Quote:
Originally Posted by JamieS.AdultDatingDollars
Yes B.Barnato, I am tired of this! People who argue with scientific FACT.
!
|
Funny, even some of the original "signers" of the IPCC report have stated that they do not think that global warming is a fact. Amazing that YOU are able to state it as such, against the word of those scientists....
Here are a couple:
Solar Physicist and Climatologist Douglas V. Hoyt, who coauthored the book The Role of the Sun in Climate Change, and has worked at both the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), has developed a scorecard to evaluate how accurate climate models have been. Hoyt wrote, ?Starting in 1997, we created a scorecard to see how climate model predictions were matching observations. The picture is not pretty with most of the predictions being wrong in magnitude and often in sign.? (LINK) A March 1, 2007 blog post in the National Review explained how the scoring system works. ?[Hoyt] gives each prediction a ?yes-no-undetermined score.? So if the major models? prediction is confirmed, the score at the beginning would be 1-0-0. So how do the models score when compared with the evidence? The final score is 1-27-4. That?s one confirmed prediction, 27 disconfirmed, and 4 undetermined,? the blog noted. Hoyt has extensively researched the sun-climate connection and has published nearly 100 scientific papers in such areas as the greenhouse effect, aerosols, cloud cover, radiative transfer, and sunspot structure. (LINK) To see Hoyt?s climate model scorecard, go here: (LINK)
Solar physicists Galina Mashnich and Vladimir Bashkirtsev, of the Institute of Solar-Terrestrial Physics of the Siberian Division of the Russian Academy of Sciences, believe the climate is driven by the sun and predict global cooling will soon occur. The two scientists are so convinced that global temperatures will cool within the next decade they have placed a $10,000 wager with a UK scientist to prove their certainty. The criteria for the $10,000 bet will be to ?compare global temperatures between 1998 and 2003 with those between 2012 and 2017. The loser will pay up in 2018,? according to an April 16, 2007 article in Live Science. (LINK) Bashkirtsev and Mashnich have questioned the view that the ?anthropogenic impact? is driving Earth?s climate. ?None of the investigations dealing with the anthropogenic impact on climate convincingly argues for such an impact,? the two scientists noted in 2003. Bashkirtsev and Mashnich believe the evidence of solar impacts on the climate ?leave little room for the anthropogenic impact on the Earth?s climate.? They believe that ?solar variations naturally explain global cooling observed in 1950-1970, which cannot be understood from the standpoint of the greenhouse effect, since CO2 was intensely released into the atmosphere in this period.? (LINK)
Internationally renowned scientist Dr. Antonio Zichichi, president of the World Federation of Scientists and a retired Professor of Advanced Physics at the University of Bologna in Italy, who has published over 800 scientific papers, questioned man-made global warming fears. According to an April 27, 2007 article at Zenit.org, Zichichi ?pointed out that human activity has less than 10% impact on the environment.? The article noted that Zichichi ?showed that the mathematical models used by the [UN's] IPCC do not correspond to the criteria of the scientific method. He said the IPCC used ?the method of ?forcing? to arrive at their conclusions that human activity produces meteorological variations.?? Zichichi said that based upon actual scientific fact ?it is not possible to exclude the idea that climate changes can be due to natural causes,? and he added that it is plausible that ?man is not to blame.? According to the article, ?He also reminded those present that 500,000 years ago the Earth lost the North and South Poles four times. The poles disappeared and reformed four times, he said. Zichichi said that in the end he is not convinced that global warming is caused by the increase of emissions of ?greenhouse gases? produced through human activity.
Renowned Astronomer Sir Patrick Moore, a fellow of the UK?s Royal Astronomical Society, host of the BBC?s Sky at Night program since 1957 and author of over 60 books on astronomy called global warming concern ?rubbish? in an interview with The Sun in 2005. ?I think it?s a lot of rubbish! From 1645-1715 the sun was inactive and we had a ?Little Ice Age,?? Moore said. ?Then the sun went back to normal and the world warmed up,? he concluded. Moore most recently co-authored two books published in 2006: 50 Years in Space: What We Thought Then What We Know Now; and Bang! The Complete History of the Universe. (LINK)
You must the be most brilliant climatologist in the UNIVERSE!
I bow to your wisdom. Guide us, Oh Master!
.
But seriously, there are VERY few cutting edge ideas in science that are called "FACT", by actual scientists. The very idea that institutes and journals REFUSE to allow dissent or debate should be a very chilling idea to you. It's very much against the principals of science and should, in and of itself, cause some doubt about motivations and the process that is going on here.
.