BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 31 Aug 11 - 07:07 AM

It doesn't say that of course. But the point here isn't what it said, it's what someone said someone said someone said it said.

You could call it "the oral tradition" as applied to science...

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 31 Aug 11 - 03:42 AM

Let's just run that again Juicy Brucie. WHERE DOES CERN SAY THAT GLOBAL WARMING IS NOT MAN MADE?

Little bit of a fibby-wibby was it?

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: catspaw49
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 11:49 PM

BTW Jack, I think I'll put that map on my desktop wallpaper! Wish I'd lived with them dragons and dinosaurs.............***sigh***.....................


Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: catspaw49
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 11:42 PM

Yeah she's hot one alright!   Didja' notice she went to Ohio State? Yep, makes me so proud I could just shit!

But when she was there she traded memorabilia for tattoos just like the football teams. In her case she gave the Tat Artiste a bible signed by Oral Roberts AND Jerry Falwell in exchange for a belly tattoo of Jesus with his arms stretched upwards as if holding up her tits.


Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: number 6
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 11:11 PM

Whew .... Dr. Georgia Purdom ..... she's hot !

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 11:03 PM

I am with you Spaw!!

I just loaded this map into my GPS.

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: catspaw49
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 10:09 PM

I'm with you BB! I spent years thinking that all of those environmental scientists were in the know but now I realize I was wrong. There are several things which have sent me down the new and right road and one of them was the Oregon petition. When I see all of those other people with college degrees I know they have to be correct. No matter if their degree is Animal Husbandry, they think scientifically whereas people like myself and Bill were trained in sillyass logic games, a total waste I now sadly realize.

I was also able to see that real science was not what I thought at all when I saw THIS PLACE which changed my entire life. What really sold me was their certain knowledge backed up by their science which doesn't use any of that carbon dating bullshit.   Their timeline allows man to exist with dinosaurs and I knew this to be true because I have seen The Flintstones.

I'm sure this is the kind of real science James Delingpole readily endorses so I am positive he is just as right about Global Warning as the scientists and lecturers at The Creation Museum are about the history of the earth and mankind. I know for a fact that many of them believe as he does already!

Spaw--Born Again and proudly marching backward into the 17th century!

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: Bill D
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 09:26 PM

See for yourself Videos and comments

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: Bill D
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 09:24 PM

"A professional newsman who does interviews is obligated to get the opinions of the one being interviewed,.."

And a candidate for public office is obligated to clarify his positions and his basic attitudes that might be important to his potential constituents. The brillant Dr. Robinson had no interest in openness and clarification... which might have exposed his EXTREME bias and narrow viewpoints. He hoped, as many current Republicans did, to get elected..THEN pursue his agenda of stuff he never quite mentioned in detail. The interviewer had done some homework and was asking questions which Dr. R simply didn't want asked......and 55% of the voters didn't bite.

Art Robinson was a potential 'loose cannon', and his record showed he didn't need to be loose on Oregon's deck.

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: Don Firth
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 08:55 PM

I take it back, beardedbruce.

"I have a Ba. Sci. in Physics and astronomy, and over 30 years experience in Spacecraft Operations, as well as having been Clementine Data Manager, EO-1 Data Manager, GALEX and IBEX Flight Controller, and Orbit Determination for GLTN (under the Crustal Dynamics Project.)"

I AM impressed.

But the area under discussion falls under the headings of atmospheric science, meteorology, and oceanography.

It's not--ahem--rocket science.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 08:42 PM

"Dr. Art Robinson is a brilliant scientist"

Really pdq? upon what do you base this evaluation? Are you some sort of authority on what makes a scientist "brilliant" or did you simply hear Hanity say that?

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: BTNG
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 08:36 PM

"a scientist said" is rather like quoting an "anonymous inside source" neither of them actually exist

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 07:54 PM

Unfortuantely, the understanding of "science and scientists" is about as lacking here as elsewhere. The common citing of "a scientist said" is meaningless, or nearly so, if the subject lies outside the specific expertise of the specific scientist making the statement.

All are entitled to state their opinions; but competent people must consider how likely those opinions are to reflect the opinions of others best qualified in the field under discussion

While CERN's "Nuclear Scientists" do have an interest in sunspots (and one might suspect a vested interest?) being a CERN scientist does NOT ALONE qualify them to make sweeping statements about "Atmospheric Science" since Atmospheric Sciences are not within the province of the agency. An individual scientist might have expertise, but the credentials of the organization don't validate the opinionator. Each branch of science usually is a very specialised field, and believability for mere mortals must be based on the peer opinions of those in the same field.

Complaints that one must believe what "a PHD" says apply only at MacDonalds when one tells you whether the fries are fresh. Even then, the "PHD" may have ulterior motives and may "stretch the meanings" but there's nothing much you can do about it.

The several misstatements in the first post's extract about the "immense qualifications of CERN" are a cause for concern, specifically for example the statement that "CERN is the organization that invented the World Wide Web" which is FACTUALLY FALSE within any meaning of "invented." CERN made substantial contributions to implementing what was invented by others, and appropriate credit is deserved, but INVENT IT DID NOT.

Puffery and fakery are terms that come to mind.

No competent Atmospheric Scientist with legitimate standing among others within the specialty - that I've heard from - has denied that "sunspots" and multiple other influences have immense effect on the current cycle of apparent warming. Similarly, none have represented their models as being infallible or being the "last word." Science is a matter of continual improvement of the best and most likely, and is NOT A STATIC ENTITY.

It makes little difference what is the largest influence on warming that is going on now. The best studies have shown that man-made influences, regardless of their current effect, are producing an unstable effect that could easily run "out of control" and without prompt action may already be past recovery. I've read all of the G8 report, and have followed subsequent peer (and other) reviews; and I suspect no others here have(?).

A consistently persistent group of "scientists" (my term is SPGWKs) have repeatedly produced the same "31,000 signatures" on "petitions" with various claims that all other (real) scientists are wrong. While I've checked out the who and the why, and the vested interests of a sufficiently representative sample for my purposes, of the signatories on several prior petitions, I choose not to be bothered at this time with this purportedly "new one." (Given the proclivity for exaggerated claims, it's probably the ten year old one recycled once again.)

Even if the "conclusions" in this latest report may be eventually evaluated as being pertinent, NO ONE HEADLINE is the news. All the blustering about whose dick is the biggest (or who's the biggest dick) will not change the steady pace of legitimate science - which unfortunately will remain impenetrable for most of the people who chose to ignore fifth grade math & science.

John

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 07:37 PM

So, juicy Brucie - just where does CERN say that global warming is not man made?

Waiting...

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: pdq
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 07:18 PM

A professional newsman who does interviews is obligated to get the opinions of the one being interviewed,

If the newsperson wants his/her opinion stated, that can be done anytime and does not require the person being interviewed as a prop.

Dr. Art Robinson is a brilliant scientist and education expert. He has something valuable to contribute and the newsman's job is the help.

Confrontational newsmen should be treated rudely. They are unprofessional and should find another way to make a living.

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: Bill D
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 07:09 PM

That's it Art...the Petition Project. Over 30,000 **identified themselves** as scientists. Art Robinson was sort of 'interviewed' during the 2008 campaign. I say sort of, because he barely let the interviewer get in 2 words sideways. He was beyond rude....

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: GUEST,Art Brooks, visiting
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 07:04 PM

As a matter of curiosity, why is Mr. Gore featured so prominently in this? Did I somehow miss his denouncement of the CERN report?

The Petition Project? Isn't that the effort by that group in Oregon (both of its names are listed above someplace) that is collecting signatures about global warming from 'concerned scientists', and defines a scientist as anyone with a BS (or higher) degree in any scientific field...which is defined broadly to include dentistry and nutrition?

This article (granted, it is from Wiki) contains a wealth of information on global warming and its causes. Note that no real scientist, or at least none that I've ever known, will ever say that anything is absolutely caused by anything.

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: BTNG
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 06:53 PM

"I just love the smell of bait and switch, in the morning"

- with apologies to Lieutenant Colonel Bill Kilgore (written by John Milius)

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: Bill D
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 06:25 PM

4+ year old thread on this: read more of the same, with more participants where BB explains in detail why he DOES accept warming, but does NOT agree we can stop or curtail it much.

(Bruce...trying to find the thread where you explain what you think we SHOULD be doing. I believe it was seriously proposing folks in warmer climes moving to relatively cooler ones?)

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: beardedbruce
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 06:10 PM

"Any competent scientist knows that any satellite they launch will merely fall back to earth!""


"The vast majority of competent atmospheric and oceanographic scientists are in agreement that the recent warming of the earth's atmosphere and oceans began with the inception of the industrial revolution with its increase in the burning of coal and other hydrocarbon fuels, along with clear cutting of forested areas (plants take CO2 out of the atmosphere and convert it to O2). "







It seems that you need to think back about what the scientific method is- make a theory, and see if it matches the FACTS. THEN MODIFY THE THEORY to better match the facts, NOT throw out the facts that don't agree with the theory.

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: Don Firth
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 06:08 PM

Twist and shout, BB.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: beardedbruce
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 06:04 PM

Don,

"Especially when he has political motivations"

You mean like Gore and the scientists that support him ( and his funding to them?) ?

Or is it only ONE side ( the one YOU disagree with, of course) that has political motivations?

As to my qualifications, YOU asked about them, and now belittle them. This speaks quite a bit about YOU.

The ones MOST like the prof. YOU talk about are those who AGREE WITH YOU.

What does that say?

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: beardedbruce
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 06:00 PM

So, there are those here that think mass starvation is a joke?


JtS,

The effects of Gore et al are NOT what they claim- the people most impacted are the Third world and those who live at the edge of starvation, that Gore would push over.



" There are a lot of god, non-global warming reasons for using less oil and coal and for cutting down fewer forests. "

OK, I AGREE with this- but that does not mean it should take priority over trying to adjust for the impacts of the climate change THAT WILL OCURR regardless of reduction of man-made sources.


You are saying that we should paint the barn to make it last longer when it is burning down. Painting is a GOOD idea- but put out the fire first, or you have wasted the effort.

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: Don Firth
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 05:57 PM

Sorry, beardedbruce, but as to your qualifications, I'm not impressed. I've known a number of supposedly "highly qualified" (read "highly degreed") scientists who apparently didn't learn a great deal.

In the first astronomy class I took in college (this was in Spring quarter of 1957) all the prof taught was, essentially, celestial navigation. How to locate particular stars in the sky. Most disappointing to most of the students. They wanted to learn something about what was up there in the skies, not how to keep themselves located if they found themselves alone in an outrigger in the middle of the South Pacific.

One of the students stuck up a hand and asked what the prof thought about the possibility of space travel, especially the artificial satellite program that had been in the news of late. The prof snorted:   "That's just childish 'Buck Rogers' stuff. The artificial satellites they're talking about launching are nothing more than a boondoggle and an egregious waste of the taxpayers' money. Any competent scientist knows that any satellite they launch will merely fall back to earth!"

Several of us in class exchanged glances that said, "What the hell are we wasting our time here for?"

On October 4th, 1957, Sputnik I went into orbit. It was followed by many others, both Russian and American, then other countries got into it. I wonder what Prof. Jacobsen was thinking when he watch Neil Armstrong step down onto the moon's surface. Or watching a couple of Apollo astronauts hopping like kangaroos and singing, "I was strolling on the moon one day …. "

And, you may recall, there have been a few little things since then. Beautiful photos of Jupiter and Saturn taken from up close, a couple of little high-tech go-carts wandering the surface of Mars, etc.

Jacobsen retired shortly thereafter, and a couple of more up-to-date and generally much brighter young professors took over the department.

No, just because someone has some alphabet soup after his name doesn't mean that he knows anything from Shinola.

Especially when he has political motivations.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 05:44 PM

"As a human being, I am more concerned about the racist and possibly genocidal aspects of the real effects of the measures demanded by GW enthusiasts than in being a scientist."

That's the most hysterical thing you've written so far, BB. You really are a fully fledged, hysterical right-wing nut-job, aren't you?

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 05:43 PM

"Thus, to waste effort on trying to stop it as opposed to trying to reduce it's impact on HUMAN BEINGS is morally wrong, and genocidal,"

The only "HUMAN BEINGS" being adversely affected are the shareholders in big oil and big agriculture. There are a lot of god, non-global warming reasons for using less oil and coal and for cutting down fewer forests.

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 05:40 PM

And what the hell has "liberal" and "conservative" got to do with this kind of stuff anyway, and more than with stuff like the causes of cancer or heart disease?

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 05:37 PM

What the research indicates is evidence that cosmic rays can cause cloud formation. Nothing more, nothing less. Extrapolating that into "Global Warming- CERN says not man-made" is going way way beyond that, and is in fact a gross and dishonest distortion of what the research indicates.

It's interesting research, it needs to be followed through and the results put into the equations, and no doubt it will be. But playing knockabout politics with this kind of stuff is nonsensical.

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: beardedbruce
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 05:32 PM

TIA,

There MAY be some anthropogenic part of climate change- I have seen nothing to indicate that it is the CONTROLLING factor, and that we can prevent climate change from occurring. Thus, to waste effort on trying to stop it as opposed to trying to reduce it's impact on HUMAN BEINGS is morally wrong, and genocidal, as the people most in danger are Third World nations. THAT is my premise. Care to discuss this on a factual basis? That might be useful, not the comments that many here seem to think are required to prove their "liberal" credentials regardless of the impact on real people.

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 05:21 PM

I think you should definitely object to any thread title that contains a lie. And I hope that the powers that be would change it...or not, and let readers make up their own minds.

You accuse me of genocide based on a false premise. I could easily accuse you of the same for denying that climate change is the least bit anthropogenic. If we can stop it and don't is that not genocide? But that is a schoolyard nyah-nyah conversation that I have no interest in.

Let's get back to the science, shall we?

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 05:20 PM

That wasn't a link to a news story in the Telegraph - it was a piece in a blog, putting a very angled spin on an item in Nature, written by "James Delingpole (who)is a writer, journalist and broadcaster who is right about everything. He is the author of numerous fantastically entertaining books including 365 Ways to Drive a Liberal Crazy, Welcome To Obamaland: I've Seen Your Future And It Doesn't Work, How To Be Right, and the Coward series of WWII adventure novels.

And here's a link to the website for the current issue of Nature.

As the "fantastically entertaining" Mr Delingpole quotes "The research, published with little fanfare this week in the prestigious journal Nature" - it's in there somewhere... Not the spun version of course.

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 05:16 PM

"When I stop seeing threadds here that are both insulting and lies, perhaps I might seek to make neutral titles that YOU approve of."

Don't worry about my approval. Just stop lying. That can be your contribution to decreasing the total number of lies. Lying because you think that someone else has lied does nothing to further your argument.

Think of it this way. If you put less greenhouse gas into the atmosphere it doesn't mean you will stop Climate Change by yourself. After all those cosmic rays won't stop because you ask them to. But you will have done your part.

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: beardedbruce
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 05:11 PM

Picky Dicky has yet to show any factual reason that supports a claim for man-made GW.

So he continues to attack me and the title to the thread rather than providing ANY support for his viewpoint.

I stated a better title- care to alter all the thread titles on here that **I** object to as well?

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: beardedbruce
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 05:09 PM

BTNG

Check to see that I was attacked first- are you saying that others here can act in ways that you would not allow me to act???


Self-defense is allowed.

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 05:08 PM

Well, unless Juicy Brucie can come up with some better quotes from the article on which he relies, the assertion "Global Warming - CERN says not man-made" was an outright bare-faced lie. Juicy Brucie's best efforts to find a quote and bring it here come nowhere close to his assertion.

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: beardedbruce
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 05:06 PM

TIA,

YOU seem to think it ok to claim I am a denier, when that is NOT the case- **I** have said that climate change is real, and significant. MANY TIMES.

It is the religious belief that it is both caused by man, and can be prevented ( if we just give up money to the "right people") that I find unreasonable and unsupported.

I have stated repeatedly that we need to accept that climate change is REAL, and we should be taking steps to allow humanity to survive it, not waste our energy and act in a genicidal manner to try to prevent what I have reason to think will happen no matter how many times King Gore stands on the shore and commands the tide to stop.


As for racism, I can only judge by your actions- you support activities that are racist in their result.

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: BTNG
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 05:02 PM

well beardedbruce I do see a number of personal attacks made by you, so, based on your own statement, you are not worth reading or listening to..

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: beardedbruce
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 05:00 PM

JtS,,

When I stop seeing threadds here that are both insulting and lies, perhaps I might seek to make neutral titles that YOU approve of.

Until then, I will comntinue to wait for you to argue facts instead of attacking people.

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 04:57 PM

Lame again.
Now you are deflecting and changing the subject because you know that you got caught.

And please do call me racist.
That is funnier than you can possibly imagine.
Several people here know why.

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: Bill D
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 04:56 PM

"Arthur Robinson, president of the institute.."

Oh, I remember Arthur Robinson...


"Robinson was the senior author of the Oregon Petition, a petition of over 31,000 people who identified themselves as scientists or engineers (in 2008), intended to show that scientific consensus does not exist on the subject of global warming.[16] Robinson is a signatory to A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism, a petition produced by the Discovery Institute that expresses skepticism about the ability of natural selection to account for the complexity of life, and encouraging careful examination of the evidence for "Darwinian theory".

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: beardedbruce
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 04:54 PM

TIA,

As a human being, I am more concerned about the racist and possibly genocidal aspects of the real effects of the measures demanded by GW enthusiasts than in being a scientist.

Pardon me for valueing humanity over academic precision.


And you called me one of the "local deniers", not a scientist.


Shall I call you "One of the local Racist, Genocidal GW enthusiasts"?


I don't think that contributes to a reasonable, fact based discussion, though you seem to think that.

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 04:53 PM

There is no way you were trying to be scientific or accurate. If you were you would have chosen a non-political title like.


"CERN findings on cloud formation"

With no links to bloviated opinion floggers.

You can quote your CV until the cows come home (belching the greenhouse gas methane with every step.) But you lose all scientific credibility when your source of data is "James Delingpole a writer, journalist and broadcaster who is right about everything. "

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: pdq
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 04:26 PM

Climate change petition pits scientists against each other

A group of protesting scientists hope to break into the global warming debate with a petition against the theory of human-driven global warming. The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, a small independent research group...

Published: 2008-05-28

Devin Henry

A group of protesting scientists hope to break into the global warming debate with a petition against the theory of human-driven global warming.

The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, a small independent research group, announced the petition before the National Press Club on May 19.

It contains the signatures of more than 31,000 scientists who stand against the idea that global warming is man-made, including those of several University professors.

Arthur Robinson, president of the institute, said the petition began as a protest among friends.

"Myself and a few of my colleagues had been alarmed for a long time about this claim that all the scientists agree with those who are promoting human-caused global warming," he said.

In order to break this perception, the group solicited a research document on the subject of global warming to members of the scientific community in 1998-99. During this time, they got about 18,000 signatures, Robinson said.

In 2007, the petition was sent out again, Robinson said, citing increased activity such as Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth," a movie portraying global warming as human-driven, as reasons to circulate the petition again.

Petition signatures have reached 31,000, including 9,000 Ph.D.s, Robinson said.

"If this many American scientists will sign this petition, you certainly can't continue to contend that there is a consensus on this subject," he said.

University medicine professor Frank Nuttall signed the petition.

He said he still believes the Earth is growing warmer, despite his signature.

"This issue is whether the major reason for this is from human activities," he said. "I consider that inconclusive at the present time."

University professor Wayland E. Noland said he signed the petition both in the late 1990s and last year.

Like Nuttall, Noland said he didn't doubt the warming of the Earth; rather, he said he signed the petition, "because I feel that the public has become incorrectly persuaded that the global warming that is going on now has been primarily caused by CO2 emissions."

Noland, a chemistry professor, said he studied meteorology briefly in college under a professor who shares his views on the subject.

He said he thought people like Gore had "jumped on the current bandwagon effect" surrounding global warming.

Michael Nobel, executive director for Fresh Energy, a St. Paul-based policy think tank that focuses on energy solutions, said the petition holds little merit to those who study global warming.

"It's a sad and odd little voice shouting that there is no global warming," he said of the institute. "Many people have apparently fallen for it."

Nobel said among those who study global warming, most agree that it is a human-driven phenomenon.

"It's a curious little cultural artifact," he said of the petition. "It's like people talk about Sasquatch or alien abductions."

The scientific community mostly agrees on climate issues, Nobel said.

"That's what's most ridiculous about this petition," he said. "It alleges that there's a broad disagreement about the climate."

Noland, however, said he believes there are still scientists who disagree with climate change ideas.

"I think it's in the minority at present," he said. "But sometimes the minority proves to be right in the long term."

All content © 1900 - 2011

The Minnesota Daily

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: beardedbruce
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 04:21 PM

Don,

I will look for the cartoon version for you...

http://www.geo.arizona.edu/palynology/geos462/20climsolar.html

some info on longterm solar cycles. You know, like what contributed to the Ice Ages, and such...

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 04:13 PM

Sorry, lame response.
You've got a link to the facts, but you don't want to hear them.
You ran with the blog talking points, and got caught.
And I did not think that calling you a scientist was a personal attack.

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: beardedbruce
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 04:04 PM

And personal attacks are indicative of people not worth listening too- BUT I HAVE TRIED to listen to you, anyway.

Still waiting on any facts you have to present on the topic.

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 03:44 PM

As a scientist, I am sure you appreciate precision in language and realize that inaccuracy is always worth pissing and moaning about.

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: beardedbruce
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 03:44 PM

Don,

There are a number os solar flux variation cycles BESIDES the 11 year sunspot cycle, as has been brought out and ignored in several earlier threads. If YOU care to state that solar flux is otherwise a constant, YOU have NOT been keeping up with the last 50 years or so of solar astronomy. Atmospheric models are a significant part or precision orbit determination for low Earth orbiting satellites, and are even used for s/c such as LAGEOS.

But since you know so much better than those of us who make our livings dealing with such, I suppose I should start insisting my knowledge of whatever field YOU claim to know is superior, because I say so.

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: beardedbruce
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 03:36 PM

TIA, Thread titles are limited to a short phrase.

I will let it be retitled" Global warming- CERN data indicates that there are significant sources of climate change related tempurature control mechanisms that are solar rather than man-made."


Otherwise, should we piss and moan over thread titles, or determine what the factual basis is for the racist attempts to destroy the 3rd world peoples being proposed by Man-made GW enthusiates?

Subject: RE: BS: Global Warming- CERN says not man-made
From: beardedbruce
Date: 30 Aug 11 - 03:31 PM

Don:

"I've been an astronomy buff since I was a kid, I took a couple of astronomy classes in college [actually had some telescope time], and I have kept up with the subject through reading recently written books, and current periodicals such as "Scientific American" and [oddly enough] "Astronomy" and "Sky and Telescope.")"


If THAT makes you qualified, I suggest you stop pounding on me and stuff your own head in the sand.

I have a Ba. Sci. in Physics and astronomy, and over 30 years experience in Spacecraft Operations, as well as having been Clementine Data Manager, EO-1 Data Manager, GALEX and IBEX Flight Controller, and Orbit Determination for GLTN (under the Crustal Dynamics Project.)