize in physics, abruptly announced his resignation Tuesday, Sept. 13, from the premier physics society in disgust over its officially stated policy that "global warming is occurring."
Please note: Nobel laureate Giaever has no known affiliation with any tea party group.
I love this quote, for its simplicity, elegance and power:
"The claim … is that the temperature has changed from ~288.0 to ~288.8 degree Kelvin in about 150 years, which (if true) means to me is that the temperature has been amazingly stable, and both human health and happiness have definitely improved in this 'warming' period."
As a non-PhD who relies on the credentialed to sort these matters for public discussion and reflection, when I see individuals of this stature and integrity saying things like this, I wonder how our teachers who have taught the opposite to our kids get back to the truth.
I still have no clue about whether AGW is happening or not. I just hope that our kids are getting the whole story.
Best, c
Posted Thursday Sep 15, 2011 09:11 #
Reply »
You must log in to post.