|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
 Posted: Sat Nov 28, 2009 5:39 am Post subject: |
 |
|
I largely like the Economist's balanced position on this.
| Quote: |
| This newspaper believes that global warming is a serious threat, and that the world needs to take steps to try to avert it. That is the job of the politicians. But we do not believe that climate change is a certainty. There are no certainties in science. Prevailing theories must be constantly tested against evidence, and refined, and more evidence collected, and the theories tested again. That is the job of the scientists. When they stop questioning orthodoxy, mankind will have given up the search for truth. The sceptics should not be silenced. |
My only quibble is with the phrasing of the last sentence, it sounds as if a large number of credible individuals are calling for the silence of the sceptics, whereas really it seems like many are claiming the sceptics are just wrong.
Its just as Big Bird said, the culture of science definitively discourages certain conclusions. So I find the certainty on both sides disconcerting, and hostile to the spirit of the actual inquiry. Al Gore's passionate lobbying falls under the harmful politicization of science, and there are definitely sceptics speaking hypocritically and politicizing the issue as well (my personal favorite sceptic hypocrisy: we're not in the pocket of big oil, but those climate change proponent researchers are corrupt and just following the grant money!).
Following TUM's link, it does look as if the CRU computer model, data, everything need to be thrown out. Time to go back to the drawing board, as it were, on measuring global temperature averages.
See you in Denmark |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 28, 2009 8:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| asylum seeker wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| asylum seeker wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| asylum seeker wrote: |
It looks pretty clear that there has been some misuse of this issue to further some agendas. Is this irrefutable evidence that human activity has absolutely no effect on global warming? Of course not. Most sensible people realize the science has not been proved conclusively either way.
People in this thread are taking this too far to further their own agendas.
|
Actually most of them are just pointing out that's what some of the top scientists in the pro global warming camp were doing.
For years we kept saying things like "the science has not been proven conclusively either way." And for years the other side kept sticking their fingers in their ears and saying "We have a consensus." You should read some of the prior threads on global warming.
And now that the shoe is on the other foot, the pro GWC-camp is now saying the same thing.."It's not conclusive." |
Reread the thread. People have been posting comments in the vein I mentioned. Stop trying to speak for everybody else in the thread. The very second comment was:
| Quote: |
| I told you all it was a scam. |
|
How does "MOST" (which was a reference to the anti AGW people) equate to "everybody else in the thread"? Perhaps you should stop misrepresenting my position? |
I disagree that "MOST" of these people have no agenda. I would say the majority have revealed themselves to be far more on the hardcore skeptic side rather than the 'undecideds'. Again you need to stop trying to project your own position onto others. |
So first you say the majority have revealed themselves to be far more on the hardcore skeptic side and then you have the hypocritical gall to tell ME I'm the one that's projecting on to others?
The irony is a gift that never stops giving... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 28, 2009 9:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| ...the CRU computer model, data, everything need to be thrown out. Time to go back to the drawing board, as it were, on measuring global temperature averages. |
Yes. And some ought to be excluded entirely from Academe's power positions: grant-committeee review boards; editorial boards; journal refereeships, where some subverted the double-blind process, an abusive thing that should never have been done.
New people, perhaps even new questions, and new research. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chris_J2
Joined: 17 Apr 2006
Location: From Brisbane, Au.
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 28, 2009 11:00 am Post subject: CSIRO |
|
|
| Quote: |
Senator CARR (Victoria�Minister for Innovation,
Industry, Science and Research) (10.44 am)�by
leave�We will not be dividing on this matter but I do
want to publicly indicate the government�s strenuous
opposition to this proposal on the basis that it is misguided
and totally misunderstands the nature of the
relationship between this parliament and the CSIRO.
Like all public research agencies, CSIRO is governed
by a charter of research freedom and autonomy. That
charter guarantees CSIRO�s right to pursue lines of
inquiry, to publish results and to participate in public
debate without political interference. It does not provide
a basis for the government to micromanage the
organisation.
The CSIRO produces over 3,700 papers per year. It
is a ludicrous proposition to suggest that the minister
would individually vet those papers. The government
has no role in the discussions between CSIRO and
Dr Clive Spash about the research paper which is the
subject of this motion. This is entirely a matter for the
CSIRO to manage. As I understand it, discussions between
CSIRO and Dr Spash are continuing. Peer review
is central to research enterprises. CSIRO has its
own internal peer review processes.* Those processes
have been established to maintain the standards of excellence
that have made CSIRO an international research
icon. They have been established to protect the
CSIRO brand and to ensure that Australia gets the best
possible return on its investment in research. (Time
expired) |
*which Dr Spash declined to follow.
http://www.aph.gov.au/hansard/senate/latesthansard/shansard.pdf
(page 12)
http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/csiro-scientist-faces-punishment-20091126-jutb.html
| Quote: |
The CSIRO will punish one of its scientists after he published a paper on climate change that criticised the government's emissions trading scheme.
It has accused Dr Clive Spash of breaching protocol by releasing the paper before it was vetted by the peak science body.
"These breaches of fundamental CSIRO standards will be dealt with through appropriate line management," CSIRO boss Megan Clark wrote in a letter to federal Science Minister Kim Carr.
But facing accusations of censorship, it has released the paper officially - stressing it is not linked to the CSIRO in any way.
Dr Spash accused his employer of gagging him after it refused to formally release his report under the CSIRO banner earlier this month.
The paper, The Brave New World of Carbon Trading, is critical of cap and trade systems - like the one the government is introducing - as well as the compensation given to industry.
He recommends a direct tax on carbon.
The CSIRO - which has guidelines restricting its scientists from commenting on public policy - has repeatedly denied suggestions it is censoring criticism of the government.
"This has never been an issue of gagging or stifling debate on ETS policies," Dr Clark wrote.
"The key issues at play here are the quality of science and how it is communicated.
"CSIRO has a nationally recognised role as a trusted advisor on matters of science and as such it is important that all our staff are able to fulfil their duties in an apolitical, impartial and professional manner."
She said CSIRO had processes in place to ensure its reputation in science and development is maintained.
Dr Clark was critical of Dr Spash's approach to the issue, saying he had not met his responsibilities as a CSIRO scientist.
He will be punished for releasing his paper during a conference in Darwin in October.
Although he released it without mentioning his link to CSIRO, the science body said he was meant to have gotten formal approval.
"His behaviour has been manifestly inconsistent with the expectations and obligations that apply to all CSIRO staff," Dr Clark said in the letter.
The CSIRO, which headhunted the leading scientist, had tried to get Dr Spash to amend the report so it could be published with CSIRO linkage, but he declined to change it.
The unamended report has been tabled in parliament. |
I worked in Government in Australia, for 28 years, and you do NOT go running off to the press, or whichever political party is in power, with sensitive documents, that have not yet been approved by the head of the Department that is employing you. As the press release above states, CSIRO has its own internal peer review system in place, which Spash boycotted. I see nothing sinister in the CSIRO having a guarded approach, to releasing highly sensitive & emotive material on global warming. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 28, 2009 11:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Chris_J2 wrote: |
| ...you do NOT go running off to the press, or whichever political party is in power, with sensitive documents, that have not yet been approved by the head of the Department that is employing you. |
In theory, and legally speaking, absolutely correct.
But I question your assertion that you worked in govt for nearly three decades and you do not recognize "leaking" as a long-established, semi-official process. Nearly everyone respects it (in the United States, only the Nixon administration actually moved to suppress it) and even the press plays by the rules.
And given the allegations that these emails have now made credible, I would hope that anyone having anything at all to do with environmental policymaking at the govt level, as well as knowledge-production at the research level, will leak, leak, and leak for the rest of time.
We need transparency. This means fully airing disagreements in unedited form. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Axiom
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 28, 2009 5:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
drip.... drip..... drip..... drip.........
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6936289.ece
From The Sunday Times November 29, 2009
The great climate change science scandal
Leaked emails have revealed the unwillingness of climate change scientists to engage in a proper debate with the sceptics who doubt global warming
Jonathan Leake, Environment Editor |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kimbop
Joined: 31 Mar 2008
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Junior
Joined: 18 Nov 2005
Location: the eye
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 28, 2009 7:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The hacker who exposed the emails no doubt hopes Climategate will tip the scales decisively against an agreement � an outcome which is likely to be supported by a minority of hardliners in the US, such as Bryan Zumwalt, legislative counsel for Republican senator David Vitter, who said earlier this week that the CRU emails were evidence of what "could well be the greatest act of scientific fraud in history" and suggested that "nearly all of the international data and models supporting the theory of global warming would have been influenced by data corruption and fraud".
However Bob Ward, a climate change expert at the London School of Economics and Political Science, believes world leaders will pay little attention to the scandal surrounding the CRU, arguing that politics, not science, will decide the fate of the Copenhagen summit.
"The politicians won't be swayed by this," he said. "It's basic physics that the world is being warmed by greenhouse gases, and politicians can see through the sceptics' arguments.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/copenhagen-climate-change-confe/6672875/Whos-to-blame-for-Climategate.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 28, 2009 10:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Junior wrote: |
The hacker who exposed the emails no doubt hopes Climategate will tip the scales decisively against an agreement � an outcome which is likely to be supported by a minority of hardliners in the US, such as Bryan Zumwalt, legislative counsel for Republican senator David Vitter, who said earlier this week that the CRU emails were evidence of what "could well be the greatest act of scientific fraud in history" and suggested that "nearly all of the international data and models supporting the theory of global warming would have been influenced by data corruption and fraud".
However Bob Ward, a climate change expert at the London School of Economics and Political Science, believes world leaders will pay little attention to the scandal surrounding the CRU, arguing that politics, not science, will decide the fate of the Copenhagen summit.
"The politicians won't be swayed by this," he said. "It's basic physics that the world is being warmed by greenhouse gases, and politicians can see through the sceptics' arguments.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/copenhagen-climate-change-confe/6672875/Whos-to-blame-for-Climategate.html |
You wish. Politicians care about getting reelected. These leaked emails have blown a hole right through the sham, and soon everyone is going to know it (unless you can shut down the internet - which I'm guessing would be something you would support). "Climategate" is far more damaging that it's namesake (Watergate), and just look what happened to Nixon - he resigned in disgrace, his name forever tarnished. The global warming sham is going to follow suit, and be known as the biggest scam perpetrated on the public in history. Just watch.
But keep on spinning it if you want - it's just going to make your defeat that much more bitter... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Axiom
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 28, 2009 11:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
probably not related, but I can't resist
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1720024.ece
| Quote: |
"Mars is being hit by rapid climate change and it is happening so fast that the red planet could lose its southern ice cap, writes Jonathan Leake.
Scientists from Nasa say that Mars has warmed by about 0.5C since the 1970s. This is similar to the warming experienced on Earth over approximately the same period.
............" |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 28, 2009 11:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mars has Western capitalism, too? Imagine that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Axiom
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 29, 2009 12:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| Mars has Western capitalism, too? Imagine that. |
Maybe their UN and our UN could combine to create the Federation of the Sun. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
UrbanStyle
Joined: 23 Jul 2009
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 29, 2009 12:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| now that everyone has seen through the man made global warming scam- they will try to come up with some other sort of problem/religion for the world to unify under to create a world government/tax the hell out of us- maybe they will declare hostile aliens exist? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Axiom
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 29, 2009 12:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| UrbanStyle wrote: |
| now that everyone has seen through the man made global warming scam- they will try to come up with some other sort of problem/religion for the world to unify under to create a world government/tax the hell out of us- maybe they will declare hostile aliens exist? |
I like your enthusiasm UrbanStyle, but I fear the fight is not won yet.
I feel only about 30 to 40% of people realise that climate change caused by carbon dioxide, and carbon credits and ETS schemes to save us from yourselves, are a load of bollocks. We have to get that figure to 60% before the politicians of the world will drop this like a hot potato.
Tell your friends, tell your family, send emails to politicians, write it in the heavy snow (I'm lead to believe has covered the northern hemisphere), anything to get the message out. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chris_J2
Joined: 17 Apr 2006
Location: From Brisbane, Au.
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 29, 2009 12:57 am Post subject: AGW |
|
|
Gopher wrote
| Quote: |
| We need transparency |
Agreed. There are Freedom of Information laws in Australia, as well as Judicial Review laws. Opposition parties, members of the public, the press, & government employees use them all the time, if government processes & machinations are insufficiently transparent for their liking. And the internal 'leaking' of documents, is a little different, to deliberate hacking by non government sources. There are also both internal & external auditors in government departments, to police operations. There's also the Whistleblowers Protection Act which I believe was enacted in 1989, in the US. Australia followed suit.
http://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/LEGISLTN/CURRENT/W/WhistleblowA94.pdf
Just to reiterate, I hope the East Anglia scientists are censured severely for their unprofessional conduct, & corruption of the peer reviewed process. Personally, I think that global warming is a reality, but whether it is a natural, cyclical event, or anthroprogenic, I'm undecided. This is where we need professional research, untainted by politics or money.
Last edited by chris_J2 on Sun Nov 29, 2009 7:49 am; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
