Fishman wrote:Original EPA Report
"You will see that the report is really nothing more than a rehash of many of the climate change talking points "
Schmuto wrote:What is it with Enviro-Loons and Al Gore Worshippers who themselves know jack squat about climate science and who go running around calling the unindoctrinated "deniers."? I'll never get this.
To the extent I'm on the fence about anything, if side A is calling side B the "denier" side, then I'll cast my lot with side B. Calling somebody a "denier" is intellectually vacant and the same thing as calling them an "infidel."
Schmuto wrote:I'll never get this.
Prove in your hypothetical scenario that carbon dioxide molecules released by humans are responsible without using a lot of hypothetical computer models. More importantly by going with the "consensus reality" prove how playing the game and empowering politicians to have even more control over your life will really help (knowing what we know about the world today)?. You seem to be suffering more from "global mourning" and a serious case of doomerism.Cid Yama wrote:we have no proof
You mean like the temperature of Venus?pablonite wrote:Prove in your hypothetical scenario that carbon dioxide molecules released by humans are responsible without using a lot of hypothetical computer models.
This part of the WCR post became the pivotal section 3 of the Carlin report, “Contrast between Continuing Improvements in US Health and Welfare and their Alleged Endangerment Described in the draft TSD”, which begins almost identically:
One of the problems with the EPA’s Endangerment TSD is the nearly complete disregard of observed trends in a wide array of measures which by and large show that despite decades of increasing anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions the U.S. population does not seem to have been adversely affected by any vulnerabilities, risks, and impacts that may have arisen (to the extent that any at all have actually occurred as the result of any human-induced climate changes).
The following paragraph is identical in both, except for the figure numbers, of course:
For instance, despite the overall rise in U.S. and global average temperatures for the past 30 years, U.S. crop yields have increased (Figure 2), the population’s sensitivity to extreme heat has decreased (Figure 3), and our general air quality has improved (Figure 4). Further, there has been no long-term increase in weather-related property damage once changes in inflation, population size, and population wealth are accounted for (an essential step in any temporal comparison). All of these trends are in the opposite sense from those described in the EPA’s Endangerment TSD.
And, once again, all the figures are included.
VMarcHart wrote:My 2 cents.
Everybody's entitled to an opinion, more so in the Land of the Free than in anywhere else, and that's really a good thing. Al Carlin is entitled to his opinion, and we ought to celebrate that. And Carlin's degree in physics and his experience with mathematical models helps his opinion
VMarcHart wrote:I'm not convinced it takes a real NASA rocket scientist to figure out whether the planet is warming up, cooling down or staying the same; if a "million" properly calibrated thermometers around the planet show the temperature going up, well, it's probably warming up, and vice versa. Similarly, how many rocket scientists does it take to measure glaciers melting, less snow preciptation, or the increasingly speed of the ice sheets towards the oceans? Carlin's lack of specific climatology education and trade is not grounds for discrediting him.
VMarcHart wrote:Neither is his age. That was a low blow and that's all I'm going to say about that.
Lore, you're too jumpy on this thing. I forgot to spell it: S-A-R-C-A-S-M.Lore wrote:VMarcHart wrote:My 2 cents.
Everybody's entitled to an opinion, more so in the Land of the Free than in anywhere else, and that's really a good thing. Al Carlin is entitled to his opinion, and we ought to celebrate that. And Carlin's degree in physics and his experience with mathematical models helps his opinion
No one is denying his opinion. There are tens of thousands of people with Carlin’s qualifications that are also allowed their opinions.VMarcHart wrote:I'm not convinced it takes a real NASA rocket scientist to figure out whether the planet is warming up, cooling down or staying the same; if a "million" properly calibrated thermometers around the planet show the temperature going up, well, it's probably warming up, and vice versa. Similarly, how many rocket scientists does it take to measure glaciers melting, less snow preciptation, or the increasingly speed of the ice sheets towards the oceans? Carlin's lack of specific climatology education and trade is not grounds for discrediting him.
You are correct, but neither should Carlin be portrayed as an expert on climate, which he obviously is not. His report speaks for the grounds to discredit his lack of understanding the science.VMarcHart wrote:Neither is his age. That was a low blow and that's all I'm going to say about that.
His age is very germane to the discussion since his bachelor’s degree in physics was most likely obtained some 50 years ago. For the length of that time he was not involved professionally in practical science related to his under graduate degree.
VMarcHart wrote:Lore, you're too jumpy on this thing. I forgot to spell it: S-A-R-C-A-S-M.
(Carlin)"I worked very hard," he added.
green_achers wrote:"Denier" is a bit of shorthand and might be a little intellectually lazy, but it doesn't come close to the name-calling that occurs on the other side.
Return to Environment, Weather & Climate
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests