- Jul 9, 2009
- 10,759
- 2,086
- 136
This should be interesting.
https://science.house.gov/legislati...e-science-assumptions-policy-implications-and
https://science.house.gov/legislati...e-science-assumptions-policy-implications-and
Full committee hearing- climate science in the House.
- Thread starter imported_tajmahal
- Start date
- Jul 9, 2009
- 10,759
- 2,086
- 136
I thought you might actually be interested in learning new things Moonie. Tune in on C-span.
Probably part of having a liberal brain is that it stimulates curiosity in new things. We know however that the presence of a trait like that is probably present is all human beings to some degree. I infer from that also, that the human brain must have a concomitant capacity, then to learn and draw useful conclusions from that at least to the degree that some evolutionary value should be attached to those capacities. But it must also follow then that in the human experience of life transmitted and passed on in language, and thus certainly in aphorisms and sayings, that we also note that curiosity killed the cat. From that I adduce the possibility that a well functioning brain must be a balancing act, not too liberal as to wonder what it would be like to jump off a cliff, and not too conservative to sit on the toilet all day.
It is in keeping with that spirit, then, that I have to consider your offer and so I want to offer some of what this particular brain has come to regard as pertinent data bearing on how I make that decision:
I have learned as a result of a rather significant amount of personal suffering that all the meme and doctrines, the isms and doctrines accumulated over the centuries in the form of commonly held human wisdom, the cultural milleau and ambiance, tone and assumption passed down to me as pearls of Western culture, failed when I put them to a merciless honesty test.
That has made me, shall we say, conservative and rather suspicious that what you offer isn't just more of the same.
Ah, but the question then becomes, am I not curious still, that something might be there. Am I not driven by some unsatisfied longing that something I may learn commonly available, say as on TV might offer me something new to hang my hat on and derive some sort of long lost inner satisfaction?
Well, the answer is no, because what happened to me, having destroyed, by the above mentioned mercilessly honesty analysis, all the forms of all my cherished beliefs that I was able to put under scrutiny, is that the resulting state of mind thereby produced can probably best be defined as a void that could only be filled, all that was artificial having been destroyed, only by what is real and true. I leave you to wonder what that might be since any words I use would only run up against notions you may yourself not yet have abandoned and I can assure you those will mislead you as much as they did me.
So the short answer to your question, which answered now with brevity, may make some better sense or so I hope, than if told immediately.
No I am not curious because I already know everything there is to know. I know that I know nothing and that there is nothing at all to know other than that.
But what I would be happy to explore with you, because owing to the inner joy such knowledge gives me and and due also to its infinite supply, I find myself more than happy to share it with you if you would like to explore what it is you think you know that I also should.
Sincerely, your friend Moonbeam who discovered a strawberry growing on a cliff while falling down it and that tasted so good.
Last edited:
Paratus
Lifer
- Jun 4, 2004
- 17,717
- 16,003
- 146
So here's the line up:
Dr. Judith Curry
President, Climate Forecast Applications Network; Professor Emeritus, Georgia Institute of Technology
Former peer reviewed and published climate scientists who mostly goes on Fox and other conservative mediums as a cliamte change "skeptic"
Dr. John Christy
Professor and Director, Earth System Science Center, NSSTC, University of Alabama at Huntsville; State Climatologist, Alabama
A climate change "skeptic" who produces one of the two major satellite datasets. His data was routinely used to "prove" the "pause" was real because one section of the troposphere was warming slowly - at least until last year when it a had a record level spike in temperatures.
Dr. Michael Mann
Professor, Department of Meteorology and Atmospheric Science, Pennsylvania State University
An out spoken climate scientist know for the "hockey stick" and a frequent target of "skeptics"
Dr. Roger Pielke Jr.
Professor, Environmental Studies Department, University of Colorado
Has a background on climate and political science including policies on affecting climate change. Believes the IPCC findings but believes any changes will have to be adaptive as fixing climate will take decades. Recently got into a pissing contest with Mann on the impacts of climate change on the destructive power of storms and hurricanes.
Maybe it's just me but I'm sensing this will be a gang up on the mainstream climate scientist kind of talk. Don't know why I think that.
Dr. Judith Curry
President, Climate Forecast Applications Network; Professor Emeritus, Georgia Institute of Technology
Former peer reviewed and published climate scientists who mostly goes on Fox and other conservative mediums as a cliamte change "skeptic"
Dr. John Christy
Professor and Director, Earth System Science Center, NSSTC, University of Alabama at Huntsville; State Climatologist, Alabama
A climate change "skeptic" who produces one of the two major satellite datasets. His data was routinely used to "prove" the "pause" was real because one section of the troposphere was warming slowly - at least until last year when it a had a record level spike in temperatures.
Dr. Michael Mann
Professor, Department of Meteorology and Atmospheric Science, Pennsylvania State University
An out spoken climate scientist know for the "hockey stick" and a frequent target of "skeptics"
Dr. Roger Pielke Jr.
Professor, Environmental Studies Department, University of Colorado
Has a background on climate and political science including policies on affecting climate change. Believes the IPCC findings but believes any changes will have to be adaptive as fixing climate will take decades. Recently got into a pissing contest with Mann on the impacts of climate change on the destructive power of storms and hurricanes.
Maybe it's just me but I'm sensing this will be a gang up on the mainstream climate scientist kind of talk. Don't know why I think that.
- Jul 9, 2009
- 10,759
- 2,086
- 136
Gosh you mean climate science isn't really a settled science and there's authoritative climate scientists that disagree with the media consensus? Who knew? (except the skeptics)
Fanatical Meat
Lifer
- Feb 4, 2009
- 35,862
- 17,406
- 136
Paratus
Lifer
- Jun 4, 2004
- 17,717
- 16,003
- 146
Lol. There's hundreds of practicing climate scientists and 97% support mainstream findings.
3% of several hundred leaves more than enough "skeptics" for Lamar to cherry pick.
Now since the predictions by "skeptics" have been 100% wrong:
- The Earths not warming - oops it is
- Oh we meant people have no impact - oops!
- We meant people's impacts is to small to do anything - oops!
Maybe they will also have a hearing on if the earth is flat
IronWing
No Lifer
- Jul 20, 2001
- 73,307
- 34,757
- 136
The science is settled. The politics are not. Lamar Smith is a ghoul feasting on the entrails of a dead issue.
Paratus
Lifer
- Jun 4, 2004
- 17,717
- 16,003
- 146
Putin totally approves of global warming. Despite the "skeptic community's " cries otherwise the private and govt controlled oil industries all know with the arctic melting new areas are opening up for oil exploration. Good for business or a government budget.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/ng-interactive/2015/jun/16/drilling-oil-gas-arctic-alaska
- Jul 9, 2009
- 10,759
- 2,086
- 136
Well there's at least 3 pillars of the Climate scientist community that disagree and they're testifying before Congress in a few days. It also depends on what part of climate science you think is settled. I know of no one that disagrees that CO2 isn't a GHG or that the world isn't warming and hasn't been for the last couple hundred years, but keep tossing those lies out there.
Paratus
Lifer
- Jun 4, 2004
- 17,717
- 16,003
- 146
You stated, "climate science isn't really a settled science". Since you made the statement and then tried to flip the question back on me we can assume you don't have an answer.
Why can't you answer which part isn't settled?
Why would you believe it isn't settled if you can't even articulate what part isn't?
Sad
- Jul 9, 2009
- 10,759
- 2,086
- 136
jman19
Lifer
- Nov 3, 2000
- 11,225
- 664
- 126
hal2kilo
Lifer
- Feb 24, 2009
- 26,361
- 12,501
- 136
hal2kilo
Lifer
- Feb 24, 2009
- 26,361
- 12,501
- 136
So your answer is an unreviewed editorial piece from someone who isn't a climatologist that makes a number of demonstrably false claims like that sea level rise is no greater now than in the past. lol.
Amazing how you guys always, always go for editorial pieces. Actually, it's not. They aren't subject to scientific review so people can get away with saying whatever they want. You rely on that because you can't argue the science.
There is great moral value in what drives your thinking in my opinion. Liberals love change and change can be a dangerous thing. We both see the danger is being stampeded into something out of fear, whether it is nobler of the mind to stay in the frying pan and suffer the arrows of outrageous climate, or to take arms against a sea of temperature rise data, and by imposing a break, try to eliminate them, whether to spend money now and suffer the costs to other causes, or to live temporarily without inconvenience.
I believe that you have decided that the best course of action is inaction, based on a suspicion of liberals and perhaps their desire for more and more spending on things like (un)scientific research and grants, whereas I was brought up with a trust in the scientific method as a means to differentiate between my feeling biases and hard reality. But I believe that in all matters where risk is assessed in areas that don't bring up inculcated fears, like being told as a youth never to trust liberals, you think exactly as I do, that the best assessment of risk comes from a math and science look at the facts. I think, for example, if it suddenly became the fashion among conservative to destroy sidewalks by jumping out of high buildings, you would chose to deviate from that belief. You would be very difficult to convince otherwise, I believe, because you understand gravity in your gut. This is what a scientific understanding feels like to liberals. It makes bone deep sense.
Fanatical Meat
Lifer
- Feb 4, 2009
- 35,862
- 17,406
- 136
import_taj types' (you know, most conservatives) posts largely serve as peacocking for science denialists. Not unlike "I'm not racist, but... something about them lower status browns" for white nationalists, ie. mostly the same crowd.
- Jul 9, 2009
- 10,759
- 2,086
- 136
It's also a flat out lie. Do you think there's that much difference in the temperatures between the 1930s and present day? Seriously? The graph is a lie, where did you get it?
Sorry for the long image but its pretty telling
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter