SOTU - Global Warming is a FACT
- Thread starter nitro
- Start date
For FC it's a buyers market...
This study, titled "Institutionalizing delay: foundation funding and the creation of U.S. climate change counter-movement organizations," reports that all of this money is spent "on maintaining a field frame that justifies unlimited use of fossil fuels by attempting to delegitimate the science that supports the necessity of mandatory limits on carbon emissions. To accomplish this goal in the face of massive scientific evidence of anthropogenic climate change [which is documented in that link] has meant the development of an active campaign to manipulate and mislead the public over the nature of climate science and the threat posed by climate change."
It's just straight-up cronyism
American Enterprise Institute, Heritage Foundation, Hoover Institution, Manhattan Institute, Cato Institute, Hudson Institute, Atlas Economic Research, Americans for Prosperity, John Locke Foundation, Heartland Institute, and Reason Foundation.
They, in turn, pay professors and journalists to write, both for the "news media," and for professional journals, to debunk or (in the scholarly publications) to raise questions about, global warming or its cause -- questions that are no longer even questions among actual climate scientists.
They, in turn, pay professors and journalists to write, both for the "news media," and for professional journals, to debunk or (in the scholarly publications) to raise questions about, global warming or its cause -- questions that are no longer even questions among actual climate scientists.
Nitro I am very interested in what real scientists have to say. If your scientist buddy says man made co2 causes warming... ask him for the science and let us know what he gives you. Really... I would like hear from someone with a brain instead of fc.
All I know is I have spent many hours searching for the science on google and the closet the agw guys get are models. Which have failed.
[img[<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/2ROw_cDKwc0?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>[/img]
All I know is I have spent many hours searching for the science on google and the closet the agw guys get are models. Which have failed.
[img[<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/2ROw_cDKwc0?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>[/img]
In the past, we've had similar issues where corporate and societal interests fell on opposite sides. These issues -- cigarets and lung cancer, freons and ozone destruction -- also became politicized, but to a lesser extent than the Global Warming Issue. In both these prior cases corporate interests eventually lost the arguments. But these were simpler issues with fewer parameters. Our planet's atmosphere and climate will be far more difficult to unravel and understand, though man is no less anxious to jump to conclusions. This climate business is so very complex that corporate interests have their best chance yet of guessing right, but I wouldn't put any money down yet. It is far too soon to place bets.
Now, along comes Professor Salby to throw a giant monkey wrench in the works. Salby has put forth well-reasoned, rigorous, data-based arguments showing that CO2 content of the atmosphere is, to a significant extent, driven by temperature change, rather than the other way around, as previously assumed. But what hasn't he done? He hasn't sorted out all of the contributors to temperature change. He has merely shown that changing CO2 content is an unlikely suspect as the instigator.
We are in the renaissance period of understanding when it comes to climate. We have a long, long way to go before we fully understand our climate with all its interacting elements and feedback loops. We certainly can't rule out anthropomorphic contributions as being important; there is still, at the minimum, deforestation, ocean and air pollution, and plain old thermal pollution to be considered in addition to all of the natural phenomena known to affect atmospheric thermal energy. And there are bound to be as yet undiscovered factors.
I say let science take its natural course with out interference from the political arena and the scientific community's inappropriate hubris. Sadly, in corporate America, where research money is too often politically linked, there is less chance of that than their should be.
E.O. Wilson has offered an explanation for why Homo sapiens can't help wrecking their biosphere. Perhaps it is possible to get control of our destructive instincts, once we understand their origin. If so, Wilson may be unwittingly responsible for his own species' survival.
__________________
see E.O. Wilson, "The Social Conquest of Earth"
Now, along comes Professor Salby to throw a giant monkey wrench in the works. Salby has put forth well-reasoned, rigorous, data-based arguments showing that CO2 content of the atmosphere is, to a significant extent, driven by temperature change, rather than the other way around, as previously assumed. But what hasn't he done? He hasn't sorted out all of the contributors to temperature change. He has merely shown that changing CO2 content is an unlikely suspect as the instigator.
We are in the renaissance period of understanding when it comes to climate. We have a long, long way to go before we fully understand our climate with all its interacting elements and feedback loops. We certainly can't rule out anthropomorphic contributions as being important; there is still, at the minimum, deforestation, ocean and air pollution, and plain old thermal pollution to be considered in addition to all of the natural phenomena known to affect atmospheric thermal energy. And there are bound to be as yet undiscovered factors.
I say let science take its natural course with out interference from the political arena and the scientific community's inappropriate hubris. Sadly, in corporate America, where research money is too often politically linked, there is less chance of that than their should be.
E.O. Wilson has offered an explanation for why Homo sapiens can't help wrecking their biosphere. Perhaps it is possible to get control of our destructive instincts, once we understand their origin. If so, Wilson may be unwittingly responsible for his own species' survival.
__________________
see E.O. Wilson, "The Social Conquest of Earth"