Comments on: The Alliance for Climate Education begins ambitious campaign to educate America’s youth about Climate Change http://climateprogress.org/2009/05/09/6457/ The Latest on Climate Science, Solutions, and Politics Sun, 22 Nov 2009 05:48:27 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: Tomas http://climateprogress.org/2009/05/09/6457/#comment-50219 Tomas Tue, 12 May 2009 03:48:00 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/?p=6457#comment-50219 Taking the approach of trying to silence those who disagree or question global warming is not working. Nothing is being done and people are less concerned about it than they were ten years ago. If you think this debate is about science, you are wrong; it's about economics and social policy and whatever the science says is not going to help. BTW, I am not on your side. I don't dispute the temperature record, but do question our ability model the future climate and to confound that with predicting the economic consequences that allegedly follow. Furthermore, there is nothing you can do. Bjorn Lomborg is right; mitigation is a better approach. Kyoto was a complete failure and even if it had worked, it's effect on warming would be imperceptible. You can refuse to listen to the "deniers", but it won't help you. Taking the approach of trying to silence those who disagree or question global warming is not working. Nothing is being done and people are less concerned about it than they were ten years ago. If you think this debate is about science, you are wrong; it’s about economics and social policy and whatever the science says is not going to help. BTW, I am not on your side. I don’t dispute the temperature record, but do question our ability model the future climate and to confound that with predicting the economic consequences that allegedly follow. Furthermore, there is nothing you can do. Bjorn Lomborg is right; mitigation is a better approach. Kyoto was a complete failure and even if it had worked, it’s effect on warming would be imperceptible. You can refuse to listen to the “deniers”, but it won’t help you.

]]> By: Gail http://climateprogress.org/2009/05/09/6457/#comment-50159 Gail Tue, 12 May 2009 01:55:45 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/?p=6457#comment-50159 THANKS JOE! I'm so glad you did that. I was exhausted just thinking about having to wade into the nuances of the London court decision. "Sharply rebuked?" Oh, pulease! THANKS JOE! I’m so glad you did that. I was exhausted just thinking about having to wade into the nuances of the London court decision. “Sharply rebuked?” Oh, pulease!

]]> By: caerbannog http://climateprogress.org/2009/05/09/6457/#comment-49997 caerbannog Mon, 11 May 2009 20:08:21 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/?p=6457#comment-49997 EMTguy said, <i> ....is refuted by tens of thousands of scientists world-wide. </i> Name some. And list their qualifications. Note: Before you wave around the OISM petition or something similar, remember that engineers are not climate scientists. The same holds true for medical doctors, dentists, and veterinarians. EMTguy said,

….is refuted by tens of thousands of scientists world-wide.

Name some. And list their qualifications. Note: Before you wave around the OISM petition or something similar, remember that engineers are not climate scientists. The same holds true for medical doctors, dentists, and veterinarians.

]]> By: EMTguy http://climateprogress.org/2009/05/09/6457/#comment-49986 EMTguy Mon, 11 May 2009 19:45:10 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/?p=6457#comment-49986 OK, Nancy bombs out. Gail, are you up to naming some of the "lies?" I'm reminded of The Church examining Galileo. Joe, if you are not receptive to dissent, by all means "trash it." Then, the true value of this blog is verified. [<em>JR: I love dissent. That's what I mostly do. But what I don't do is disinformation. That's what you do, which is why you're now on moderation. The job of disinformers is to confuse the uninformed and waste the time of those who are informed. That's why we don't put up with it here. BTW, Galileo was the scientist struggling to tell the truth against an ideological-based status-quo power structure, so I'm afraid you have the analogy exactly backwards.</em>] OK, Nancy bombs out.

Gail, are you up to naming some of the “lies?” I’m reminded of The Church examining Galileo.

Joe, if you are not receptive to dissent, by all means “trash it.” Then, the true value of this blog is verified.

[JR: I love dissent. That's what I mostly do. But what I don't do is disinformation. That's what you do, which is why you're now on moderation. The job of disinformers is to confuse the uninformed and waste the time of those who are informed. That's why we don't put up with it here.

BTW, Galileo was the scientist struggling to tell the truth against an ideological-based status-quo power structure, so I'm afraid you have the analogy exactly backwards.]

]]> By: Gail http://climateprogress.org/2009/05/09/6457/#comment-49974 Gail Mon, 11 May 2009 19:22:13 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/?p=6457#comment-49974 I'm with Nancy. It is impossible and unnecessary to detail the denier nonsense in the post because the entire thing is riddled with lies. And here's the main thing. There isn't an original thought in it. It looks like it was lifted from some formulaic source titled "Standard Denier Talking Points for Dummies who Can't Think for Themselves and Can't Admit AGW Exists Because Then Their Ideology Would be Undermined and Their Heads Would Explode." Trash it, Joe, plz! I’m with Nancy. It is impossible and unnecessary to detail the denier nonsense in the post because the entire thing is riddled with lies. And here’s the main thing. There isn’t an original thought in it. It looks like it was lifted from some formulaic source titled “Standard Denier Talking Points for Dummies who Can’t Think for Themselves and Can’t Admit AGW Exists Because Then Their Ideology Would be Undermined and Their Heads Would Explode.”

Trash it, Joe, plz!

]]> By: Nancy http://climateprogress.org/2009/05/09/6457/#comment-49968 Nancy Mon, 11 May 2009 19:11:54 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/?p=6457#comment-49968 I don't feed trolls. I don’t feed trolls.

]]> By: EMTguy http://climateprogress.org/2009/05/09/6457/#comment-49948 EMTguy Mon, 11 May 2009 18:34:29 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/?p=6457#comment-49948 Nancy - Please detail the "denier nonsense" in my post. Nancy -

Please detail the “denier nonsense” in my post.

]]> By: Nancy http://climateprogress.org/2009/05/09/6457/#comment-49906 Nancy Mon, 11 May 2009 17:12:12 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/?p=6457#comment-49906 EMT Guy: I hope Joe removes your post. It is full of denier nonsense. We must teach our children the facts about climate change, both at home and in schools. Denying children the information they need to understand the importance of caring for our home planet is no less than a sin. I am pleased that our town's schools teach about climate and energy. Nancy EMT Guy:

I hope Joe removes your post. It is full of denier nonsense.

We must teach our children the facts about climate change, both at home and in schools. Denying children the information they need to understand the importance of caring for our home planet is no less than a sin. I am pleased that our town’s schools teach about climate and energy.

Nancy

]]> By: EMTguy http://climateprogress.org/2009/05/09/6457/#comment-49837 EMTguy Mon, 11 May 2009 14:39:00 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/?p=6457#comment-49837 The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), yet to be ratified by the United States, confers special rights to children. None of the rights specified in the Convention include the right of children to be lied to in school. The teaching of anthropogenic climate change (ACC) as a fact based on "settled science" when indeed it is not settled science should be a crime. Even without the UNCRC, common sense dictates that serious misleading of schoolchildren in matters of this magnitude should be forbidden. A scientific theory becomes settled science when it has been repeatedly proven to be true. The claim that ACC is "settled" because a "consensus" of scientists say so is preposterous. Consensus is a political, not scientific, term. Besides, consensus in this case is voiced by the 52 core scientists of the IPCC and is refuted by tens of thousands of scientists world-wide. The vaunted collection of computer models produced by the IPCC lies in shambles for the simple reason that they are incapable of backcasting the actual climate of the last decade which has experienced no warming and some actual cooling while CO2 levels continue to rise. In the United Kingdom, the manifold lies in Al Gore's "Inconvenient Truth" were not treated kindly by the Courts. The edict that the slide show be shown to all school children in the UK was sharply rebuked by the High Court which ordered that the film not be shown unless accompanied by material that exposed and corrected the lies. It is yet to be seen whether the courts in this country would allow the teaching of unproven pseudo-science in public schools. I would certainly hope not. The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), yet to be ratified by the United States, confers special rights to children. None of the rights specified in the Convention include the right of children to be lied to in school. The teaching of anthropogenic climate change (ACC) as a fact based on “settled science” when indeed it is not settled science should be a crime. Even without the UNCRC, common sense dictates that serious misleading of schoolchildren in matters of this magnitude should be forbidden.

A scientific theory becomes settled science when it has been repeatedly proven to be true. The claim that ACC is “settled” because a “consensus” of scientists say so is preposterous. Consensus is a political, not scientific, term. Besides, consensus in this case is voiced by the 52 core scientists of the IPCC and is refuted by tens of thousands of scientists world-wide.

The vaunted collection of computer models produced by the IPCC lies in shambles for the simple reason that they are incapable of backcasting the actual climate of the last decade which has experienced no warming and some actual cooling while CO2 levels continue to rise.

In the United Kingdom, the manifold lies in Al Gore’s “Inconvenient Truth” were not treated kindly by the Courts. The edict that the slide show be shown to all school children in the UK was sharply rebuked by the High Court which ordered that the film not be shown unless accompanied by material that exposed and corrected the lies.

It is yet to be seen whether the courts in this country would allow the teaching of unproven pseudo-science in public schools. I would certainly hope not.

]]> By: caerbannog http://climateprogress.org/2009/05/09/6457/#comment-49819 caerbannog Mon, 11 May 2009 14:00:43 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/?p=6457#comment-49819 Just wanted to post a followup with an apology to oxnardprof. I read his post in too much haste and misinterpreted his students' misunderstandings as his own. So I'd like to amend my earlier post to read, "looks like oxnardprof's *students* need to review their grammar-school math". Just wanted to post a followup with an apology to oxnardprof. I read his post in too much haste and misinterpreted his students’ misunderstandings as his own. So I’d like to amend my earlier post to read, “looks like oxnardprof’s *students* need to review their grammar-school math”.

]]>