curiousexplorer
Posts: 77
Joined: 2/1/2007
Status: offline
|
"They should be. He makes his living writing fiction, fantasy, and tall tales."
Hence the topic of human influenced global warming and the industry it supports. He knows it when he sees it.
"So he's a medical doctor. I guess that makes him a scientist, huh? "
Um yes.What do you think a medical doctor is, and what do you think they study? One could not graduate as a medical doctor without being proficient in the scientific method. You've blown any scientific credibility you thought you had with that one comment.
"Oh, and the part about the "experiment" cracked me up! I wonder what I could get away with if I used that excuse....
"I'm sorry officer, but when I robbed that bank it was an experiment!" "
Did you bother to read what you quoted? "and so as an experiment Crichton informed another professor of his idea and submitted Orwell's paper as his own." ". He informed another professor of his idea, so not only was it clearly done as an experiment and not cheating, but it was supervised (even if only lossely) by a university staff member. It shows intelligence, a need for evidence to support ideas, respect for procedures and the acknowledgement of consequences to actions. You've shown the guy thinks scientifically.
"If those on the left are wrong (which I sincerely hope that mainstream science is wrong, but I suspect from my own research they are right) I will be very happy about that. No one wants to see human beings go through a changed planet and perhaps go extinct.... "
What do you call mainstream science? Is that media science? There are many "mainstream scientists" without media commitments or political appointments who cannot find any evidence to support humanity as a cause for global warming. Then there is the fact that the fatal flaws of the original theory have never been addressed, and that no model or theory has been able to prove a link to people being capable of effecting climate on that scale.
Humanity has always thought the universe revolved around us, it is a throwback to past days to see something and instantly assume it is happening for humanity, or because of something we have done (sinned).
"Crichton is an M.D. A quick check of his own website indicates he has never authored a peer reviewed paper of any sort. It should be fairly clear from that that Crichton is not now and has never been a scientist. "
I know a few people who claim to be scientists and have submitted numerous articles in peer reviewed publications, but who have absolutely no regard for the scientific method or evidence. And yes the green areas are full of them, there intent counts much more than performance or proof. What makes a scientist is thinking scientifically, not ones job, courses, or papers. The fact he is a M.D. proves he is a scientist, or at the very least was.
"I do find this odd though, why should the opinion of an M.D. with a bachelor's in anthropology be considered more valid on this subject than the majority of atmospheric physicists and climatologists who are in widespread agreement that the Earth is warming and human activity is causing at least some of the increase?"
Well first of all there are many scientists who are still requiring proof and evidence, but they are not popular. They are not good for ratings on tv or radio, and they are no good for getting research grants. The anthropology helps with understanding how people work, which is the most important component of human influenced climate change. As for the scientific community, I've always found it amusing that the scientists with the longest view give the least support for humanity causing global warming. They are the ones who recognise the trends and possibilites of the earth, instead of fearing the imaginations of one insignificant species.
DomKen,
If I were you I'd grab the original theory and the commentary on it from that time, including where the idea comes from and it's fatal flaws (yes, fatal flaws, think about that). If help was still required a chemistry and physicts tutor would be in order, but not to teach anything about climate change, just the smaller pieces of the puzzle. At that point your questions should be answered and you should be waiting for evidence to support the abandoned theory. See you there.
"They're from 2003. Ergo they're obsolete. You have to follow climate science month to month. Unforunately, most people aren't capable of that, so they accept whatever viewpoint suits their prejudices. "
Actually you have to follow "climate science" of thousands of years, the month to month media circus is quite pointless, especially since the "cures" never add up to having any impact on the "immediate disaster". People in the 1980's were commenting on the industries and follow on effects of human influenced global warming and that the benefits were worth pursuing even though the science behind it was junk. Governments and green groups know full well about the lack of evidence to support their position, but they do not care as they see it as an opportunity to acheive other goals.
"Sure we do. We're arguing against this man as a "scientist" because he has no credentials. He's no more of an authority on the subject than you or I. I'm not wasting my time with his drivel. "
First of all he has credentials, you have just chosen to dismiss them. Second if he has no more authority than you, and his drivel isn't worth the time, what does that say about your drivel?
"where he argued that the jury was out on anthrogenic causes of global warming. Why is he competent to make this statement? Is a working atmospheric physicist or climatologist? "
It doesn't matter who he is, the jury was and still is out because the atmospheric physicists and climatologists have no evidence to support humanities influence on the climate, and because so many have used bogus information in the past to push other agendas.
"Time will tell soon enough who is on the right side of this one."
Actually by that time it wont matter. The humanity causes climate change people have stopped make ten year doomsday predictions, they have gotten smarter and now aim for 50 or 100 years. That way they'll be dead and it won't matter if they are wrong, they'll still get the media time while they are alive. It is an industry.
|
RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I hav... - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread