It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Climate scientists are losing the public debate on global warming

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 12:17 AM
link   
Green campaigners and climate scientists are losing the public debate over global warming, one of the movement's leading proponents has admitted.


Dr James Hansen, director of the Nasa Goddard Institute for Space Studies, who first made warnings about climate change in the 1980s, said that public scepticism about the threat of man-made climate change has increased despite the growing scientific consensus.

Critics, however, insist the public have become desensitised by decades of dire warnings by climate scientists.

Dr Benny Peiser, director of sceptical think tank The Global Warming Policy Foundation, said governments and the public had "more urgent problems to deal with" than tackling climate change.

"In reality the backlash against climate change has very little to do with the sceptics. We will take credit for instilling some debate but it is mainly an economic issue. Climate change is not seen as being urgent any more.

"James Hensen has been making predictions about climate change since the 1980s. When people are comparing what is happening now to those predictions, they can see they fail to match up."

The Telegraph


It is true that climate change scientists are losing the debate. If they cry wolf again and again but are then proved wrong, why are they surprised that they are losing credibility?

For instance, one global scientists, James Lovelock, has warned that billions will die before the end of this century and only the Arctic will be fit for human habitation. Yet climate scientists can't even accurately predict 10 years ahead.

In the 70s the big greenie scare was global freezing. Now it is global warming.




edit on 27-4-2012 by ollncasino because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 12:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by ollncasino
In the 70s the big greenie scare was global freezing. Now it is global warming.


They are both right in the long term. Global warming which is occurring at this time, will lead to global freezing. It is a cycle that has been going on since earths birth, and will continue for its life cycle.

The argument I believe is weather or not humans and their impact on the planet are the cause of an accelerated version of this cycle.
edit on 27-4-2012 by mileysubet because: awesome dog by the way



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 12:27 AM
link   
reply to post by ollncasino
 


Unfortunately the public are not all versed in climate science and big corporations such as coal, oil and gas energy companies have spent billions trying to sway public view. This article shows just how successful they have been at it.


edit on 27-4-2012 by polarwarrior because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 12:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by polarwarrior
Unfortunately the public are not all versed in climate science and big corporations such as coal, oil and gas energy companies have spent billions trying to sway public view. This article shows just how successful they have been at it.


That may be true, but isn't it also true that climate scienists are using models that are very inaccurate?

Isn't it true, whether they are right or wrong in their predictions, that the models and conclusions they are drawing don't stand up to scientific scrutiny?



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 12:47 AM
link   
reply to post by ollncasino
 



Originally posted by ollncasino
That may be true, but isn't it also true that climate scienists are using models that are very inaccurate?


Not being a climate scientist I'm not qualified to say, and neither are you I'm guessing. But the vast majority of scientists agree that they have been proven accurate.


Originally posted by ollncasino
Isn't it true, whether they are right or wrong in their predictions, that the models and conclusions they are drawing don't stand up to scientific scrutiny?


The models have stood up to daily scrutiny for many years by some of the best scientists on the planet. A major goal of any scientist is to try and be critical of their own theories, that's what critical thinking is.
Once a new theory is discovered the rest of the scientific community will try to prove it wrong. So far climate science has stood up to this rigorous process.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 12:48 AM
link   
What's the article last week about them wanting to burn deniers' houses down? That's a lot of fires.


Oh yeah...

"Let's start keeping track of them now, and when the famines come, let's make them pay. Let's let their houses burn until the innocent are rescued. Let's swap their safe land for submerged islands. Let's force them to bear the cost of rising food prices."

As talked of on Yahoo




The point that he was trying to make was the people who have denied the man-made nature of global warming have been extremely detrimental to the global population at large... more

DailyMail




ATS Thread on it




Burn This:

They are caught in lies and it's come down to threats now?
edit on 27-4-2012 by dreamingawake because: sp



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 01:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by polarwarrior
The models have stood up to daily scrutiny for many years by some of the best scientists on the planet. So far climate science has stood up to this rigorous process.


Over 30,000 American Scientists are of the opinion that Global Warming doesn't stand up to scientific scrutiny.

Digital Journal



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 07:03 AM
link   
Originally posted by polarwarrior
reply to post by ollncasino


The models have stood up to daily scrutiny for many years by some of the best scientists on the planet.

Complete rubbish. The IPCC's models are so infantile in their simplicity that they can only be described as misrepresentations of the climate-system. The AGW-theory has not really being subjected to any critical scientific testing at any point or stage in its development, but apparently has been allowed up to now to just pay lip-service to the scientific method and go through the motions of observing it, AGW-theory is not obtaining any objective feedback from the real world and is therefore stagnant. And anyone who dares to challenge, or even doubt the sacred tenets of AGW-theory is quickly branded a climate-change denialist and dismissed as an oil-industry shill regardless of what his arguments might actually be.
edit on 27-4-2012 by Nathan-D because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 07:12 AM
link   
reply to post by ollncasino
 


sounds like pulling the sympathy card.

australia has a carbon tax (imo useless but its still meant to fight global whatever). green cars are everywhere, or atleast greener cars, qantas thinking about having bio-diesel powered aircrafts i believe.

solar panels wind turbines natural gas.. the world is already changing slowly, they cant expect it to happen overnight



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 07:32 AM
link   





That's a great news! I got NASA graphs which shows the Earth in fact cooling down, but Al Gore never talks about those graphs! I know the global warming is a scam to introduce carbon tax. I am glad that people don't buy it!
S&F!



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 09:22 AM
link   
The title of the thread mentions global warming but the quoted article talks about climate change. Are they not two different things?



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 09:30 AM
link   
global warming extremists won't even take questions anymore because thier beliefs have been totally debunked and they have been caught committing huge fraud. (ask NASA) lol.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 12:44 PM
link   
Let's keep score,
104 degrees April 26th 2012
Central Texas.

1 point Global Warming
0 points Oil Company disinfo




top topics



 
5

log in

join