50 Top Astronauts, Scientists Sign Letter Slamming NASA For Promoting Man-Made Climate Change Dogma

page: 1
34
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
+5 more 
posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 06:57 AM
link   

Eventually the sham is going to give, and the latest letter signed by 50 NASA experts, with more than 1000 years of combined professional experience, is a sure sign the gig’s about over.
…..unproven remarks…..not substantiated…..hundreds of well-known climate scientists…..tens of thousands of other scientists publicly declaring their disbelief…..science is NOT settled…..unbecoming of NASA’s history…..advocacy of an extreme position…..damage to the exemplary reputation of NASA…..even the reputation of science itself…”
Letters to the top don’t get any more blunt than that.
And how many tens of billions have these crackpots at GISS cost the taxpayers?


The letter:


March 28, 2012
The Honorable Charles Bolden, Jr.
NASA Administrator
NASA Headquarters
Washington, D.C. 20546-0001
Dear Charlie,
We, the undersigned, respectfully request that NASA and the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) refrain from including unproven remarks in public releases and websites. We believe the claims by NASA and GISS, that man-made carbon dioxide is having a catastrophic impact on global climate change are not substantiated, especially when considering thousands of years of empirical data. With hundreds of well-known climate scientists and tens of thousands of other scientists publicly declaring their disbelief in the catastrophic forecasts, coming particularly from the GISS leadership, it is clear that the science is NOT settled.
The unbridled advocacy of CO2 being the major cause of climate change is unbecoming of NASA’s history of making an objective assessment of all available scientific data prior to making decisions or public statements.
As former NASA employees, we feel that NASA’s advocacy of an extreme position, prior to a thorough study of the possible overwhelming impact of natural climate drivers is inappropriate. We request that NASA refrain from including unproven and unsupported remarks in its future releases and websites on this subject. At risk is damage to the exemplary reputation of NASA, NASA’s current or former scientists and employees, and even the reputation of science itself.
For additional information regarding the science behind our concern, we recommend that you contact Harrison Schmitt or Walter Cunningham, or others they can recommend to you.
Thank you for considering this request.
Sincerely,
(Attached signatures)


nation.foxnews.com...

www.infowars.com...

notrickszone.com...




posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 07:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Merlin Lawndart
 


It doesn't matter though, this BS won't stop. As long as there are gullible idiots to fool, the myth will remain in existence. It's not about science it's about propaganda, always has been and will continue to be as long as there are idiots that will listen...and there will be. Irony is a guy like Al Bore who preaches this idea of global warming but has private jets and super 3 huge homes.



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 07:09 AM
link   
"The science is settled"
funny
the whole point of scientific method is
so that anyone can do an experiment and settle it for them selves
( it was really invented back when the elites were the amature "scientists" and disputes were settled on the field of honor...with dueling pistoles...a good shot could keep 2+2 = 3 for ages.
Throw in a priest or two and a couple politicians and you even could make it ILLEGAL to point out 2+2=4)

the whole world domination/giant thumb thing is based on the new tythe being carbon taxes

Since the god thing is spawning too many divergent, out of control, philosophies, the uberputzes need a new religion, one that they can control.
To do that you need priests on the take.
Al Gore the man bear pig's new seaside mansion is the perfect example of this.

partake in disseminating the fairy tale and you will get to be a hall monitor.
edit on 11-4-2012 by Danbones because: (no reason given)
edit on 11-4-2012 by Danbones because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 07:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Merlin Lawndart
 


Gotta love those appeals to authority huh? Debates over folks, they have, dun dun duh, A PETITION, can't argue with that. Oh sure you can throw all the facts that show climate change is real out the window now, who cares about melting ice and our planet being serially raped, shows over, they have a petition



The way I see it the reality of Climate Change doesn't even matter, the important thing is the realization that we shouldn't treat this planet like crap. This is our home and thanks to the NASA budget and the fact that no one seems to care about space travel it looks like this is going to be our home for centuries to come. So whether or not the Climate is headed toward catastrophe we need to do something to change the way we treat the Earth. Not just because of the negative consequences, but because taking care of your home is the right thing to do.



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 07:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Merlin Lawndart
 


Who are the "top astronauts"? Names and topness.



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 07:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aleister
reply to post by Merlin Lawndart
 


Who are the "top astronauts"? Names and topness.





(Attached signatures)
CC: Mr. John Grunsfeld, Associate Administrator for Science
CC: Ass Mr. Chris Scolese, Director, Goddard Space Flight Center
Ref: Letter to NASA Administrator Charles Bolden, dated 3-26-12, regarding a request for NASA to refrain from making unsubstantiated claims that human produced CO2 is having a catastrophic impact on climate change.
1. /s/ Jack Barneburg, Jack – JSC, Space Shuttle Structures, Engineering Directorate, 34 years
2. /s/ Larry Bell – JSC, Mgr. Crew Systems Div., Engineering Directorate, 32 years
3. /s/ Dr. Donald Bogard – JSC, Principal Investigator, Science Directorate, 41 years
4. /s/ Jerry C. Bostick – JSC, Principal Investigator, Science Directorate, 23 years
5. /s/ Dr. Phillip K. Chapman – JSC, Scientist – astronaut, 5 years
6. /s/ Michael F. Collins, JSC, Chief, Flight Design and Dynamics Division, MOD, 41 years
7. /s/ Dr. Kenneth Cox – JSC, Chief Flight Dynamics Div., Engr. Directorate, 40 years
8. /s/ Walter Cunningham – JSC, Astronaut, Apollo 7, 8 years
9. /s/ Dr. Donald M. Curry – JSC, Mgr. Shuttle Leading Edge, Thermal Protection Sys., Engr. Dir., 44 years
10. /s/ Leroy Day – Hdq. Deputy Director, Space Shuttle Program, 19 years
11. /s/ Dr. Henry P. Decell, Jr. – JSC, Chief, Theory & Analysis Office, 5 years
12. /s/Charles F. Deiterich – JSC, Mgr., Flight Operations Integration, MOD, 30 years
13. /s/ Dr. Harold Doiron – JSC, Chairman, Shuttle Pogo Prevention Panel, 16 years
14. /s/ Charles Duke – JSC, Astronaut, Apollo 16, 10 years
15. /s/ Anita Gale
16. /s/ Grace Germany – JSC, Program Analyst, 35 years
17. /s/ Ed Gibson – JSC, Astronaut Skylab 4, 14 years
18. /s/ Richard Gordon – JSC, Astronaut, Gemini Xi, Apollo 12, 9 years
19. /s/ Gerald C. Griffin – JSC, Apollo Flight Director, and Director of Johnson Space Center, 22 years
20. /s/ Thomas M. Grubbs – JSC, Chief, Aircraft Maintenance and Engineering Branch, 31 years
21. /s/ Thomas J. Harmon
22. /s/ David W. Heath – JSC, Reentry Specialist, MOD, 30 years
23. /s/ Miguel A. Hernandez, Jr. – JSC, Flight crew training and operations, 3 years
24. /s/ James R. Roundtree – JSC Branch Chief, 26 years
25. /s/ Enoch Jones – JSC, Mgr. SE&I, Shuttle Program Office, 26 years
26. /s/ Dr. Joseph Kerwin – JSC, Astronaut, Skylab 2, Director of Space and Life Sciences, 22 years
27. /s/ Jack Knight – JSC, Chief, Advanced Operations and Development Division, MOD, 40 years
28. /s/ Dr. Christopher C. Kraft – JSC, Apollo Flight Director and Director of Johnson Space Center, 24 years
29. /s/ Paul C. Kramer – JSC, Ass.t for Planning Aeroscience and Flight Mechanics Div., Egr. Dir., 34 years
30. /s/ Alex (Skip) Larsen
31. /s/ Dr. Lubert Leger – JSC, Ass’t. Chief Materials Division, Engr. Directorate, 30 years
32. /s/ Dr. Humbolt C. Mandell – JSC, Mgr. Shuttle Program Control and Advance Programs, 40 years
33. /s/ Donald K. McCutchen – JSC, Project Engineer – Space Shuttle and ISS Program Offices, 33 years
34. /s/ Thomas L. (Tom) Moser – Hdq. Dep. Assoc. Admin. & Director, Space Station Program, 28 years
35. /s/ Dr. George Mueller – Hdq., Assoc. Adm., Office of Space Flight, 6 years
36. /s/ Tom Ohesorge
37. /s/ James Peacock – JSC, Apollo and Shuttle Program Office, 21 years
38. /s/ Richard McFarland – JSC, Mgr. Motion Simulators, 28 years
39. /s/ Joseph E. Rogers – JSC, Chief, Structures and Dynamics Branch, Engr. Directorate, 40 years
40. /s/ Bernard J. Rosenbaum – JSC, Chief Engineer, Propulsion and Power Division, Engr. Dir., 48 years
41. /s/ Dr. Harrison (Jack) Schmitt – JSC, Astronaut Apollo 17, 10 years
42. /s/ Gerard C. Shows – JSC, Asst. Manager, Quality Assurance, 30 years
43. /s/ Kenneth Suit – JSC, Ass’t Mgr., Systems Integration, Space Shuttle, 37 years
44. /s/ Robert F. Thompson – JSC, Program Manager, Space Shuttle, 44 years
45. /s/ Frank Van Renesselaer – Hdq., Mgr. Shuttle Solid Rocket Boosters, 15 years
46. /s/ Dr. James Visentine – JSC Materials Branch, Engineering Directorate, 30 years
47. /s/ Manfred (Dutch) von Ehrenfried – JSC, Flight Controller; Mercury, Gemini & Apollo, MOD, 10 years
48. /s/ George Weisskopf – JSC, Avionics Systems Division, Engineering Dir., 40 years
49. /s/ Al Worden – JSC, Astronaut, Apollo 15, 9 years
50. /s/ Thomas (Tom) Wysmuller – JSC, Meteorologist, 5 years


[url=http://www.infowars.com/50-top-astronauts-scientists-engineers-sign-letter-claiming-extremist-giss-is-turning-nasa-into-a-laughing-stock/]Source[ /url]
edit on 11-4-2012 by RUSSO because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 07:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Titen-Sxull
 

While I agree with you about taking care of the planet, I think it makes a huge difference as to where we are at fault. The whole man-made climate change scheme pretty much declares it okay to rape the planet as long as you are willing to pay for it.
It puts everyone in a position of guilt about something that's not really their fault to begin with. How can you blame the people for using oil if the only alternatives presented to us are too expensive or ineffective. Those carbon-taxes don't end up in the hands environmentalists if you know what I mean.



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 07:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Merlin Lawndart
 


Lol really, A constructed letter from NASA. An arm of the US military. Funny how the only reports that come out negating AGW are from the likes of petrochemical company's, the senate, the US military etc.


There are no major scientific bodies that doubt the. existence of AWG.... It is proven beyond reasonable doubt and yes all those scientitists could be wrong. But for the time being I will trust them. It is science that allows me to sit here tapping in front of a laptop. Science has bought us so much, why should I not heed the warnings of science..

I dont get why peeps get so upset about this. If we reduce CO2 levels and nothing happens so what they planet is cleaner...... Its not a risk worth taking...

edit on 11-4-2012 by purplemer because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 07:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by purplemer
reply to post by Merlin Lawndart
 


Lol really, A constructed letter from NASA. An arm of the US military. Funny how the only reports that come out negating AGW are from the likes of petrochemical company's, the senate, the US military etc.


There are no major scientific bodies that doubt the. existence of AWG.... It is proven beyond reasonable doubt and yes all those scientitists could be wrong. But for the time being I will trust them. It is science that allows me to sit here tapping in front of a laptop. Science has bought us so much, why should I not heed the warnings of science..



science can be used for good and bad- science can be wrong, and when you delve into it, even the "settled" debate on AGW isn't really settled, and much ofit involves computer extrapolations decades into the future- which is just ridiculous to have "faith" in



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 07:45 AM
link   
Luckily in science the only thing that counts are facts and objective evidence...which support the claim that man has a negative impact on our climate. That letter isn't bringing forward any facts that would discredit the climate change movement, they are merely making an ARGUMENT FROM AUTHORITY...a very common fallacy


The hilarious part of this letter? The large majority of people who signed don't even have an education that would allow them to assess the thing properly in the first place
edit on 11-4-2012 by MrXYZ because: (no reason given)


+3 more 
posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 07:48 AM
link   
reply to post by purplemer
 





I dont get why peeps get so upset about this. If we reduce CO2 levels and nothing happens so what


People get upset because it is not fact yet it is used to reduce our standard of living.

Carbon Tax, Crony Capitalism.....

They dont want to fix anything,they want to make money.



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 07:53 AM
link   
reply to post by RUSSO
 


Thanks for posting the names. Lots of good astronauts on there, moon walkers and all (moon warming). I didn't know Chris Kraft was still alive.



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 07:53 AM
link   
Our planet can take care of the global warming and sustain life by causing certain events to take place. Everything has a cycle so we will quickly enter an ice age and someday return back to where we are now. That doesn't concern me. For every reaction there is an equal and opposite reaction.

I'm more concerned by the chemicals we are creating and concentrating them in certain areas. The sewer plants aren't designed to rid the water of the chemicals in them. Many of these chemicals are the medicines we take that are excreted unchanged from the body. With all the people taking these medications they are entering the waters and could cause problems with fish and their foodchain. They were collecting extra meds from people here so they didn't flush them and they didn't go to the dumps. They already know these meds are bad for the environment but won't tell us that they are excreted unchanged from the body....Unless you read the fine print on the paper that comes with your meds that is......

Even the vitamins we excrete can change the environment and can create problems if they are concentrated. Our soap, shampoos, and beauty products also contain chemistry that is a major problem. The environment can handle a little of these things with no problem. The fish can slowly evolve to their presence. Fish can live around oil seeping from the earth and can move away to escape it if it bothers them. Crude oil escaping from the ocean floor occasionally is natural. So why don't the wildlife just move away? the toxins in our streams are confusing them and they just can't tell what is going on.

I'm definitely not an environmentalist and will cut a tree if it needs to go. I see no problems with managing the forests and leaving the small branches for fertilizer for the newly forming trees. I know we need to grow food and raise meat animal. Concentrating the chemicals and overusing them is not wise though. When we poison ourselves we eventually poison the environment. I don't care if we die, I worry about there being a nice place for our offspring three generations from now.

Climate change is real and the trees can't fix the problem because we are harvesting them at high rates to support capitalism. The vikings put us in a mini ice age because they burned the forests to clear the land for farming. That coupled with a possible small comet exploding over England in about 600 AD may have exasperated the change. Our overall actions do affect climate. If it was just the CO2, no problem. Add everything together and see the real picture. Science picks things apart to see what makes them tick. they are separating this into categories and try to push blame on one thing. It's all our actions together that cause problems, not a single thing by itself. That's the biggest flaw of sciences being seperated like they are, nobody can see the big picture.

I know my post will be ignored by most because I have attacked the way of life of most people. It even affects my way of life. I was conditioned by society to ignore nature also. I always liked the woods but thought they would always be there. I found out that this whole area was deforested at one times and that it was full of blizzards and almost uninhabitable except for miners. My home towns were listed among the most polluted sites in America and were under the super fund because of the copper mining that occurred in the past. They were removed from the fund because it can't be fixed, not because they were fixed. They covered the stampsands in some areas and they said that's all they can do. At least Michigan Tech is still searching for some cure because they are from up there.

We have caused a lot of problems by deforesting. Washington DC was a dust bowl once because all the trees were taken out in the center of the country. It cost the Taxpayer moocho bucks to fix that. If it wasn't effecting DC it would never have been fixed. Watch over your local area and be advised that things far away do affect us to. If I change one person's attitude I will have done my job.



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 07:54 AM
link   
nzclimatescience.net...

My view has always been: Warmer temps = more water evaporation = more clouds = COOLER Earth......Which means the Earth has inbuilt safety devices.



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 07:55 AM
link   

As former NASA employees
This tells you all you need to know.. Why should anyone listen to ex employees (none of them an actual climate scientist or even close to being qualified to comment on the subject) Over the observations of real climate scientists working in the field of climate science right now? Using state of the art equipment...

This is total bull# and another lame attempt to discredit real scientists who are finding it harder and harder to get their message out because of this type of thing. If you follow the paper trail back far enough i am sure you will find some right wing think tank is funding this latest crap to further confuse/divide public opinion, it's outrageous!

Here are the latest findings of climate researchers detailing how new findings show that the last ice age was ended by an increase of CO2 which in turn raised global temperatures.

A new, detailed record of past climate change provides compelling evidence that the last ice age was ended by a rise in temperature driven by an increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide.
Stop being dupped by right wing propaganda and educate yourselves on the subject, all tools you need are right at your fingertips.....
www.nature.com...
www.bbc.co.uk...



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 07:58 AM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


I'll be damned, we actually agree on something
Maybe I should investigate what else we agree on instead of judging you on one subject back a while ago.



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 07:59 AM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 





Luckily in science the only thing that counts are facts and objective evidence...which support the claim that man has a negative impact on our climate. That letter isn't bringing forward any facts that would discredit the climate change movement, they are merely making an ARGUMENT FROM AUTHORITY...a very common fallacy The hilarious part of this letter? The large majority of people who signed don't even have an education that would allow them to assess the thing properly in the first place edit on 11-4-2012 by MrXYZ because: (no reason given)


Are you saying that some of the smartest engineers in the world lack the ability to asses the situation?



I think I will take AGW advice from a NASA engineer before I trust the words of scum like Penny Wong.

Carbon tax is a joke....It will achieve nothing but reduce the ALP's deficit.

It will do nothing for the environment.

If the ALP had really wanted to do something about the environment, it would be a "pollution tax".



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 08:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by rickymouse
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


I'll be damned, we actually agree on something
Maybe I should investigate what else we agree on instead of judging you on one subject back a while ago.




Just wanted to make sure people understand that "creating lists with signatures" is not how science works. What's next? Want me to go to 100 scientists and make them sign a list stating that they believe in god...and then claim "that settles it, god exists"?


Also, the climate change we've seen over the past 35 years normally happens over the course of a thousand years, so it's definitely not a "normal cycle". The danger is in the main ocean current being disrupted, this could destroy entire countries as their countries either get flooded or dry out.

People often don't look past their immediate surroundings. Tonga is drowning, certain parts of Africa see record draughts, and the Arctic will be ice free in summer very very soon. In the end, the weather's become a lot more volatile, a trend that will only intensify.

And reducing carbon emissions doesn't automatically mean you have to decrease your standard of living. They just did a study in the UK where they found out that having all homes properly isolated with good windows would save dozens of % of the total energy consumption every year. It wouldn't cost jobs to push this through, and better isolated homes have other benefits too.

Climate change is 100% real and the disinformation tactics by the petroleum industry is sadly misleadi ng a lot of gullible people who don't bother to look up the facts themselves.



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 08:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by OccamAssassin
reply to post by MrXYZ
 





Luckily in science the only thing that counts are facts and objective evidence...which support the claim that man has a negative impact on our climate. That letter isn't bringing forward any facts that would discredit the climate change movement, they are merely making an ARGUMENT FROM AUTHORITY...a very common fallacy The hilarious part of this letter? The large majority of people who signed don't even have an education that would allow them to assess the thing properly in the first place edit on 11-4-2012 by MrXYZ because: (no reason given)


Are you saying that some of the smartest engineers in the world lack the ability to asses the situation?



I think I will take AGW advice from a NASA engineer before I trust the words of scum like Penny Wong.

Carbon tax is a joke....It will achieve nothing but reduce the ALP's deficit.

It will do nothing for the environment.

If the ALP had really wanted to do something about the environment, it would be a "pollution tax".



You do realize that an engineer has no clue about climate and weather, right? A "systems analyst" has no clue about rising seawater levels.

You also don't go to a physicist to get surgery, or do you?


I agree that carbon taxing isn't good, just like taxes it simply makes companies treat polluting as an "expense". The Koch brothers are already dong that for example.

What is needed are draconic fines that make it totally unprofitable to pollute excessively when alternatives are available. You wanna save on some security measure for your oil platform to make a few more bucks? Fine. But if a disaster happens like in the Gulf a while ago, you lose ALL profits for that year...or something along those lines. Right now, the fine BP pays is so ridiculously small, they're still having a near-record year even though they polluted an entire ocean and beaches. What about the tourism outlets that were hit quite badly because of this? What about the long term effects of those chemicals they dumped into the sea?

Draconic fines is the only way to initiate change. And once they're forced to adapt, competition will make sure new innovative ways are found that don't require a drop in living standards. Either way, our living standard shouldn't come at the expense of people in Tonga losing their entire country!!

Also, getting your "science" information (or general news even) from Fox is like looking for a cooking recipe on a car mechanic website
edit on 11-4-2012 by MrXYZ because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 08:22 AM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


Twice now you have mentioned "sea level rises" , Yet I bet you haven't even bothered to think about it !

For instance the Amazon river alone spews out 1 billion tons of sediment into the sea each year, That displaces water, then add all the other rivers that are doing the same ?

Then we have continual coastal erosion which is displacing water ?

Then we have the millions of boats sitting on the ocean, which are displacing water too ?

When you think about this it becomes obvious sea levels MUST rise.
edit on 11-4-2012 by ken10 because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
34
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join