Comments on: Talking To A Climate Change Skeptic.

By: SteveA

SteveA — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 22:16:50 +0000

You stated “current rise in the temperature of earth” from what I’ve recently seen there’s been a 10 cooling period. And just yesterday I read where they are considering pulling Al Gore’s Nobel Peace Prize. Didn’t read the details but I’m pretty sure it’s due to him being wrong.

Don’t forget in the 1970s they were worried about the return of the ice age. Oh the horror.

I am a GW sceptic, I believe it’s cyclical. However as someone above mentioned we need to stop polluting the earth for our own health reasons not because the earth is going to turn into Venus.

By: I'm a Real_scientist

I'm a Real_scientist — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 18:18:50 +0000

Lizzie,
I first heard about the effect of greenhouse gases on the temperature of planetary atmospheres after Mariner spacecraft went to Venus in 1963 and found it is hotter than an oven.
At that time, a senior scientist explained to me that the earth was vulnerable to heating due to the fossil carbon dioxide being released to the atmosphere. If it wasn’t for CO2, and other gases, the earth would be as cold as the moon.
The current rise in the temperature of earth is consistent with calculations using the extra CO2 now in the air. We’ve added 38% more CO2 than there was 50 years ago.
The science was established 50 years ago. It’s frustrating to see everybody ignoring it when the global weather is changing worldwide.
Fossil fuel companies pay for denying websites who spout mumbo jumbo that can sound scientific if you don’t know the exact details. Go to NOAA, NASA, NCAR, MIT, AIP, web pages if you want to know what the real science is.
Or maybe you chose to believe in science “bias” for the last 150 years, involving thousands of physicists, chemists, biologists. Some of whom look for the signals of global warming in their data; others find it accidentally when they are studying something else.
In summary, the reason for my strong “views”: I know the science and I have grandchildren.

By: Lizzie

Lizzie — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 09:34:27 +0000

I”™m a student currently researching a piece on bias in science in relation to global warming and the arguments for and against it. I was just wandering what has influenced your strong views on the topic? There is evidence that backs up these scientists”™ views that it is not manmade. However each website, book, TV station etc. has a different slant on the topic. Plenty of scientists are against the idea of manmade climate change as well as those who believe it is our fault. Any thoughts on the topic would be helpful as you can understand it such a huge topic to look into.

By: Anabel

Anabel — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 21:42:32 +0000

Lindzen and Singer’s pronouncements at a nonscientific conference are meaningless. If there is ‘observational evidence’ Singer could publish what it is in a scientific journal, where it would be peer reviewed, and could be validated or refuted in later research articles.

These guys are a joke, except that the warming of the globe is serious.