It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Top Physicist Freeman Dyson: Obama Has Picked The ‘Wrong Side’ On Climate Change

page: 5
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in


posted on Oct, 16 2015 @ 12:08 AM

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: burntheships

I am not for carbon credits per sey, at least not as it has been presented.

Will you accept anything that says less CO2 getting released is good, don't want to waste my time if you are just going to disagree with that.

Too much to ask for empirical scientific proof to prove less C02 is going
to significantly reverse the so called AGW in a time frame that will even
matter to the next 10 generations, and show how that will benefit the poor?
( all claims of the AGW sect )

edit on 16-10-2015 by burntheships because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 16 2015 @ 12:08 AM
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

The 40% is an observation(assuming a 280ppm starting point).

Radiative forcing of CO2 leads to a warming effect.

Some say the changes we are making to the atmosphere are not significant enough to cause great changes, while some of us already see the change.

Climate change is being sold as a hoax to levy taxes and destroy freedoms, it is an easy sell to those who do not go out much and therefore blind to the changes and challenges this planet faces as a direct result of human activity.
edit on 16-10-2015 by jrod because: drunk

posted on Oct, 16 2015 @ 12:38 AM
a reply to: jrod you see it. And since you see it, despite others not seeing it, its real (and those who don't see it are idiots for not just going outside and seeing it).

But still not science.

I've read the explanations of radiative forcing. I presume you are deriving what you say from a hypothesis (that is unsupported outside of the aforementioned broken model) based on radiative forcing.

If you want to make the world a better place, leave the politicans out of it. No one will disagree that we need to reduce pollution. Its just that no one will want to pay a tax for it. Hence: leave the politicans out of it.

posted on Oct, 16 2015 @ 12:45 AM

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
If you are a climate change proponent, then you cannot ignore the simple fact that, despite all the computing, mathematical, and brain power put into data collection and analysis, we are still left with "scientists" standing, palms up, saying, "I dunno" when the model fails any statistically relevant test of accuracy.

No, what climate change proponents tend to "not ignore" is the axiomatic physics that dictate why increasing greenhouse gases are already known to be trapping more energy in our climate system - at a rate of four Hiroshima bombs per second. This is not "modeled". It is observed and well understood.

I've tried to demonstrate it and explain it to skeptics here before, but what most of them prefer to do is just ignore this basic science and empirical evidence in favor of endless phony memes about natural cycles, failed models, and of course carbon credits.

And that's why proponents get constantly told by skeptics how this is all about politics and not science. Because it's not, but skeptics simply ignore the actual science, while focusing on confirmation-biased politics or whatever other off-topic flavor tickles their talking point taste buds.

And this debate goes on and on and on in endless circles until everybody gets sick of it and barfs (exactly as denial industry obstructionists have intended) while the world continues to burn as the rich get richer off its ashes.

posted on Oct, 16 2015 @ 04:02 AM
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

CO2 is just one piece of the puzzle, but a very important one.

Radiative forcing can be replicated in a lab so we know it exists without the aid of the 'models' you are hung up about.

We keep observing CO2 levels going up, that is based on real world data.

I am not sure who you can say radiative forcing and the observed CO2 increase is not 'science'. It is as if we both define 'science' differently.

posted on Oct, 16 2015 @ 05:56 AM
Have people actually read what he says in the interview?

He doesn't deny climate change is happening. In fact he says climate change is happening.

He just seems to disagree on the idea of Co2 being bad, he seems to be saying Co2 emissions are inevitable, and instead of trying to reduce them, we need to find other solutions. The examples he offers are in weather control. Inducing more snowfall in the arctic for example.

posted on Oct, 16 2015 @ 05:59 AM
a reply to: Sremmos80

Those top scientists have been caught lying, falsifying data, publishing lies, and deleting raw temperature data to push for the AGW agenda.

You think there is only a few scientists who agree with this physicist?...

WASHINGTON - A United Nations climate change conference in Poland is about to get a surprise from 650 leading scientists who scoff at doomsday reports of man-made global warming - labeling them variously a lie, a hoax and part of a new religion.

Later today, their voices will be heard in a U.S. Senate minority report quoting the scientists, many of whom are current and former members of the U.N.'s own Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

About 250 of the scientists quoted in the report have joined the dissenting scientists in the last year alone.

In fact, the total number of scientists represented in the report is 12 times the number of U.N. scientists who authored the official IPCC 2007 report.

Here are some choice excerpts from the report:

* "I am a skeptic ... . Global warming has become a new religion." -- Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever.

* "Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly ... . As a scientist I remain skeptical." -- Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a Ph.D. in meteorology and formerly of NASA who has authored more than 190 studies and has been called "among the most pre-eminent scientists of the last 100 years."

* Warming fears are the "worst scientific scandal in the history ... . When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists." -- U.N. IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning Ph.D. environmental physical chemist.

* "The IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn't listen to others. It doesn't have open minds ... . I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are not geologists." -- Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and a board member of the U.N.-supported International Year of the Planet.

* "The models and forecasts of the U.N. IPCC "are incorrect because they only are based on mathematical models and presented results at scenarios that do not include, for example, solar activity." -- Victor Manuel Velasco Herrera, a researcher at the Institute of Geophysics of the National Autonomous University of Mexico.

* "It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who don't buy into anthropogenic global warming." -- U.S. Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

* "Even doubling or tripling the amount of carbon dioxide will virtually have little impact, as water vapor and water condensed on particles as clouds dominate the worldwide scene and always will." -- Geoffrey G. Duffy, a professor in the Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering of the University of Auckland, New Zealand.

* "After reading [U.N. IPCC chairman] Pachauri's asinine comment [comparing skeptics to] Flat Earthers, it's hard to remain quiet." -- Climate statistician Dr. William M. Briggs, who specializes in the statistics of forecast evaluation, serves on the American Meteorological Society's Probability and Statistics Committee and is an associate editor of Monthly Weather Review.

* "For how many years must the planet cool before we begin to understand that the planet is not warming? For how many years must cooling go on?" -- Geologist Dr. David Gee, the chairman of the science committee of the 2008 International Geological Congress who has authored 130 plus peer-reviewed papers, and is currently at Uppsala University in Sweden.

* "Gore prompted me to start delving into the science again and I quickly found myself solidly in the skeptic camp ... . Climate models can at best be useful for explaining climate changes after the fact." -- Meteorologist Hajo Smit of Holland, who reversed his belief in man-made warming to become a skeptic, is a former member of the Dutch U.N. IPCC committee.

That's not all of them, but a small sample of how many scientists doubt the AGW hoax.

posted on Oct, 16 2015 @ 06:21 AM
The entire US coal industry and railroads are being wiped out thanks to Obama's stance on Climate change.
They don't need jobs in West Virginia - heck, they have social security and oxycontin to keep them happy.

posted on Oct, 16 2015 @ 06:31 AM

Selected Highlights of the Updated 2010 Report featuring over 1,000 international scientists dissenting from man-made climate fears:

Were not scientifically there yet. Despite what you may have heard in the media, there is nothing like a consensus of scientific opinion that this is a problem. Because there is natural variability in the weather, you cannot statistically know for another 150 years.” — UN IPCCs Tom Tripp, a member of the UN IPCC since 2004 and listed as one of the lead authors and serves as the Director of Technical Services & Development for U.S. Magnesium.

Any reasonable scientific analysis must conclude the basic theory wrong!!” — NASA Scientist Dr. Leonard Weinstein who worked 35 years at the NASA Langley Research Center and finished his career there as a Senior Research Scientist. Weinstein is presently a Senior Research Fellow at the National Institute of Aerospace.

Please remain calm: The Earth will heal itself — Climate is beyond our power to control…Earth doesnt care about governments or their legislation. You cant find much actual global warming in present-day weather observations. Climate change is a matter of geologic time, something that the earth routinely does on its own without asking anyones permission or explaining itself.” — Nobel Prize-Winning Stanford University Physicist Dr. Robert B. Laughlin, who won the Nobel Prize for physics in 1998, and was formerly a research scientist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.

In essence, the jig is up. The whole thing is a fraud. And even the fraudsters that fudged data are admitting to temperature history that they used to say didnt happen…Perhaps what has doomed the Climategate fraudsters the most was their brazenness in fudging the data” — Dr. Christopher J. Kobus, Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering at Oakland University, specializes in alternative energy, thermal transport phenomena, two-phase flow and fluid and thermal energy systems.

The energy mankind generates is so small compared to that overall energy budget that it simply cannot affect the climateThe planets climate is doing its own thing, but we cannot pinpoint significant trends in changes to it because it dates back millions of years while the study of it began only recently. We are children of the Sun; we simply lack data to draw the proper conclusions.” — Russian Scientist Dr. Anatoly Levitin, the head of geomagnetic variations laboratory at the Institute of Terrestrial Magnetism, Ionosphere and Radiowave Propagation of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

Hundreds of billion dollars have been wasted with the attempt of imposing a Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) theory that is not supported by physical world evidencesAGW has been forcefully imposed by means of a barrage of scare stories and indoctrination that begins in the elementary school textbooks.” — Brazilian Geologist Geraldo Luís Lino, who authored the 2009 book The Global Warming Fraud: How a Natural Phenomenon Was Converted into a False World Emergency.

I am an environmentalist,butI must disagree with Mr. Gore” — Chemistry Professor Dr. Mary Mumper, the chair of the Chemistry Department at Frostburg State University in Maryland, during her presentation titledAnthropogenic Carbon Dioxide and Global Warming, the Skeptics View.

I am ashamed of what climate science has become today.The sciencecommunity is relying on an inadequate model to blame CO2 and innocent citizens for global warming in order to generate funding and to gain attention.If this is whatsciencehas become today, I, as a scientist, am ashamed.” — Research Chemist William C. Gilbert published a study in August 2010 in the journal Energy & Environment titledThe thermodynamic relationship between surface temperature and water vapor concentration in the troposphere” and he published a paper in August 2009 titled “Atmospheric Temperature Distribution in a Gravitational Field.” [Update December 9, 2010]

The dysfunctional nature of the climate sciences is nothing short of a scandal. Science is too important for our society to be misused in the way it has been done within the Climate Science Community.The global warming establishmenthas actively suppressed research results presented by researchers that do not comply with the dogma of the IPCC.” — Swedish Climatologist Dr. Hans Jelbring, of the Paleogeophysics & Geodynamics Unit at Stockholm University. [Updated December 9, 2010. Corrects Jelbring’s quote.]

Those who call themselves Green planet advocatesshould be arguing for a CO2- fertilized atmosphere, not a CO2-starved atmosphere…Diversity increases when the planet was warm AND had high CO2 atmospheric content…Al Gores personal behavior supports a green planet – his enormous energy use with his 4 homes and his bizjet, does indeed help make the planet greener. Kudos, Al for doing your part to save the planet.” — Renowned engineer and aviation/space pioneer Burt Rutan, who was named. “100 most influential people in the world, 2004″ by Time Magazine and Newsweek called him “the man responsible for more innovations in modern aviation than any living engineer.”

“Global warming is the central tenet of this new belief system in much the same way that the Resurrection is the central tenet of Christianity. Al Gore has taken a role corresponding to that of St Paul in proselytizing the new faith…My skepticism about AGW arises from the fact that as a physicist who has worked in closely related areas, I know how poor the underlying science is. In effect the scientific method has been abandoned in this field.” — Atmospheric Physicist Dr. John Reid, who worked with Australias CSIROs (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization) Division of Oceanography and worked in surface gravity waves (ocean waves) research.
... ipcc-gore-2/

edit on 16-10-2015 by ElectricUniverse because: add link.

posted on Oct, 16 2015 @ 06:34 AM


We maintain there is no reason whatsoever to worry about man-made climate change, because there is no evidence whatsoever that such a thing is happening.” — Greek Earth scientists Antonis Christofides and Nikos Mamassis of the National Technical University of AthensDepartment of Water Resources and Environmental Engineering.

There are clear cycles during which both temperature and salinity rise and fall. These cycles are related to solar activity…In my opinion and that of our institute, the problems connected to the current stage of warming are being exaggerated. What we are dealing with is not a global warming of the atmosphere or of the oceans.” — Biologist Pavel Makarevich of the Biological Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

Because the greenhouse effect is temporary rather than permanent, predictions of significant global warming in the 21st century by IPCC are not supported by the data.” — Hebrew University Professor Dr. Michael Beenstock an honorary fellow with Institute for Economic Affairs who published a study challenging man-made global warming claims titledPolynomial Cointegration Tests of the Anthropogenic Theory of Global Warming.

The whole idea of anthropogenic global warming is completely unfounded. There appears to have been money gained by Michael Mann, Al Gore and UN IPCCs Rajendra Pachauri as a consequence of this deception, so its fraud.” — South African astrophysicist Hilton Ratcliffe, a member of the Astronomical Society of Southern Africa (ASSA) and the Astronomical Society of the Pacific and a Fellow of the British Institute of Physics. ipcc-gore-2/
edit on 16-10-2015 by ElectricUniverse because: add link.

posted on Oct, 16 2015 @ 06:40 AM

originally posted by: StanFL
a reply to: Krazysh0t

You could try googling government funding for climate change research.

Or you could do it too and actually present a rebuttal to my post instead of demanding that I do it for you.
edit on 16-10-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 16 2015 @ 06:40 AM
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

You posted a several post copy paste about Climategate? The proven manufactured scandal? So you just let propaganda do your arguing for you then?
edit on 16-10-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 16 2015 @ 06:46 AM

originally posted by: liejunkie01
I would like to first state that I ciuld have picked several of your comments to reply to from the first page alone.

Don't care.

Secondly I would like to say that I am convinced that you have a very unhealthy infatuation with climate change, and it is starting to show up in more and more of your posts.

Being concerned about humans destroying our planet and other humans' refusal to even BELIEVE it is occurring let alone do anything about it? Yea I guess that is something idiotic to be overly invested in... /sarc

Third and lastly, I would like to ask you if you have even read this guys biography information?

Here let me introduce you to a little snippet of his background, courtesy of Google and good old Wiki.

Around 1979, Dyson worked with the Institute for Energy Analysis on climate studies. This group, under the direction of Alvin Weinberg, pioneered multidisciplinary climate studies, including a strong biology group. Also during the 1970s, he worked on climate studies conducted by the JASON defense advisory group.[18]

So let me get this straight?

This genius, litterally, has been schooled his whole life in many fields, INCLUDING CLIMATE STUDIES, and has devoted his entire life into the learning field, does not know what he is talking about????

I didn't say he doesn't know what he's talking about. I said he's not a SME because he's a physicist. Plus I also said that there is no evidence presented here. Only this man's opinion, WHICH has been pointed out that he DOES believe in man made climate change. He just doesn't think it is a bad thing.

Are you serious? If anyone or ten thousand scientists on the whole cclimate doom side had half of the credentials this man has, you would be foaming at the mouth over his intellectual abilities to understand climate and the global cycles.

Nope. Don't tell me how I think.

But since he is saying exactly the opposite of what you repeatedly spew over and over and over, like everyone else is mentally challenged, and you and your "glorious info intellectuals" are the only correct individuals on this is just completely absurd.

I'm not entirely sure you know exactly what he is saying.

I mean come on man, what do you want? Jesus to come down from a storm cloud caused by condensate from a super heated ocean after all of the arctic ice melts and tell you that you are right?

I'd like some intellectual honesty not derisive sarcasm.

posted on Oct, 16 2015 @ 06:51 AM
a reply to: ketsuko

Ketsuko, Climate Science has existed for 100 years. Are you trying to tell me that all that time up until 2008 that NO climate research was available for peer review based on that source alone? Because, I think that isn't exactly what I asked for.

posted on Oct, 16 2015 @ 06:52 AM

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Why are we believing a physicist's opinion on a field of science that he doesn't do research in? Oh wait, it's because it confirms people's confirmation biases. Just like always when it comes to flimsy evidence like this.

This thread needs a big "APPEAL TO AUTHORITY FALLACY" stamped on it.

Albedo modulation is what drives the climate. CO2 only contributes a little bit. 5 to 10 times less than what climate change scammers have been saying. They have been saying that to push the global tax fraud scheme in carbon credits. That scam won't work if carbon isn't driving the climate.

Ok... And where's your proof?

This is why the ones clamoring for carbon credit tax schemes continue to drive big engine Suburbans and Tahoe's and personal jets, and Obama uses Air Force 1 to go golfing. They all know that carbon isn't causing climate change. And we all know Al Gore sleeps with all the lights on. Shame he never replaced the burned out bulbs in his head though.

This is also why fossil fuels continue to burn with abandon. No authority cares about cutting emissions. No excuse to keep polluting, but tell that to our world leaders. They sure don't seem to care.

No crap. Hypocrites exist. That doesn't mean that Climate Change isn't real.
edit on 16-10-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 16 2015 @ 07:51 AM
its one thing to say that there are other major contributing factors or that its possible humans could affect it but they arent (i disagree though) its another to say humans are simply incapable of changing the environment

quite foolish
edit on 16-10-2015 by fartlordsupreme because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 16 2015 @ 07:55 AM
a reply to: Asktheanimals

coal is a some filthy #
climate change or no we need to get off coal
look what its done to the air quality in china
you want to live in that permanent death haze?

posted on Oct, 16 2015 @ 08:14 AM
a reply to: Phoenix
To be honest I hope the global warming crowd gets snowed in for the next ? Of course in their own twisted models they will claim sub zero temps and all the snow never seen in places before is caused by C02, mankind, and Global warming.. or just say man's fault but we can tax it away !

Crippling blizzards, snowstorms and sub-zero temperatures threaten a yearly dose of Arctic misery for the next FIFTY YEARS at least - and possibly decades more.

Climate experts warn a rare pattern of water cooling in the north Atlantic will trigger a chain reaction of events leading to a “fully-blown ice age”.

The say the UK is on alert for a “serious climate situation” with regular winter whiteouts pushing emergency services to the limit.
Britain faces an 'all but unprecedented' situation thanks to a cocktail of climatic changes all happening at once to affect the weather.

The northern Atlantic has been cooling steadily over the past few months leading to a colossal area of icy water to form off the UK coast.

This is thought to be the result of changes in wind flow and salinity and could lead to lower than average temperatures in Britain all year round.

The phenomenon has already raised fears this winter will be un usually brutal with months of sub-zero temperatures and heavy snow on the way.

Long-term accumulative effects could be that parts of northern Europe, including Britain, will cool dramatically.

posted on Oct, 16 2015 @ 08:47 AM

originally posted by: 727Sky
and all the snow never seen in places before

guess god put it there
climate change is inarguable
the fact that people have the ability to change our environment is inarguable

doesnt mean thats whats happening but we shouldnt be polluting in the first damned place
everybody wants more cash and they WANT IT NOW! to hell with the consequences
....until they come
then its the governments fault the rivers are levi blue and air is thicker than your skull
and yer chillins have that eevil cancer

posted on Oct, 16 2015 @ 11:11 AM
During the 911 air traffic ban, the temperatures across the continental USA rose noticeably.  This went against the logic if planes are not spewing out CO2 then the temperature should have lowered a miniscule amount ( or at least stayed the same.)
The reason being that planes being more efficient burning than before leave a lot of contrails which reflect the suns energy and lower our average temperature. They used to have bigger particles which did not stay suspended ( I'm not denying chemtrails exist lol ). This creates cloud seeding and reflects suns energy .
So what the press isn't reporting  is the fact that  in the northern Hemisphere over 10% of our suns energy is being blocked by atmospheric pollution.  In the Southern Hemisphere it isn't as bad for obvious reasons.Acoss the British Empire, they have been taking the suns energy measurements since the 1800s through evaporation trays ( more heat energy = more level loss ) and we have been losing heat since the 1970's from in Northern hemisphere. The Bush family is buying large amounts of land in South America so maybe they are getting out of Dodge. Pollution of suspended particles also causes cloud seeding which enhances the heat loss to the surface.
Without pollution, the effect of CO2 emissions would be greater.
However, Greenland was green when the Vikings settled there over a thousand years ago. Archeology  research showed that they had sheep, goats, and cows and grew  crops / vegetables.  This was a warming cycle from the sun.
Then the climate became cooler and the crops failed , animals died and the Vikings actually had sheep  living with them in their houses during the winter ( not because the women were ugly ) and shortly then after Greenland was abandoned. This was a cooling cycle from the sun.
In London during the 1500's, there are paintings of people Ice skating on the River Thames.
Then we started to warm up again and it wasn't because the Vikings or the Elizabethans were driving their cars. It is simply the sun and how our rotation around it varies ( closer vs. farther ) among other factors. Mars too is warming up.
Now you can even argue that the millions of animals that used to roam the continents ( Ex - American bison ) are now not spewing out CO2 and we have replaced them with cars spewing out CO2.
The reason why we are being blamed for CO2 emissions causing global warming is because they want to Carbon Tax us. The government can't get enough of the world's black heroin revenue.
The original scientific paper that blamed CO2 emissions for raising temperatures was flawed. Sure, when co2 levels rise so do earth's temperature.  The fact missing was that when the earth's temperature rises, CO2 emissions rise hundreds of years later.  This is because the Ocean heats up and then releases CO2. Over 97% of the CO2 on this planet comes from the Ocean. The rest is volcanoes , industry ,cars ,animals and plants.
Maybe we should have a Carbon breathing tax thrown in as well for good measure.

edit on 16-10-2015 by jimmybob because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-10-2015 by jimmybob because: (no reason given)

new topics

top topics

<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in