Before Climate Meeting, a Revival of Skepticism

[TomCADem]

Source: NY Times

Just two years ago, a United Nations panel that synthesizes the work of hundreds of climatologists around the world called the evidence for global warming “unequivocal.”

But as representatives of about 200 nations converge in Copenhagen on Monday to begin talks on a new international climate accord, they do so against a background of renewed attacks on the basic science of climate change.

The debate, set off by the circulation of several thousand files and e-mail messages stolen from one of the world’s foremost climate research institutes, has led some who oppose limits on greenhouse gas emissions, and at least one influential country, Saudi Arabia, to question the scientific basis for the Copenhagen talks.

The uproar has threatened to complicate a multiyear diplomatic effort already ensnared in difficult political, technical and financial disputes that have caused leaders to abandon hopes of hammering out a binding international climate treaty this year.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/07/science/earth/07climate.html

---

Just a reminder that like right wing efforts to re-introduce creationism, and oppose the teaching of evolution, the climate change deniers are still a formidable force.

[tabatha]

1. A reasonably fair article.

[rwheeler31]

2. The crap remains. Get a popper scooper.

[Tanelorn]

3. A reasonable response

Listen to a comment from Australia's ABC radio show called The
Science Show. It contains a very reasonable response  to the
hoo haa about the stolen emails.
Here is the link: (it lasts about 13 minutes)

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/scienceshow/stories/2009/2758445.htm 

[fasttense]

4. A revival of skepticism? NO, more like a revival of propaganda from corporations.n/t

[beyond cynical]

5. Actually, both sides are formidable forces and both sides have a financial

interest in the outcome.

Neither side is beholden to the truth and as a result, many do not know what to believe.

[Kali]

7. my what a balanced view you have

:eyes:

"both sides have financial interest"

[karynnj]

8. Absolutely not true

The scientific community is beholden to trying to discover what is true. Their reputations are based on their work and that is their biggest motivator. While there have been isolated scientists would have attempted scams, this is not the norm.

This is the same even handedness used to say that Kerry and the SBVT were equally likely to be wrong - even though ALL the official records backed Kerry and the SBVT were hacks with ties to Bush.

The people paid by Exxon/Mobile and other such companies clearly have a vested interest.

[beyond cynical]

10. So, I take it that you are a climatologist with all of the answers.

Unfortunately, most of us have to sort through the lies and disinformation coming from both sides in order to find the truth. It seems to me that the problem with any form of climatology is the immense factors that are involved with making any form of prediction. Only time will tell if your theory is going to survive and maybe even proven right. Furthermore, I’m sure that only an advanced physicist and/or climatologist will be able to understand it.

Having said that, I am skeptical of the manner in which the alarmists are pushing their side of the argument. They abhor debate and seek to silence and discredit those with differing views. I do not find their tactics to be very convincing at all.

Unlike you, I do not have a complete understanding of the physical and chemical forces that control the planet. Thus, it will take more time for me to arrive at a conclusion.

[Zoeisright]

13. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

:rofl:

Uh huh. I'll go with the 97% of climatologists who know global warming is real, thank you. And here's the wahhhh-bulance number you can call when the true effects of climate change kick in and NOBODY will be a denier:

1-800-BUH-BYE

[beyond cynical]

15. It will not matter to us if it is real or not.

For we will be long gone before any of the effects are experienced. So, what's your hurry...?

[karynnj]

18. The fact is we are experiencing some of the effects already

For many here, who are in there 20s, the effects if we do nothing will be very significant in their lifetimes.

[Quantess]

20. I like your fleur de lis. It reminds me of New Orleans...

Which reminds me of Hurricane Katrina.

Hurricanes, tsunamis, tornadoes, and flooding disasters have sharply increased in the past decade or so, and the increase is directly attributable to climate change / global warming, according to the overwhelming majority of climate scientists.

[karynnj]

17. No I did not claim in any way that I am a climatologist

I am skeptical of the manner in which the oil company paid propagandists are willing to smear the reputation of hundreds of scientists. Many of the people who have been treated by the scientific community as you describe have intentionally distorted information.

My comments were made about the motivations of scientists. Here, I actually have known many scientists and worked with them for two decades. My degrees were in math and economics, but the people I worked with physicists, engineers, chemists etc - and the place was Bell Labs. The excitement of finding something new and a work ethic of checking and rechecking conclusions was the norm. Now, I was not an expert in their discipline, nor have I ever claimed that, but I do have a reasonably good view of how scientists work and that is what I commented on.

Your name is the only thing honest about you - and you are likely incapable of seeing that or you wouldn't have used it. What do you think "cynical" means?

[Zoeisright]

11. Oh please.

What a load of crap. The only side with money in this is the corporations who have gotten rich by polluting the earth and ripping us off - in other words, the deniers.

[WriteDown]

12. I love the word "deniers"

Reminds me of "infidels."

[beyond cynical]

14. Funny...

[Kali]

6. "debate" wasn't set off by stolen correspondence

it was, and has along, been bought and paid for by oil interests and is fed by ignorance and politics of the scientifically illiterate (read that as repukes and their ilk)

[karynnj]

9. Exactly - In case you want the link - here is an excellent Daily Kos diary refuting it

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/11/25/808088/-The-SwiftHack-(ClimateGate)-Scandal:-What-You-Need-to-Know

[Doctor_J]

16. More like "another round of propaganda attempts to muddy the water"

no pun intended. THis is just another variation of "Kerry killed an innocent child in Viet Nam", "Dukakis wants rapists to run the streets", and "Obama has terrorist friends". No more truthful, yet no less believed by the Limbeciles

[Kali]

19. good one!

Limbeciles :rofl: