IntenseDebate - GregBurnham

14 years ago @ Macleans.ca - The truth is out there... · 5 replies · +1 points

There are in excess of 31,000 scientists (over 9,000 with PhD's) who have signed a petition denouncing the Kyoto Protocol and the entire AGW premise.

The petition is found here: http://www.petitionproject.org/

Be sure to check out the qualifications of the signers which is stated.

14 years ago @ Macleans.ca - The truth is out there... · 0 replies · +1 points

RagingRanter--I thought I was replying to him too-- lol -- sorry for the mis-post. I agree with you.

14 years ago @ Macleans.ca - The truth is out there... · 0 replies · +1 points

Very well said, indeed...

14 years ago @ Macleans.ca - The truth is out there... · 1 reply · +1 points

No you misunderstand--water vapor is nearly ENTIRELY "to blame" for a completely normal and safe self regulating planetary system of climate control! Oh lord, how self important are we humans to think that we can over ride the effect of THE SUN and the OCEANS--by our pathetic actions--and in such a short time?

14 years ago @ Macleans.ca - The truth is out there... · 3 replies · +2 points

You talking to me? Oh sheesh... Climate and weather are BOTH non-linear complex systems. What is you point?

14 years ago @ Macleans.ca - The truth is out there... · 2 replies · +2 points

Biff, you are correct. The scientific method was abused as is evidenced by the emails. That isn't even in question. Moreover, there is a petition, the link to which I will post in reply to Daniel, which contains more than 31,000 signatures (more than 9,000 are PhD's) from scientists who REFUTE the entire idea of AGW. Additionally, it is ironic that there is no consensus at all--given the fervor of those who claim the opposite! And finally, science is not determined by a "show of hands" -- not in Galileo's time--and not now. Petition Project link: http://www.petitionproject.org/

14 years ago @ Macleans.ca - The truth is out there... · 3 replies · +3 points

Daniel, I am not a "skeptic" -- rather, I am someone who chooses to think critically. One difference between what those whom you have chosen to believe have proposed-- vs. --those with whom you disagree have proposed in the link you provided, is huge. If those scientists with whom you agree are actually unreliable because they are disingenuously reporting alarministic data in support of an agenda that is politically based, there is a big problem for several reasons. There has already been in excess of 50 BILLION dollars spent researching this subject in the past decade. Imagine how much more will be charged in taxes to fix something that has not been legitimately submitted for unbiased peer review! Skepticism is not a bad word--In fact, it is part of a healthy exchange of ideas--but only when all parties are genuinely seeking the truth. When the view of the skeptic is censored despite his or her qualification, or irrespective of the strength of the argument offered, that is not climate science--it is the CHURCH of CLIMATE CHANGE and has no credibility.

14 years ago @ Macleans.ca - The truth is out there... · 3 replies · +1 points

What "basic fact" is being ignored, pray tell? Hogwash! CO2 is a trace element in our atmosphere; it is necessry for life; we exhale it; plants inhale it; an abundance of CO2 is very good for so-called GREEN people--at least it is if they love green PLANTS as much as they love their own self importance; CO2 is not a "pollutant" at all. Finally, the number one "culprit" contributing to the greenhouse effect is WATER VAPOR. Please do not take my word for this, but I'm not kidding. Water vapor is far and away (to the tune of 99%) the highest contributor to greenhouse gas accumulation in the atmosphere. Are you suggesting that we cap and trade the oceans, too?

14 years ago @ Macleans.ca - The truth is out there... · 11 replies · +4 points

The planet's climate is determined mostly by the SUN and the OCEANIC reaction to same...and to a lesser but significant degree, by myriad other factors. The problem isn't so much about "global warming" as it is in the faulty science--more specifically, the BAD MATH. Again, Chaos Theory does not preclude Anthropogenic Global Warming or Cooling -- but it absolutely precludes the PREDICTABILITY of such a thing! Yet, prediction is exactly what these alarmists have been claiming they are capable of doing.

14 years ago @ Macleans.ca - The truth is out there... · 13 replies · +9 points

There is a fundamental reason that the entire AGW and/or ACC (Man Made Climate Change) suppositions can be categorically deemed as flawed, if not disingenuous. The reason is mathematical--and math is not emotionally determined nor is it political. Math simply "is what it is" dispassionately. The mathematical discipline of Chaos Theory does not preclude the possibility that global warming (climate change) can be caused by man made factors. However, the weather (climate) is mathematically, nonlinear, by definition--and as such, any predictions of its future behavior is HYPER-DEPENDENT upon "initial conditions" -- Linear or simple systems behave differently than do non-linear or complex systems. In other words, in a linear system, if the equation uses factors that are "slightly off" the resultant product will also be "slightly off" -- which probably is not that big a deal. However, in a non-linear or complex system even the slightest error or deviation in the factors used in the equation will yield a result that is CHAOTICALLY determined--and therefore, UNPREDICTABLE, by definition.

IntenseDebate Comment System

Connect with GregBurnham

People I'm following

GregBurnham