[Newsbot]

Title: 'There is no climate emergency,' hundreds of scientists, engineers tell U.N.
Category: Environmental
Posted By: Freakinoldguy
Date: 2019-09-30 10:04:17
Canadian

[Freakinoldguy]

Finally a little common sense in the debate. But of course, once again we have no rational debate between the antagonists and the "Chicken Little Crowd" is immediately trying to discredit the 500 scientists and engineers who have spoken out against them and their dogmatic beliefs.

$1:

The declaration was dismissed by Penn State climatologist Michael E. Mann, who called it “craven and stupid,” as well as the left-of-center [U.K.] Guardian, which said the document “repeats well-worn and long-debunked talking points on climate change that are contradicted by scientific institutions and academies around the world.”Have to admit I did a double take when I first glanced at this. Was sure that last signature was “He Who Must Not be Named”. Then I reflected on the matter and realized how unlikely that is.
Not even Valdemort would sign his name to something so craven and stupid

How mature of Mr. Mann because using Harry Potter references is likely to get a lot of traction with the crowd that's out of school protesting. Unfortunately for people like Mr. Mann this time they have a problem. These weren't a couple of scientists and engineers being paid for by the oil companies. Some of these people are very respected in their fields.

At the same time, the sheer number of prominent signers with scientific and engineering credentials belied the contention that only a handful of fringe researchers and fossil-fuel shills oppose the climate-catastrophe “consensus.”

$1:

The U.S. contingent was made up of 45 U.S. professors, engineers and scientists, including MIT professor emeritus Richard Lindzen; Freeman Dyson of the Institute of Advanced Studies at Princeton, and Stanford University professor emeritus Elliott D. Bloom, as well as several signers formerly affiliated with NASA.

Unfortunately rational debate isn't likely to happen anytime soon.

$1:

Convincing climate-focused institutions like the UN to engage on such topics has been a struggle, said Guus Berkhout, professor emeritus of geophysics at Delft University of Technology and a CLINTEL co-founder.

“We promote a scientific discussion at the highest level between both sides of the climate debate, but the mainstream refuses so far,” said Mr. Berkhout in an email. “They always come with the same arguments: they are right and we are wrong. Period!”

Sounds familiar doesn't it?

[DrCaleb]

Guus Berkhout Look him up. Used to work for Royal Dutch Shell. Who pays his bills now?

[Freakinoldguy]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

ROTFL

Guus Berkhout Look him up. Used to work for Royal Dutch Shell. Who pays his bills now?

One name out of 500 but keep up the good work. How about the others like MIT professor emeritus Richard Lindzen; Freeman Dyson of the Institute of Advanced Studies at Princeton, and Stanford University professor emeritus Elliott D. Bloom.

Are they being paid by big oil?

[stratos]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

ROTFL

Guus Berkhout Look him up. Used to work for Royal Dutch Shell. Who pays his bills now?

While we are at it lets see who is paying the bills for Gretta and the other kids to travel all around the globe for their lecture and protest tour.

[N_Fiddledog]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

ROTFL

Guus Berkhout Look him up. Used to work for Royal Dutch Shell. Who pays his bills now?

In any case, Shell has always been on the side of climate alarmism, so what's your point?

[N_Fiddledog]

But if alarmists want to start throwing personal slags around let's talk about this guy:

$1:

The declaration was dismissed by Penn State climatologist Michael E. Mann

You mean the creator of the heavily debunked "Hockey stick graph," the perpetrator of "Mike's nature trick," the guy who just had his ass handed to him in court by Canadian professor Tim Ball?

That guy?

This guy?

[DrCaleb]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

ROTFL

Guus Berkhout Look him up. Used to work for Royal Dutch Shell. Who pays his bills now?

One name out of 500 but keep up the good work. How about the others like MIT professor emeritus Richard Lindzen; Freeman Dyson of the Institute of Advanced Studies at Princeton, and Stanford University professor emeritus Elliott D. Bloom.

Are they being paid by big oil?

I can't find much for Prof. Bloom, but what I find isn't encouraging. But Lindzen!

MIT climate scientists turn on their former colleague after he tells Donald Trump to tear up Paris Agreement

<em>stratos</em> <em>stratos</em>:

While we are at it lets see who is paying the bills for Gretta and the other kids to travel all around the globe for their lecture and protest tour.

I already did.

[N_Fiddledog]

My favorite quote about Richard Lindzen is from one of his grad students who said "If Professor Lindzen was only half as smart as he thinks he is he'd still be twice as smart as everybody else."

But wouldn't you rather talk about the critics of the declaration against "Chicken Little" pseudo science? How about the Guardian newspaper then? The crybabies who had to be rescued off Antarctic ice during their "Ship of Fools" expedition after believing their own BS that the ice was melting down there.

[Tricks]

Dyson doesn't disagree with Climate change, he's said AGW is happening, he doesn't agree with the timeline. He doesn't like the computer models. He's also implied he's being a contrarian to drive discussion. He's also said he is by no means an expert in climatology, and that he doesn't do much reading on it.

Dyson is an astronomically intelligent man, but I feel like he's stepping out of his wheel house on this one.

[N_Fiddledog]

Well, actually...

$1:

This week’s Conversation that Matters features Freeman Dyson a professor emeritus of the Institute for Advanced Study who says models do a good job of helping us understand climate but they do a very poor job of predicting it.

Dyson says, “as measured from space, the whole earth is growing greener as a result of carbon dioxide, so it’s increasing agricultural yields, it’s increasing the forests and it’s increasing growth in the biological world and that’s more important and more certain than the effects on climate.”

He acknowledges that human activity has an effect on climate but claims it is much less than is claimed. He stresses the non-climate benefits of carbon are overwhelmingly favourable.

https://www.vancouversun.com/technology ... story.html

It's really hard to get the video to the Vancouver Sun interview with Dyson to work.

I remember when the story first appeared in the Vancouver newspaper I posted the script version to the news page here at CKA and some sort of Censor Gnome made it disappear.

[N_Fiddledog]

As to Thunberg, who's this handler of Greta's - Luisa-Marie Neubauer? See, because conspiracy guys are telling us she's connected to something called The "One" foundation which which we're told, "has several well-known wealthy financiers, including Bono as well as Bill and Melissa Gates. An even more striking name is that of the multi-billionaire oligarch George Soros, notorious for his currency speculation and maybe even more prominent as the father of the global, radical, and left-liberal lobby and activist network “Open Society”, supporting thousands of NGOs."

You have heard of Greta's handler right? The woman who jumps between the kid and journalists who try to ask a question.



Try a Wiki search on Luisa, they won't give you everything but you'll get a general idea.

[N_Fiddledog]

[FieryVulpine]

Tricks Tricks:

Dyson doesn't disagree with Climate change, he's said AGW is happening, he doesn't agree with the timeline. He doesn't like the computer models.

Can you blame him? The so-called experts have been notoriously bad at predicting the effects of climate change for decades to the point where it's a sad joke.

[DrCaleb]

FieryVulpine FieryVulpine:

Tricks Tricks:

Dyson doesn't disagree with Climate change, he's said AGW is happening, he doesn't agree with the timeline. He doesn't like the computer models.

Can you blame him? The so-called experts have been notoriously bad at predicting the effects of climate change for decades to the point where it's a sad joke.

Yes, we can. I've gone through the 1990 IPCC report, and shown predictions that are occurring now.

The magic predictions attributed to no one in particular seem to be the ones the deniers will trot out to prove their bias.

Some brilliant people like Dyson are just bad with subjects outside their area of expertise.