DEBJENROB wrote:
heyrob has as much background in climatology as I do ....NONE ...
DEBJENROB wrote:
heyrob has as much background in climatology as I do ....NONE
In a court of law those statements would be thrown out as
"Facts not in evidence." Please tell us all what degrees do you hold in the scientific field DEBJENROB? I have a degree in Physics and I am a working scientist, while you are correct that I am not a Climatologist, I do know something about the field as it is closely related to physics, and I dare say that I have a great deal more knowledge and experience in the field of science than you do. You assume a great deal about people that you know absolutely nothing about, and to spout off with such drivel is nothing more than gross ignorance.
DEBJENROB wrote:
I have always believed that in almost all cases ... if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, a reasonable person would assume it is a duck
Based on the rest of your statements you don't seem to know the difference between a duck and a goose.
Let me give you a brief lesson in science which you obviously lack. There is a process known as the "Scientific Method" that all bona fide scientists adhere to. To boil it down to its simplest form, first you observe something, then you form a hypothesis as to the cause of this phenomenon, you then devise an experiment to prove your hypothesis, if the experiment fails to prove your hypothesis, then you devise a new hypothesis and repeat the process. Eventually you may find an experiment that seems to work every time. You now publish your findings, both positive, as well as a description of that which failed. The reason for the latter is so that other researchers wont waste their time repeating experiments that are doomed to fail. This is known as peer review, and is an attempt to prove your theory. However few theories will ever rise to the status of a natural law, because as Einstein said no amount of experimentation will ever prove a theory right, but just one could prove it wrong. If a single experiment doesnt work, the theory is wrong and must be discarded.
The problem with the Global Warming/Climate Change adherents is that they observed a change in climate; the world seemed to be warming up. Now most scientists knew that the earths climate has been cyclical from the beginning, but there was a small group that promoted this idea that CO2 was to blame. They did some research and some experimentation; the fact is though, none of it worked. Eventually though in an effort to prove their point, they came up with some computer models that showed dire results, and also a graph, now famously known as the Hockey stick graph that showed a direct correlation between the rise in CO2 and global average temperatures. BINGO! "We've proved that CO2 is causing the planet to get warmer" they screamed from the roof tops.
Now despite the fact that when taken as a much bigger picture, going farther back into history, and not cherry picking a time frame that worked, other (more honest) scientists showed that CO2 levels have been much higher than they are today while the temperatures were not much warmer. Furthermore, recent history has proved that not a single one of those computer models were even close to showing what the actual climate has done since they were put forth. Unfortunately, because the global warming alarmists had grabbed the ears of so many government bodies, those governments were all too happy to lavish these scientists with research grants to continue to provide them "proof" of their findings. Do you see a motive here yet?
The problem is that scientists are like street beggars; few have reliable sources of income for their research and are therefore constantly looking for benefactors who are willing to pay the bills. When you hook big governments with such an interest, and get a nice big cash flow for this avenue of research, every starving scientist with no intellectual honesty will jump on the band wagon to get their piece of that pie. The fact remains that every single theory put forth by the global warming/climate change crowd has failed. Now go back and reread what Einstein said about that problem.
Now somehow I doubt I have convinced you DEBJENROB, because like most of the public, you are either scientifically illiterate, or have some ideological belief that will not let you look at the issue with an open mind. Maybe both. However, if that werent true the whole climategate and climategate II scandals would have convinced anyone with an open mind of what is happening. The emails leaked in those scandals proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that these scientists were lying to the public, and manipulating their data to give the results they needed to keep the money coming, not to prove scientifically that man has anything more than a marginal effect on global climate.