Home
Articles
Photos
Interviews
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Georgia Tech Recruiting
Dashboard
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Chat
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
General Topics
The Swarm Lounge
Are you now, or have you ever been, a denier of AGW?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="AE 87" data-source="post: 186464" data-attributes="member: 195"><p>FWIW, if you read through this thread, you'll see that there's a pretty significant scientific debate on the significance of human contributions to so-called greenhouse gasses and climate change. The opinion piece you cite refers to a study that assumes a scientific consensus without discussing the serious debate and the failures of the models.</p><p></p><p>Its "news" is that Exxon apparently was aware of the science indicating significant impact without acting on it. However, it obfuscates on the fact that the actual climate change, especially global warming, has not been as drastic as was being predicted. As a result it presents a very biased report and would lead casual readers to a misunderstanding of the situation. For example, the following paragraph comes from the study hyperlinked by jaybookman:</p><p style="margin-left: 20px">Michael Mann, director of the Earth System Science Center at Pennsylvania State University, who has been a frequent target of climate deniers, said that inaction, just like actions, have consequences. When he recently spoke to InsideClimate News, he was unaware of this chapter in Exxon's history.</p><p>Note that this paragraph refers to scientific opposition as "climate deniers." Clearly, it's not serious reporting. Secondly, it does not mention that the reason Michael Mann has been the target of scientific opposition is for his fraudulent "hockey stick" chart. See <a href="http://a-sceptical-mind.com/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-hockey-stick" target="_blank">this link</a>. I just googled and grabbed one that seems to present the data fairly straight forwardly.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="AE 87, post: 186464, member: 195"] FWIW, if you read through this thread, you'll see that there's a pretty significant scientific debate on the significance of human contributions to so-called greenhouse gasses and climate change. The opinion piece you cite refers to a study that assumes a scientific consensus without discussing the serious debate and the failures of the models. Its "news" is that Exxon apparently was aware of the science indicating significant impact without acting on it. However, it obfuscates on the fact that the actual climate change, especially global warming, has not been as drastic as was being predicted. As a result it presents a very biased report and would lead casual readers to a misunderstanding of the situation. For example, the following paragraph comes from the study hyperlinked by jaybookman: [INDENT]Michael Mann, director of the Earth System Science Center at Pennsylvania State University, who has been a frequent target of climate deniers, said that inaction, just like actions, have consequences. When he recently spoke to InsideClimate News, he was unaware of this chapter in Exxon's history.[/INDENT] Note that this paragraph refers to scientific opposition as "climate deniers." Clearly, it's not serious reporting. Secondly, it does not mention that the reason Michael Mann has been the target of scientific opposition is for his fraudulent "hockey stick" chart. See [URL='http://a-sceptical-mind.com/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-hockey-stick']this link[/URL]. I just googled and grabbed one that seems to present the data fairly straight forwardly. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
What's the good word?
Post reply
Home
Forums
General Topics
The Swarm Lounge
Are you now, or have you ever been, a denier of AGW?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top