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

a reply to: angryhulk

Banning something is VERY hard to pass in a country that values freedom.

In any case, you need to separate the solutions that the politicians come up with for Climate Change away from the evidence saying if it is real or not. That is a red herring. The evidence stands on its own with or without a viable solution to present.

Yeah, cause we know scientist who support climate change don't get any kind of funding for supporting the narrative. After all, their tenure and future grants are just dependent on it....

If the science is bulletproof, then it should stand up to scrutiny. I really don't have a position one way or the other, but when I see the alarmist side deflecting or refusing to have the work thoroughly examined, it raises flags to me.

originally posted by: Phoenix
a reply to: Krazysh0t

So are you claiming Dyson is on the take?

No, I'm claiming that he is wrong, or at the very least misinformed. I have no idea if he is on the take, I'm not his accountant nor have I seen his finances to make that proclamation.

In many many threads its been demonstrated that believers are financially involved with their false data claims.

Bull#.

Tit for tat I guess. But that's how you guys like to change focus on a thread isn't it?

I have no idea what you are talking about here. All I care about is objective evidence. Nothing you've presented in this thread can be considered objective evidence. It's just one guy's opinion, and he isn't even a SME on that opinion either. So why is it even important? Because he's a famous scientist? Well that's an appeal to authority fallacy (like I've said twice already now).

So is Dyson on the take?

Stop putting words in my mouth.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: angryhulk

Banning something is VERY hard to pass in a country that values freedom.

In any case, you need to separate the solutions that the politicians come up with for Climate Change away from the evidence saying if it is real or not. That is a red herring. The evidence stands on its own with or without a viable solution to present.

So freedom, over endangering our planet and future generations? (providing man-made 'accelerated' climate change is real). The government make decisions for the benefit of the people, you are made to believe. "Tax it" they said, "the people want freedom".

originally posted by: Edumakated
If the science is bulletproof, then it should stand up to scrutiny. I really don't have a position one way or the other, but when I see the alarmist side deflecting or refusing to have the work thoroughly examined, it raises flags to me.

And where exactly have you seen a refusal from Climate scientists to let their work be peer reviewed?

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I give you a link and a quote upthread that shows Dyson has been studying climate change far longer than most and you disregard.

Here it is again,

At America's Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Dyson was looking at the climate system before it became a hot political issue, over 25 years ago.

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.

We could just listen to guys like David Suzuki. He's all about man made climate change.
But then again he's got a degree in zoology.

Let's see, the science of the interaction of heat with matter.
Listen to the physicist?
Listen to the zoo keeper?

Hmm, tough choice.
I say the physicist should at least be heard before he is dismissed.

originally posted by: Phoenix
As an adherent to the thought that Climate Change is a made up problem used in an attempt to gain monetary benefit and control of the populace to government authority - what Freeman Dyson has said is music to my ears.

I am wondering how the Climate Change believers are going to impeach Freeman Dyson's take on this subject as they have with everyone else holding a contrary view.

Oh jesus I'm on my back legs in the air I think I'm going to wet myself......why?

Well, one day you skeptics will learn how to read properly instead of cherry picking and coming to the wrong conclusion !

Dyson agrees that there is anthropogenic global warming due to the increased carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels

Go on check it out!

What he disagrees with and hence the "wrong side" bit is that he believes it is not as bad as it is made out and that there are other things that should be concentrated on. It would seem he bases this on the climate models (from 10 years ago ) that are inaccurate. He is entitled to his opinion but he forgets that todays models bear no resemblance to even those from 10 years ago. What he also forgets is that there isn't one model but lots of models written by different groups world wide. Every single one of these gets tuned and adjusted as more information is collected. Every single one shows the climate is getting worse. In fact they are converging !!!!! DUH

Also remember just because he's a nuclear physicist does not make him an expert as a climatologist. He has as much ability as anyone else with an education. Like mine for example, an honours degree in Electronics and an IQ of 136 but I would never tell anyone else who is an expert their field that they are wrong. That's ignorant and dumb. I take a consensus of opinion from the experts and in this case 96% of climate experts say we are the cause and it's going to get much worse.

a reply to: Phoenix

So since he looked into it 25 years ago he must be right?

You think he was the only one looking at it 25 years ago?

originally posted by: angryhulk

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: angryhulk

Banning something is VERY hard to pass in a country that values freedom.

In any case, you need to separate the solutions that the politicians come up with for Climate Change away from the evidence saying if it is real or not. That is a red herring. The evidence stands on its own with or without a viable solution to present.

So freedom, over endangering our planet and future generations? (providing man-made 'accelerated' climate change is real). The government make decisions for the benefit of the people, you are made to believe. "Tax it" they said, "the people want freedom".

Well that's the problem with trying to mix scientific research with government. Science can only prevent it's findings. It's up to the politicians in the government to either accept it and if they accept try to figure out a way to do something about it while not violating the principles of the government they represent. This is why you need to separate the science from the politics. All that matters it the objective evidence for or against the hypothesis/theory.

originally posted by: Phoenix
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I give you a link and a quote upthread that shows Dyson has been studying climate change far longer than most and you disregard.

Here it is again,

At America's Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Dyson was looking at the climate system before it became a hot political issue, over 25 years ago.

So? I've been studying Climate Change for a while as well. I'm still not an SME on it though.

originally posted by: Bluntone22

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.

We could just listen to guys like David Suzuki. He's all about man made climate change.
But then again he's got a degree in zoology.

Let's see, the science of the interaction of heat with matter.
Listen to the physicist?
Listen to the zoo keeper?

Hmm, tough choice.
I say the physicist should at least be heard before he is dismissed.

You can't accuse the climate side of the debate of making an appeal to authority fallacy if they never even brought the guy up to begin with. Show me where someone sourced David Suzuki when talking about climate change and you'd have a point, but until you do you have just presented a rather dumb strawman fallacy.

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: Phoenix

So since he looked into it 25 years ago he must be right?

You think he was the only one looking at it 25 years ago?

No but he provably pioneered the multidisciplinary study of climate - so yes I'd say he definitely is an SME on the subject.

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

Link

a reply to: Phoenix
bad post

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I think it is because he said follow the money and that he is a democrat, so that must mean he can't be wrong.

Don't be silly, most democrats are wrong.

This is just a guy with an opinion. (I just wonder if the 97% are all climatologists?)

a reply to: network dude

Scientific consensus: Earth's climate is warming

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. In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position. The following is a partial list of these organizations, along with links to their published statements and a selection of related resources.

That good enough for you?

Wasn't Dyson on a book tour when most of the comments were made? Source

He doesn't have to be "on the take" ... he's just wrong, or more accurately, the way his words are being twisted here is wrong.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: network dude

Scientific consensus: Earth's climate is warming

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. In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position. The following is a partial list of these organizations, along with links to their published statements and a selection of related resources.

That good enough for you?

That was debunked a long time ago..

www.breitbart.com...

www.populartechnology.net...

I think it is dangerous to politicize this issue. Politics isn't about right or wrong or facts and fiction.

Politics is about opinion.

The fact that most followers on either side are letting their opinions filter the science is troubling.

a reply to: Phoenix

Changing climate is normal, and caused by changes in solar activity, which is cyclical. Liberals will politicize anything if they think it will benefit them. Watch for boxers vs. briefs to be a political hot topic one of these days.