Top scientist resigns from post - admits Global Warming is a scam

I live in California, too! Hi fellow citizen!

The drought in California is not because of climate change but pure water mismanagement for decades. We all know that we actually live in a desert and nothing has been done to prepare for long time running droughts which can happen in a desert without human intervention. No dams, no reservoirs, nothing. Instead we want to build a bullet train to nowhere and spent billions on stupid pet projects or use the water for monetary gain like P&WE showed us on Saturday when they run an entire lake dry for electrical generation or the Almond farmers who export 95% of their goods outside of the United States but using almost 60% of the water while at the same time booking irrelevant net profits.

Water mismanagement is part of California's water issues. But look at the weather patterns. In the 1980s, the first rains near Sacramento where I live were in the first week of October. It was almost like clockwork.

Now, we are lucky to have a few good rain storms in the entire winter.

BTW I also think the bullet train is a huge waste of money. Ridership will be at best about 25% of what the politicians are predicting. Also, it will make so many stops that it will not be an express but rather stop at every burg on it's way.

Also Jerry Brown wants to build two 40 foot tunnels to take water from the delta and ship it to Southern California. That will lead to salt water intrusion into the delta and basically kill the agricultural in the delta.

Put all that aside and just watch the weather for a couple of decades.

originally posted by: HalfLeaf
a reply to: jaffo

So first microbes, then dinosaurs, eventually mammals, and finally (now) homo sapiens, purposely caused global warming? Gotcha! If only dinosaurs had paid taxes for all those farts that contributed to global warming, that would have taught them and prevented it all!


Not saying we shouldn't focus on improving (decreasing) our impact, but what are you claiming exactly, that planet earth has been f*cking up for all these millions of years, evolution is a failed process that "OOPS" missed the fact there would be an impact on the planet we evolved on? Kinda ridiculous tbh, it's obviously part of this rock we live on, it's obviously part of the species that evolved on it.

There is nothing in that post that even comes close to a rebuttal or proofs of your apparent position. Try again.

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

In order for someone to "admit" something, they needed to have participated in what they knew to be wrong. Dr. Lewis was a physicist and did not take part in any climate change research. (Although he was on a panel investigating the possibility of a "nuclear winter.") He is calling global warming A "scam" based on the leaked "climategate" emails which are known to have been cherry picked. He seems to be frustrated by a trend in science to chase corporate money, of which he believes the AGW theory to be an example. He is entitled to his opinion, but it is not admission.

Gee, that's all I need to hear. One unknown scientist says it's all fake? Good enough for me.

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Indigo5

OK...First Off ..You do realize that this professor died 4 years ago?

Albert Einstein died 60 years ago.

(A) Albert Einstein was proven wrong on some of his theories since then.

(B) For effs sake, this Oil Industry sell-out was no Albert Einstein.

The "AMERICAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY" HAS OVER 4,800 MEMBERS... One guy drops out 4 years ago to join a climate denier org. and the right wing has an orgasm
www.aps.org...

Run the math on that....1 divided by 4,800...so .0002 of 1 percent of the American Physical Society disagrees with the climate change science??? Hell ...Only 99.9998% more to go???

God help me...I know simple math or logic is just a Climate Change conspiracy.

Ignore the 99.9998% and declare the .0002 % as correct.

originally posted by: flyandi
I live in California, too! Hi fellow citizen!

The drought in California is not because of climate change but pure water mismanagement for decades. We all know that we actually live in a desert and nothing has been done to prepare for long time running droughts which can happen in a desert without human intervention. No dams, no reservoirs, nothing.

The idea that humans have underengineered California is false. The point is that no amount of reservoir can overcome a long-running drought.

Actual facts:

www.acwa.com...

California is home to one of the most extensive water supply systems in the nation. Comprising more than 1,000 reservoirs, hundreds of groundwater basins and dozens of local and regional water conveyance systems, California’s water infrastructure is an engineering marvel and a tribute to human ingenuity.

...

California relies on an elaborate network of water storage and delivery systems to supply cities, farms, businesses and the environment with adequate water year-round. Given the state’s highly seasonable precipitation and the fact that annual runoff can vary widely from year to year, water supply infrastructure has allowed California to grow and prosper by storing and moving water when and where it’s needed.

Nature provides about 200 million acre-feet of precipitation to California in average years. Of this total, 65% is lost through evaporation and transpiration by trees and other plants. The remaining 35% stays in the state’s system as runoff. More than 30% of this runoff flows out to the Pacific Ocean or other salt sinks. The rest is used by agricultural, urban, and environmental purposes.

About 75% of the annual precipitation falls north of Sacramento, while more than 75% of the demand for water is south of the capital city. Most of the rain and snowfall occurs between October and April, while demand is highest during the hot and dry summer months

California’s water system was developed to address that mismatch. Seven major systems of aqueducts and associated infrastructure exist today to capture and deliver water within the state. Two of the most important projects are the federal Central Valley Project (CVP) and the State Water Project (SWP). The CVP and SWP bring water from Northern California through the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta for delivery to users in the San Joaquin Valley, parts of the San Francisco Bay Area and Southern California

Key water projects and the amount of water they deliver:
Central Valley Project (federal). Delivers about 7 million acre-feet (MAF) per year. Constructed in 1930s - 1950s.
State Water Project (state). Delivers about 2.3 MAF / year. Constructed in 1960s – early 1970s.
All-American Canal (local). Delivers 3 MAF / year. Constructed in 1930s
Colorado River Aqueduct (local). Delivers 1.2 MAF / year. Completed in 1941
Los Angeles Aqueduct (local). Delivers 200,000 AF / year. Completed in 1913.
Mokelumne Aqueduct (local). Delivers 364,000 AF / year. Completed in 1929. Second aqueduct completed in 1949.
San Francisco Hetch Hetchy Project (local). Delivers 330,000 AF / year. Completed in 1923.

originally posted by: Dr X
OK, Lets see what some real scientists have to say on this, Not some conservative funded (read bought out by the oil industry) rag like the Daily Telegraph:

NASA:
Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals1 show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree: Climate-warming trends over the past century are very likely due to human activities.

climate.nasa.gov..." target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow"> climate.nasa.gov...

Let me know when their predictions are accurate.

originally posted by: DJW001
He seems to be frustrated by a trend in science to chase corporate money, of which he believes the AGW theory to be an example. He is entitled to his opinion, but it is not admission.

His opinion is wrong, of course, both on the science and corporate money. Corporate money has gone disproportionately to denialists and intentional obfuscators.

The underlying science of atmospheric radiative transfer and long term climatic response has a long funding history starting from the 1950's-1960's from the US Air Force (atmospheric physics) and Office of Naval Research (e.g. the long term funder of Roger Revelle).

originally posted by: TheBulk

originally posted by: Dr X
OK, Lets see what some real scientists have to say on this, Not some conservative funded (read bought out by the oil industry) rag like the Daily Telegraph:

NASA:
Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals1 show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree: Climate-warming trends over the past century are very likely due to human activities.

climate.nasa.gov..." target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow"> climate.nasa.gov...

Let me know when their predictions are accurate.

Now.

originally posted by: TheBulk

originally posted by: Dr X
OK, Lets see what some real scientists have to say on this, Not some conservative funded (read bought out by the oil industry) rag like the Daily Telegraph:

NASA:
Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals1 show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree: Climate-warming trends over the past century are very likely due to human activities.

climate.nasa.gov..." target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow"> climate.nasa.gov...

Let me know when their predictions are accurate.

A climatologist is like a weatherman on a different time scale. A weatherman might not be spot on as far as rain or if it is going to be 77 degrees or 79 degrees...but they are right about trends and statistical certainties in their predictions.

You guys take issue when they don't make precise predictions...and then claim that winter or summer is not going to happen because that weatherman was off on yesterdays forecast.

There is not doubt that climate change is happening now...Anything that denies that requires heavy amounts of flat earth logic.

a reply to: chiefsmom

Well the flip side of that is that the thought process of being 100% for cap and trade if you think man has contributed to climate change.

I still don't understand why there is still debate wether its warming or not........

Sure thing it is, but come on, it's like everyone on Earth believe that we are living a on stable system that doesn't undergo change?!?! The only scientific data I firmly believe are those that show the immense changes that have been going on for 100.000 years if not millions. Changes that will keep on going on wether we are here or not.

The only way to deal with things is, yes, live responsibly and be gentle to natura, but from then on live "here and now", adapt, accept what Earth throws at us and deal with it as we encounter it.

We are trying to model a planetary solution based that will "save mankind" based on the little time we've been here? How freaking arrogant and ignorant.

Earth is a fluke in the sense that everything could change any moment and has been changing for the last 4 billion years, but suddenly the last 100.000 years are more important that the preceeding billions.................?
Mankind will end some day, and if we don't do it ourselves Earth, the solar system or the universe will take care of that, that is a completely and undeniable FACT.

a reply to: theantediluvian

I am sorry, but your post there was complete and utter tripe. Ignorance to the extreme. Pathetic and uninformed.

His focus was high energy physics (cosmic rays and elementary particles). He specifically studied how those particles interacted with the atmosphere during periods of his long and tenured career. He authored many papers on Plasma Physics, which has a lot to do with atmospheric phenomena.

Even then, what was he commenting on specifically about the APS?

His letter characterizes the APS as having changed from an organization that seeks to further scientific knowledge, to an organization that suppresses science in its attempt to obtain further funding from government agencies.

Through his long career he knew how the scientific process is supposed to work. He saw that process break down and cave to government grants. Many years ago I explained why I left the atmospheric sciences community and it had much to do with the same.

But hey, let's call his credentials into question and call him Old. Good sport!

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

Quick,someone tell the Pope.

a reply to: flyandi

Yep. It's been my home for years and the drought is not related to AGW and many peer reviewed papers have said as much. Definitely a drought, but not the first one california has seen and definitely not the worst.

Many people don't understand that until recently a good majority of SoCal water was piped in from NorCal, but infighting has reduced that. One of Browns platforms when running was he would keep the water flowing. He didn't.

a reply to: raymundoko

... It is definitely the worst...
What peer reviewed paper is saying that it is not and has zero to do with climate change?

I agree mismanagement of water is up there, but not getting the rain/snow that we need also is a big reason.
Water mismanagement doesn't cause a drought.

And what makes him right over the other 4,999 scientist?

Because he wrote the letter??

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

I'm curious as to who you originally linked to.
I want to read what "lies" they say about ATS.

Thank you in advance.

-Toy the Bear

a reply to: TOYBEAR

It is usually just purely a source issue, not having to do with the content provided.

As in it doesn't matter what was being linked, it was about where it was coming from.
Probably a legal issue, which means we wouldn't get the real reason why I think.

IMO, nothing nefarious, but hey you never know.

a reply to: Sremmos80

Fair enough - I mean before joining this site I read a couple of things myself
about this site that I found unappealing but decided to join anyway.
I figured it didn't really matter.

-Toy the Bear