DRUGI DOM

Rade volje tudi tukaj prilimam linkec na zanimiv dokumentarec: The Great Global Warming Swindle

YouTube Video (za trajnost linka ne odgovarjam:)

LOL predvidevam, da za kredibilnost tudi ne

http://www.celsias.com/blog/2007/03/11/the-great-global-warming-swindle/
http://inthegreen.typepad.com/blog/2007/03/deconstructing_.html
http://reasic.wordpress.com/2007/03/10/the-great-global-warming-swindle-questions-answered/

A bi znal povzet argumente z lastnimi besedami in jamčit kredibilnost z lastnim imenom?

tako kot ti za tisto zbirko norcev?

A Leading US climate scientist is considering legal action after he says he was duped into appearing in a Channel 4 documentary that claimed man-made global warming is a myth. Carl Wunsch, professor of physical oceanography at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said the film, The Great Global Warming Swindle, was ‘grossly distorted’ and ‘as close to pure propaganda as anything since World War Two’.

He says his comments in the film were taken out of context and that he would not have agreed to take part if he had known it would argue that man-made global warming was not a serious threat.

adijo kredibilnost

tim ball, še en, ki nastopa v “dokumentarcu”:

Whatever one may feel about Tim Ball’s denial of climate change science, newspapers ought to report factual summaries of authors’ credentials. You note that he “was the first Climatology PhD in Canada and worked as a Professor of Climatology at the University of Winnipeg for 28 years”. Ball received a PhD in Geography in the UK in 1982, on a topic in historical climatology. Canada already had PhDs in climatology, and it is important to recognize them and their research. Examples include Kenneth Hare, a well-respected Professor at McGill, who received his PhD in 1950, also in the UK. Climatologist Andre Robert (PhD from McGill, 1965) conducted research that laid the groundwork in atmospheric models and climate. Timothy Oke, a leader in the study of urban climate, received his PhD from McMaster in 1967. According to Ball’s website, he was not a climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg for 28 years. And how could he have? He did not even have an entry-level PhD until 1983, that would allow even Assistant Professor status. During much of the 28 years cited, he was a junior Lecturer who rarely published, and then spent 8 years as a geography professor. His work does not show any evidence of research regarding climate and atmosphere and the few papers he has published concern other matters. There are great gains to be made in science from conjectures and refutations, but sometimes denial is nothing more than denial.

http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2006/06/dear_tim_ball_sue_me.php

robert, kako se kaj počutiš, ko ugledne znanstvenike označuješ za šarlatane? je to mehanizem za utrjevanje samozavesti ali zgolj igraš hudičevega odvetnika? zgleda, da tudi tega ne boš znal povzeti z lastnimi besedami ;)

A se ti podpišeš – recimo, glede zgornjega citata – pod trditev, da se bo v Sloveniji povprečna temperatura do leta 2020 povišala za najmanj dodatnih 0.9°C (0.6°C/decado) in do leta 2030 za dodatnih 1.5°C?

jaz se nimam kaj podpisovati, ker si niti pod razno ne domišljam, da imam o poročilu IPCC-ja kar smiselnega in relevantnega za pripomniti. vidiš, to je tista osnovna razlika med mano in tabo.

robert je pristaš teorije zarote, ki jo v zvezi z globalnim segrevanjem režira IPCC.

Tisti ki delajo pri IPCC imajo potrebo, da delajo paniko, ker s tem prihajajo vedno večja sredstva na njihov račun etc.

Kakšna pa je definicija neodvisnega znanstvenika? Če je plačan od države, a to slučajno pomeni da je neodvisen?

in kakšna je definicija panike? in kako si upaš trditi, da gre za paniko? si poročilo sploh prebral?

“zagotovo je mogoče sklepati, da je bolj neodvisen…”

uau, takim argumentom pa kar ne morem oporekati… vse skupaj je tako jasno in ideološko neobremenjeno, zihr
si se sam tega spomnu? manjkajo nam tako sveži pogledi na te resno pereče probleme modernega sveta.

termometer ne pove, zakaj se stvari segrevajo…

ne trdim nič, ste pa levičarji hecni: po eni strani kritizirate goreče vernike (navadno kristjane…), po drugi strani pa
verjamete v stvari, katerih obstoj ne morete dokazati… kar je vera

Najhujši so tisti verniki, ki verujejo v “nevidno roko” svobodnega trga in njene preroke: Hayeka, Friedmana itd…

Tudi če še ne moremo popolnoma dokazati nečesa, oziroma če ne obstaja znanstveno soglasje o neki stvari, ki ima potencial, da uniči naš planet – to še ne pomeni, da se nam ni dolžnost pripravljati na najbolj črn scenarij.

Preberi si nekaj o tem:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precautionary_principle

Pa globalno segrevanje ni takšen primer. O vplivu človeka na toplogredne pline namreč obstaja širok konsenz “nepodkupljivih” znanstvenikov.

ne, termometer tudi o ciklih ne govori, vse to dela človek…

fanta, saj pravim, da ne upam ničesar trditi, samo izpostavljam pa zanimive vzorce vedenja pri levičarjih…
povsem razumem in se zavedam problemov, katere izpostavljate, sporen mi je le način, kako argumentirate
vzroke in način reševanja teh problemov…

predvsem ste hecni zato, ker je večina vaših predlogov nezdružljivih in neuresničljivih… pri tem ne govorim
le o globalnem segrevanju, ampak o celotnih levih idejah za reševanje problemov tega sveta…