To start, science is not about absolute proofs found by anyone.
Also, news articles, even in 'science' sources, aren't very meaningful. Its amazing
how twisted and horribly incorrect reporters can get
What is the news article stating
Climate scientists armed with new data from deep in the ocean and far into space have found that Earth is absorbing much more heat than it is
giving off, a conclusion they say validates projections of global warming.
Correct me if I am wrong, but this is not new information no? Its been known for a while that the oceans are retaining more heat. The question is,
why, and what are the effects of it? Does a portion of a degree make a difference? And what are the normal amounts that these data point vary? And
if the oceans are warming up, why isn't
the rest of the planet warming up in a corresponding manner?
These guys are climatologists, they're not 'all scientists'. From what I understand, there is a consensus amoung climate modelers that c.f. the
GreenHouse Theory is happening. But not
amoung all scientists. Why? Is there perhaps some flaws in climate modelling that other scientists
are less convicned aren't important?
Hansen's team, reporting Thursday in the journal Science, said they also determined that global temperatures will rise 1 degree Fahrenheit
this century even if greenhouse gases are capped tomorrow.
One degree over a hundred years? Maybe? Certainly, the world is not
going to engage in radical, destructive, changes based on a single
report. This is not
a 'smoking gun', there are no smoking guns in science.
For clarification, here is the text of the disputed paper and the correspondence between the author and Science magazine. Read it and draw your
For my own part, any scientist who writes up webpages complaining about his paper not getting accepted into one of the Big Journals is a tool and
Heck , just look at the correspondance.
he submits the original stuff as a letter
it is too long for a Letter, but we would consider a shorter version if you are willing to edit it. It should be 500 words or less, not counting the
After realizing that the basic points of your letter have already been
widely dispersed over the internet, we have reluctantly decided that we
cannot publish your letter
Like I said, he's a tool.
Then he pretends that he just wants everyone to know whats going on, blah blah blah.
Fine, publish in one of the hundreds of other journals out there. Like I said, this guy is a whiner and a tool. Lots of papers get rejected all the