Strickland33
Well-known member
That's what I thought...
That's what I thought...
Well, it is really a matter of "where to begin?"
I'm gonna try and tackle it in parts but lets just start with "for the sake of science".
If science is the oracle in your society then it's the truth- teller...maybe I'm an idealist but for science to best serve humanity it must have a reasonable degree of autonomy from political motivations.
We can talk policy based on bad science,carbon-sequestration- land grabbing,trillions of dollars spent chasing a fantasy solution to a grossly over weighted problem, the plight of newly industrialized 3rd world countries forced to bear the economic brunt of the policy changes, etc., etc.
I don't think 33 is looking for more proof that there are always disagreements among scientists. It seems he's asking what do you want to see happen?
I guess what I'm wondering, though, is where and how you see political motivations playing into the publication of this research. Especially in the American political context, which has witnessed vastly different presidents and Congresses from all over the place in regards to party-affiliation. Likewise, there have been tremendous shifts in science, as practiced, funded and published, which is to say that it doesn't seem to be nearly the singular unit as you make it sound...
Genuinely looking forward to your answer.
Top Swedish scientist and member of the IPCC says there is no cause for alarm.
Top Swedish climate scientist Dr. Lennart Bengtsson, who has served on the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the official global warming advocacy body, was also quoted publicly on February 3 as saying,
“We are creating great anxiety without it being justified…there are no indications that the warming is so severe that we need to panic. The warming we have had the last a 100 years is so small that if we didn’t have meteorologists and climatologists to measure it we wouldn’t have noticed it at all. The Earth appears to have cooling properties that exceed the previously thought ones, and computer models are inadequate to try to foretell a chaotic object like the climate, where actual observations are the only way to go.
www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2...mas-global-warming-delusions-are-truly-cruel/
thanks, Heartland Institute, for your input.
The guy is a meteorologist, not a climate scientist btw.
thanks, Heartland Institute, for your input.