Global Warming

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by loosegoose

I should probably stay out of this thread other than to say, I'll go along with people I think actually know what they're talking about

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-11-...ition/11672776

"Scientists have a moral obligation to clearly warn humanity of any catastrophic threat," the paper said.[snip]The paper, which was not peer-reviewed, includes signatures from scientists from 153 countries and calls for reporting on climate change to consider a wider range of indicators, beyond just global surface temperature.

Why wasn't it peer-reviewed? Isn't that a requirement of the scientific method?

[buttsie]

Another way the rich can just buy their way out of having to do anything personally



I'm carbon neutral i can pollute as much as I like now and not feel guilty about it
I believe thats the line the Rich preach to themselves internally

[bowlinggreen]

I think Al Gore should fly in here and shovel my sidewalk this morning.

If he comes in an exorbitantly fuel-wasting private helicopter, maybe the hot exhaust and gust-producing blades will blast most of the snow out of my yard.

[Estreeter]

Originally Posted by bowlinggreen

I think Al Gore should fly in here and shovel my sidewalk this morning.

I think he should go on a plant based diet to help curb global warming

[MaxJoker]

Originally Posted by Estreeter

I think he should go on a plant based diet to help curb global warming

[bowlinggreen]

One fart from Al would probably be enough to fuel your gas grill for a big steak feast - but would you want to eat that meat?

[beemerider500]

I wouldn't trust anything that is broadcast on ABC... they don't do news anymore, they do fashion.

[ukcarter]

Originally Posted by scoundrel

Why wasn't it peer-reviewed? Isn't that a requirement of the scientific method?

This was a paper published in the "Viewpoint" section of the Oxford University Press journal BioScience. I don't have access to this journal[1] but it seems to me that this isn't a peer-reviewed paper publishing the results of an experiment but rather an opinion piece - but I may be wrong.

Peer review doesn't make much sense here - peer review is just saying "I've read the description of your experiment/technique and I can't see any mistakes in it; the conclusions you draw from your results are justified; this paper is on-topic and of sufficient interest to warrant publication in this journal".

Peer review doesn't mean that the results are correct. Sometimes you want other people to reproduce the experiment to confirm unusual results.

Remember Fleischmann and Pons' announcement of room temperature fusion? They announced it to the press rather than publishing a paper. Turned out that when they did publish, nobody could reproduce those results.

There was a good example a few years ago of some physicists measuring faster-than-light speeds for neutrinos which they knew was impossible. They couldn't find any flaws in their technique and neither could reviewers so their paper was published saying "we know this is wrong but we'd like some help". It turned out that there was a fault in some of their apparatus that explained the results.

[1] You might argue that if work is funded by tax payers' cash, those tax payers have a right to read the results. I wouldn't disagree with you.

[Arturo2nd]

I don't understand why a number of poorly educated and obviously biased members continue to display their foolishness on this thread. It has been repeatedly explained that there are those of us who are far more highly educated and presumably are more highly educated because both our IQ scores and secondary school grades were superior enough to justify investments in advanced education. Furthermore, that higher education allowed us to form relationships with those who would pursue careers in science, if we were not so inclined.

For example, my undergrad work centered on philosophy with investigations of theory of knowledge, the underpinnings of science, and ethics. My graduate work in accounting and finance exposed me to a lot of advanced maths and statistics, which gives me the tools to follow many studies. Moreover, I have known many of the scientists for over 50 years now and can speak to their intelligence and integrity. (I can also speak to the "integrity" of the business executives who wish to disparage and ignore the scientific research.) Please believe me when I say that some of these people are absolutely brilliant in a way that is truly humbling for those of us who are merely considered to be very bright. These men and women are also motivated only by the quest for knowledge and truth.

So, please spare us from your rationalizations and video links to corporate PR flacks and bought-and-paid-for-politicians. The overwhelming probability is that you are dead wrong in public and too dense to appreciate that simple fact.

End of rant.

[Estreeter]

Originally Posted by Arturo2nd

I don't understand why a number of poorly educated and obviously biased members continue to display their foolishness on this thread.

It's not foolish to question, it is foolish to blindly follow IMHO.
Why credible climatologists who don't fully agree with the so called settled science are shouted down or shut down bothers me

Why this has been thrown at us for the last 3 decades and in recent times escalated from global warming, to climate change to an emergency when I've noticed no difference to climate bothers me

Why an expert on our Great Barrier Reef and Professor was sacked by his university for disagreeing with the science bothers me

Why many of the solutions to the climate emergency seems to be socialist ideals bothers me

Why, here at least, the Extinction Rebellion crowd make 3 demands of government to tackle the problem, 2 of which are legitimate to their cause but one being a demand to an end to all colonial rule everywhere bothers me as that has nothing to do with climate change.

Why many who believe in climate change don't lead by example and ditch their cars, install solar panels, become vegans, turn off air conditioners and heaters bothers me

It bothers me that I once believed every bit of what is thrown at us and when I dared to question how accurate it all is I'm labelled foolish, haven't actually denied it all, just doubt it's magnitude.