"If the science is so settled, why are we constantly reading about scientists claiming to be stunned by new data?"
Posted by Kate at October 31, 2008 2:26 PMI guess it just points out who was stunned all along.
Posted by: Western Canadian at October 31, 2008 3:01 PMThat is really frightening. Imagine if there really is something we're doing that's upsetting the chemical mix of the atmosphere. We won't realize it, because in reality this science remains in it's infancy plus we'll be busy tilting at climate change windmills.
Posted by: iowavette at October 31, 2008 3:13 PMStep Changes are always worth looking at, something is different or there is a major error in measurement.
I appreciate their honesty, admitting they dont understand the methane cycle....which means they probably dont understand the carbon cycle very well.
Methane, at least tends to dissapate very quickly, which is what makes the jump odd....it means a significant amount would have had to have been released, assuming again there isnt a measurement error.
Posted by: Stephen at October 31, 2008 3:39 PM"If the science is so settled...." , they'd be shoving it up our collective wazoos 24/7 , 365 ....
Posted by: Bill D. Cat at October 31, 2008 3:41 PMBTW, glad you weren't yelling at me on the earlier [29th] post. Sometimes the difference between trolls and regular commenters is difficult to distinguish. I have a headache, two sprained ankles, a sprained foot and a sprained knee. Believe I'll take the red rocket over for a wash.
Posted by: iowavette at October 31, 2008 3:44 PMThe reality is that the people who preach "The Science is Settled" are not the scientists (for the most part). Most scientists work in their own little world and develop their own theories, and quite often find themself looking at something their theory could not explain ... These theories are often cherry picked and combined to produce a much larger theory (global warming) which is not very sound; people work very hard to convince you there is a consensus on their theory, and the science is settled, because if you actually look at it their large theory will fall apart.
Posted by: NoOne at October 31, 2008 4:04 PMPeople never do figure out there centuries grand model of the Universe will be the big laugh in the next. Theories are just that, to bad some folks forget that. Men are just only as good as their instruments, that extend the five senses Interpreted by Mankind itself out of the context of the day. Who knew in the late 90's we would find out 80%-90% of the universe is not visible?
Posted by: Revnant Dream at October 31, 2008 4:41 PM"The worry is that we just don't understand the methane cycle very well."
So all that hype about cow farts being a threat to the environment was based on zero proof and thinking they knew something when they didn't.
That would be hubris on their part then.
I won't hold my breath expecting them to approach science with humility or accuracy in the future.
Climate scientists, environmentalists, and the politicians who jumped on the bandwagon should understand that their credibility is in the pooper.
Posted by: Oz at October 31, 2008 5:16 PMQuote "Climate scientists, environmentalists, and the politicians who jumped on the bandwagon should understand that their credibility is in the pooper."
And that will create even more methane.
. Who knew in the late 90's we would find out 80%-90% of the universe is not visible?
Posted by: Revnant Dream at 4:41 PM
================================================
there were suggestions of such possibilities back in the 80T's, so now you look rather foolish
BTW, S. Hawking even surmized about this in the 70T's if I recall correctly??
90% not visible?
visible as in visible with your eyes-- the theory is early 1800s by James Clerk Maxwell
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_spectrum
detectable as in dark matter? wimps and macho's , yes the late seventies. not detected yet , but certainly apparent from the rotation curves of galaxies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Matter
first suspected in 1930s, confirmed in the 1970s
Don't nobody light a match!
But seriously, it's not the actual scientists who discredit science via AGW; most scientists I've spoken to who've done any serious investigation or review of the literature in this field give AGW very little credence. It's the activists and a very few vocal but not particularly rigorous scientists in an unholy alliance with news media that will do long term damage to the credibility of legitimate science as the AGW nonsense unravels.
GYM :
It does not matter who envisioned it. Heck Augustine talked about evolution in the 400's AD. Greeks new about the atomic theory in 450 BC.
It was shown to be real in the late 80's or 90's. Anyway its just an example of how things can turn about completely. For all we know this could be an effect of something else. In the late 19th century meteorites where considered a laughable concept. Ball lightning till the 70's when it was lab produced, confounded all the skeptics. Take the speed of light. It was considered a constant till labs have increased it by a factor of 3 & I heard up to 7 times its speed. My whole point is theories are just that. There will always be bogus scientists, like crooked cops. Theories by nature are transitory. Shifting sand to have as a life’s foundation built on, if really if you think about it.
I was just looking at some awesome pictures and noted that the article mentioned "...over 200 days so far with no observed sunspots. The solar wind has also dropped to its lowest levels in 50 years." But we all know it is George Bush's fault, eh.
http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2008/10/the_sun.html
Posted by: Texas Canuck at October 31, 2008 7:41 PMOld people fart more frequently. It's one of the problems of aging. As the population gets grayer, expect the level of methane emissions to rise.
/s
Instead of being alarmist why don't they use their brain's for a change instead of babble. I don't know what causes a problem some times, but if you sit down and think for a while logic might prevale. This is only an electricial problem for me; but I don't predict catastrophe problems unless I know what the is the cause. No guessing it don't work.
Posted by: Ken E. at October 31, 2008 8:51 PMSome new paper is just being published "proving global warming" at the poles and these scientists only had to utilize four different computer models with data tweaked who knows how many times to get the desired result.
Who'd a thunk that?
Posted by: Bruce at October 31, 2008 9:55 PMInstead of being alarmist why don't they use their brain's for a change instead of babble.
Posted by: Stroitel at October 31, 2008 9:58 PMStand by for course change. Earth is rapidly cooling because of pollution from rich suburbs and cruise ships and bottled water and and and. Leftist media howlers decree that all ocean trade must stop and everyone must obey their brilliant planning solutions. Hope you like turnips.
Posted by: Sgt Lejaune at October 31, 2008 10:46 PMBullshit still baffels brains.
Posted by: Western Canadian at October 31, 2008 10:58 PMBullshit still baffels brains.
Heh, a real scientist speaks. Couldn't agree more.
Posted by: jt at October 31, 2008 11:58 PMHmmm...roughly at the same time that Obama started competing for President, methane levels jumped. I wonder if there is any connection?
Posted by: Eeyore at November 1, 2008 9:39 AM