What if man made climate change

[BlasterBates]

Interesting new paper that throws some light on climate change.

Global Warming Story Page - USATODAY.com


http://climategate.nl/wp-content/upl...climate_v3.pdf

[BlasterBates]

When the atlantic cools as it does every few decades what impact will that have on the ice?

That is the Atlantic Mutidecadal Oscillation

http://climaterealists.com/index.php?id=3304

[sasguru]

BB, as you keep posting non-peer reviewed articles and blogs by non-scientists, are you implying that you don't believe in the scientific method and that anyone's opinion is equally valid?

[BlasterBates]

When you do scientific research any paper by an academic should not be ignored. Whereas the established journals are the main source they are not the only source.

It is unlikely that a paper by a layman has any worth unless it has actually been published in a respectable journal, any paper though from someone with a PhD in a scientific subject should be taken seriously, even if it is on their own website.

A PhD is a qualification that demonstrates that you have proven to the academic fraternity that you can conduct research.

This is different from a blogger.

Therefore pclarke is completely wrong when he dimisses a paper simply because it isn't in a journal he approves of.

Professor Easterbrook is not an uninformed blogger, he presents his work at reputable conferences.

In fact it was pclarke that posted a rebuttal about Easterbrook's work from an ill informed blogger.

If he can post a link to a rebuttal from a scientist with a PhD which is a bonafide paper, not necessarily in a journal but a referenceable paper, and it is enough to be on his website, then that would be a valid rebuttal to Easterbrook's work. But he hasn't done that yet.

[sasguru]

When you do scientific research any paper by an academic should not be ignored. Whereas the established journals are the main source they are not the only source.

It is unlikely that a paper by a layman has any worth unless it has actually been published in a respectable journal, any paper though from someone with a PhD in a scientific subject should be taken seriously, even if it is on their own website.

A PhD is a qualification that demonstrates that you have proven to the academic fraternity that you can conduct research.

This is different from a blogger.

Therefore pclarke is completely wrong when he dimisses a paper simply because it isn't in a journal he approves of.

Professor Easterbrook is not an uninformed blogger, he presents his work at reputable conferences.

In fact it was pclarke that posted a rebuttal about Easterbrook's work from an ill informed blogger.

If he can post a link to a rebuttal from a scientist with a PhD which is a bonafide paper, not necessarily in a journal but a referenceable paper, and it is enough to be on his website, then that would be a valid rebuttal to Easterbrook's work. But he hasn't done that yet.

Well you seem to be as confused as usual as your last 2 links were not from Professor Easterbrook who is a Professor of Geology at WWU University.
But it seems from a statement put out by WWU University that his colleagues disagree with him:

Departmental Position Statements

It is possible that he is a lone genius but I serious doubt it.
The reasoning for the WWU department of Geology position given in the link above is the overwhelming evidence they cite - you can follow the links above.

[BlasterBates]

Well your last 2 links were not from Professor Easterbrook who is a Professor of Geology at WWU University.
But it seems from a statement put out by WWU University that his colleagues disagree with him:

Departmental Position Statements
.

Indeed but is a disagreement between scientists, not a disagreement between scientists and uninformed bloggers.

The other paper was from a physicist with a PhD, so again not an uninformed blogger.

[sasguru]

Indeed but is a disagreement between scientists, not a disagreement between scientists and uninformed bloggers.

The other paper was from a physicist with a PhD, so again not an uninformed blogger.

Its misleading to say it's a disagreement between scientists.
Basically the whole department of geology where he works at WWU University is distancing themselves from Professor Easterbrook - it's equivalent to saying they believe he is talking bollux. I believe they did this after allegations were made that he falsified data.

Also you seem to have a blind faith in PhDs - there are PhDs and there PhDs - just like everything else. Many PhDs are time servers who study a minute fraction of a subject and know nothing about wider issues.

As I have said in a previous post, I believe anyone trained in mathematical statistics, even to first degree level, is better placed to evaluate the evidence since this is really an argument about data and what it means.

[BlasterBates]

The only allegations were made by bloggers, and is quite laughable. The "data" is in the open domain. It is a made up story. How could Easterbrook falsify data from another source?

If Easterbrook had falsified data wouldn't you expect the University to have conducted an enquiry, like Michael Mann had to face.

No University would tolerate an academic member of staff falsifying research.

[BlasterBates]

Of course Easterbrook isn't alone

William M. Gray - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Gray is skeptical of current theories of human-induced global warming, which he says is supported by scientists afraid of losing grant funding[5] and promoted by government leaders and environmentalists seeking world government.[6] He believes that humans are not responsible for the warming of the earth and has stated that "We're brainwashing our children."[7]

Professor William Gray is an eminent meteorologist. He pioneered hurricane forecasting in the US.

Fully agree with his statement on grant funding and brain washing.


Here is his agreement with Easterbrook

According to an earlier interview reported by Joel Achenbach, Gray had similarly said that the current warming in the past decades is a natural cycle, driven by a global ocean circulation that manifests itself in the North Atlantic Ocean as the Gulf Stream.[6]

[sasguru]

Of course Easterbrook isn't alone

William M. Gray - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Professor William Gray is an eminent meteorologist. He pioneered hurricane forecasting in the US.

Fully agree with his statement on grant funding and brain washing.


Here is his agreement with Easterbrook

Well at least we're making progress by eliminating bloggers as sources of evidence.

So lets look at the scientific consensus which is quite clear (I think we have to that as neither of us can look at all the primary data):

Scientific opinion on climate change - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It may be that the profs you cite are geniuses who have spotted something the vast majority of other scientists haven't.

Or maybe they're just the usual cranks, eh?