| Author |
Message |
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
 Mon Feb 05, 2007 6:59 pm Professor Says Global Warming Fears Are a Deception |
|
| Quote: | | Global Warming, as we think we know it, doesn't exist. And I am not the only one trying to make people open up their eyes and see the truth. But few listen, despite the fact that I was the first Canadian Ph.D. in Climatology and I have an extensive background in climatology, especially the reconstruction of past climates and the impact of climate change on human history and the human condition.�Few listen, even though I have a Ph.D, (Doctor of Science) from the University of London, England and was a climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg.� . For some reason (actually for many), the World is not listening. Here is why. |
http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/global-warming020507.htm
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Mon Feb 05, 2007 7:03 pm |
|
Good for the professor.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
TrekkieMage
Office Junkie
Joined: 17 Oct 2004
Posts: 5335
Location: Hiding
|
| Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:25 pm |
|
My two issues with this:
1. It's not a peer-reviewed scientific journal. I respect his opinion, but I can't look at this and see anything more than an opinion without it being in a journal.
2. Why hasn't anyone else said anything? If this really is the truth, why does he seem to be the only one (or at least one of few)? He makes a point about the Sierra Club and such - but they're not making record profits. They're non-profit organizations. Oil companies have a vested interesting in global warming not existing, and they'll do anything to have papers published that "prove" it. And a lot of the scientists who've come out against global warming also have strong ties to the oil companies.
Now, if something were to come out in a peer-reviewed journal that showed stong evidence against global warming, I'll believe it. But one scientist on the verge of retirement writing in a free-press newspaper isn't going to convince me.
|
|
|
WeAz
Commodore
Joined: 03 Apr 2004
Posts: 1519
Location: Where you aren't
|
| Mon Feb 05, 2007 9:17 pm |
|
If this was published in a real scientific journal, (They have incredibly strict requirements for publishment) I would give it thought. But for now I'm inclined to think he has outside motives.
|
|
|
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
| Mon Feb 05, 2007 9:20 pm |
|
All I know is, he has a PhD in Climatology (although it is Canadian), and is saying what I want to hear. Therefore, I agree with him and find him credible.
|
|
|
TrekkieMage
Office Junkie
Joined: 17 Oct 2004
Posts: 5335
Location: Hiding
|
| Mon Feb 05, 2007 9:47 pm |
|
| Puck wrote: | | All I know is, he has a PhD in Climatology (although it is Canadian), and is saying what I want to hear. Therefore, I agree with him and find him credible. |
And if he had a PhD in Climatology and wasn't saying what you wanted to hear?
|
|
|
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
| Mon Feb 05, 2007 9:50 pm |
|
I wouldn't bother reading the article, and discount him.
It is so hard to find a PhD climatologist who doesn't believe the whole global warming thing. Now though, when all of the liberals in my government class bring up the effects of humans on the environment, I can hand them this. 
Seriously though, I have heard so much stuff from 'credible' sources on both sides of this argument that I have no idea what to believe. That's why I'm just going to go with my original position.
|
|
|
WeAz
Commodore
Joined: 03 Apr 2004
Posts: 1519
Location: Where you aren't
|
| Mon Feb 05, 2007 10:29 pm |
|
I would the side with the more credible sources.
|
|
|
Theresa
Lux Mihi Deus
Joined: 17 Jun 2001
Posts: 27256
Location: United States of America
|
| Mon Feb 05, 2007 10:44 pm |
|
| Puck wrote: | | All I know is, he has a PhD in Climatology (although it is Canadian), and is saying what I want to hear. Therefore, I agree with him and find him credible. |
I love honesty. It's so refreshing.
-------signature-------
Some of us fall by the wayside
And some of us soar to the stars
And some of us sail through our troubles
And some have to live with our scars
|
|
|
Link, the Hero of Time
Vice Admiral
Joined: 15 Sep 2001
Posts: 5581
Location: Kokori Forest, Hyrule
|
| Mon Feb 05, 2007 11:32 pm |
|
Not in a peer reviewed scientific journal, but in the Canadian Free Press. Therefore, as a scientist, I cannot give any value to this article and discard it as lacking a credible source.
|
|
|
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
| Mon Feb 05, 2007 11:54 pm |
|
I am amazed that this forum is so ready to discard this man as a credible source because this isn't in a scientific journal. No one here has a PhD in climatology, but this man does. Yet, no one is willing to even recognize that this man who holds a doctorate in this field is not even credible? I mean, I know we are all smart here, but I still thought PhDs carried some weight. Of course, I suppose articles in scientific journals are always both correct and reliable, not biased or motivated by things other than the truth. Nothing like that.
|
|
|
WeAz
Commodore
Joined: 03 Apr 2004
Posts: 1519
Location: Where you aren't
|
| Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:59 am |
|
They're a lot less likely to be biased, as they are put to a panel, whether to be allowed.
|
|
|
TrekkieMage
Office Junkie
Joined: 17 Oct 2004
Posts: 5335
Location: Hiding
|
| Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:09 am |
|
The issue with where things are published is an issue of quality. Scientists make mistakes, make assumptions, or overlook things. The point of peer-review is to make sure that things aren't biased, don't have errors, and are truely scientific.
A PhD is impressive - but it doesn't mean he's infallable.
And science is fallable. That's one of the most important concepts in science. The scientific community - including the peer reviewed journals - will correct itself when it makes a mistake.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:25 am |
|
It doesn't mean that he's infallible, no, but doesn't it at least mean that he's credible? I would certainly say so.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
WeAz
Commodore
Joined: 03 Apr 2004
Posts: 1519
Location: Where you aren't
|
| Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:49 am |
|
Oh he definitely is. Just not as much if he didn't publish in a peer reviewed journal.
|
|
|
Link, the Hero of Time
Vice Admiral
Joined: 15 Sep 2001
Posts: 5581
Location: Kokori Forest, Hyrule
|
| Tue Feb 06, 2007 3:49 pm |
|
| Puck wrote: | | I am amazed that this forum is so ready to discard this man as a credible source because this isn't in a scientific journal. No one here has a PhD in climatology, but this man does. Yet, no one is willing to even recognize that this man who holds a doctorate in this field is not even credible? I mean, I know we are all smart here, but I still thought PhDs carried some weight. Of course, I suppose articles in scientific journals are always both correct and reliable, not biased or motivated by things other than the truth. Nothing like that. |
PhD or not, this man did not post his findings in any scientific journal. I could hold a PhD in anything, yet if I didn't post my findings with enough back up evidence in a scientific journal where it could be peer reviewed, analyzed, reanalyzed and Then refuted or agreed with. He bypassed one of the very important parts of scientific research which is the publishing of findings. Without it, Any person with a degree with figures that match what they want can make claims.
He has no credibility until he publishes his findings, PhD or not.
|
|
|
Arellia
The Quiet One
Joined: 23 Jan 2003
Posts: 4425
Location: Dallas, TX
|
| Wed Feb 07, 2007 5:48 pm |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | | It doesn't mean that he's infallible, no, but doesn't it at least mean that he's credible? I would certainly say so. |
A PhD is a piece of paper unless you've got something more substantial. I know a few people with doctorates who don't know what they're talking about when they're an "expert" on the subject. Depends on your person. If he could get into a scientific journal, it would be more encouraging.
I understand the man's opinion, and really, I don't dispute that the earth naturally warms and cools in cycles. We do have a wealth of climatological data dating back a good while, at least that from the oceans, if anyone has studied oceanography (*HAND RAISE!*). However, this does not mean that copious amounts of CO2 being released into the atmosphere is helping matters. Think about it--there is a natural carbon cycle where carbon is stored and lays dormant in what we call a "carbon sink." What we're doing is unnaturally awakening these sinks and releasing the carbon in airborne emmisions. This hasn't been done in the history of the planet in the amounts we're talking now. All efforts should be made so that we're no longer upsetting the balance in such a manner. By technological advancement we will produce more heat and waste, and we have to deal with that. The goal should be to minimize these effects as quickly as possible, and people are just going to have to adapt to it.
However, on the global warming issue, I fall back on technology rather than "solutions" that I don't find viable. In my town they're striving to increase byciclists (dangerous) and pedestrians, and neglect building a parking garage on a campus which has 15,000 students and rising in a very small area. We have one parking lot smaller than that of a wal mart, and some parallel parking. They want to "force" people into not driving by not building a parking garage--this is not okay. A lot of us require vehicles--it's not a convenience, it's a necessity. And there are ways to improve our vehicles, so lets!
|
|
|
|
Search
FAQ
Log in
