Fred Singer on Climate Change Data

[1000frolly]

After initializing and parameterizing hundreds of unknown factors, inserting divergent proxy data and ignoring any difficult natural forcing factors, we ran hundreds of simulations until we obtained the results we wanted-an ensemble of meaningless projected results, which we then averaged. We homogenized, adjusted and used the liberally unprincipled component method,and produced a new set of hockey sticks, giving a very robust prediction (>90% probability) that we are all being totally screwed.

[rodrigocperin]

1-what does he know about it? When did he last do any research (of his own on the topic of climate change)?

2-Remember Fred is the guy on the side of Tobacco industries on the issue of 'is smoking bad for you'? Do you believe his integrity after that?

3-How many times has he changed his line of denial, 3 at least.

4-He will be long dead by the time effects take place, your kids won't. If he has no respect for life on this planet, you should know better.

It's not a debate anymore, wake up!

[gadionson1]

its a very helpful discussion.

[david222444]

Simple physics does not say that the earth should warm with increasing carbon dioxide. Heat flows for hot to cold.

[sleepymagpie]

@david222444

In a closed system. The earth is not a closed system.

Let go through a thought experiment to explain this. We have a room, with no atmosphere at all, no gravity, no source of light or heat. In short no energy enters or leaves the room. The room is at zero degrees, and a metal sphere filled steam is placed in the centre of the room, where it floats, perfectly still.

[sleepymagpie]

over time the ball will cool, the water will condense into water and then freeze as ice. However, their is still just as much energy in the room, as when the ball was boiling hot. energy can neither be created nor destroyed. The energy has followed the curve into entropy. It has become disordered, spread very thinly across the room. The entire rooms energy levels have been very slightly raised.

[sleepymagpie]

Now, same room, but sphere has a cloud of CO2 surrounding it. The outcome is the same, save that the cooling is slowed very lightly, as radiated heat from the ball is captured and bounced around by the CO2. The energy levels of the room do not incease or decrease, but the energy does move towards entropy.

[sleepymagpie]

Same room again, however the system is no longer closed. Their is a laser aimed at the ball and gives out enough energy to keep the water liquid. The ball cools until it is at equilibrium with the energy imput from the laser, and remains at that temperature. However, the energy level of the room, continues to rise slowly.

[sleepymagpie]

Lastly, well take the same room again, and we'll have both the laser and the CO2 blanket. This time what happens is that the water remains gases. Why? Because energy from the laser, and from the initial heat radiates more slowly from the ball, as it is trapped and bounced within the blanket of CO2.

[david222444]

@sleepymagpie If you are talking about absolute zero -273k , steam could not exist. I dont Quite get what you are trying to prove. Try a simple experiment, turn you heating up full then open every door and window in mid winter.

[sleepymagpie]

@david222444

Your example, the room becomes quickly colder.

But it does not do so because of radiative heat. It does so because the air has been heated by convection, its presure had dropped as the atoms have spread out due increased energy. When the doors poop, the air rises and disperses due to the pressure differential and the energy disperses with it..

[sleepymagpie]

From that point the room cools until it reachs an equilibrium with between the rate ate which the heater produces heat and the rate at which the heat can disperse. But that has shit all to do the way a planet works.

We have an atmosphere, preserved by gravity and our magnetic field. Said planet is like the room, only the doors and windows cannot be opened, the gas cannot simply carry the heat away via convection.



[bradymusic27]

It would be nice to have a real debate on the scientific merits of each position (I believe this video is a decent example of such a debate, albeit a brief one). Unfortunately, many activists (on both sides) and the press in general are more concerned with the associations of the scientists involved, not on the facts of each position. We need to get over the association fallacy, a classic logical fallacy, if we're to make good policy about climate change. I'm simply tired of extraneous remarks.

[verstwo2]

This is the same Fred singer that was a shill for the tobacco industry. He also denies second hand smoke can cause cancer. Looks like he's moved on to oil.

[spellbinder00]

It's the Sun going into a supercycle of activity that's warming not only our planet, but all the planets.Believe me if you follow who is to profit from this, then you will know why they are pushing a Cap&Trade tax on the world.Cui Bono These poeple are working for the Elitist to get Us to pay them money for something we can't control -The Sun. Maybe we are going to pay for the bunkers for the Elite few to save themselfs from the coming solar superstorm that going to happen in the next few years.

[sleepymagpie]

@spellbinder00

Solar output fell betweem 1980 and 2000, a time period of rapid increase in average global temperature. While solar output does effect global temperature, it does not explain curent rises. Would you like to try again?

[sleepymagpie]

@sleepymagpie and just to be clear, a variety if studies have shown that the trend I am pointing out continued on to the present. Rather than spouting hysterical and unscientific rubbish, it might do you good to study a little science, then read around the subject. If you took that time, I might suggest you actually read a book with some scholarship behind it, like 'Merchants of Doubt', which documents amongst other things how singer has been wrong about acid rain, CFCs and second hand smoke.

[sleepymagpie]

The funny thing is that while you bury yourself in modern myths of 'the elite', solar superstorms and an array of other stupidity, a few hawkish physicists have been obfuscating the facts, by generating misinformation and the appearances of controversy. The idea that there is a debate about climate change is frankly laughable, as there has been scientific consensus for decades now. the appearances of descent was manufactured. And these same hawks have done it all before, time and again.

[spellbinder00]

@sleepymagpie Even if the global warming is true do to CO2.Here is an article to soothe your worries: World's forests can adapt to climate change, study says

Water shortages as a result of rising temperatures will not do as much damage as feared, evidence from ancient trees suggests-Alok Jha, science correspondent guardian.co.uk,Thursday 11 November 2010 So quit blaming people in general and pick on the true polluters..The Corporations who finance all these Green orgs to take your money away.

[sleepymagpie]

@spellbinder00

First up, all the article has to say is that in one previous case of warming moisture levels did not fall. That is a little like saying that because a coin flips one way the first time you see it flipped it will always flip that way. This is only one study, you want me to accept the premise that warming doesn't matter because of it. Sorry but no, show me a pattern of evidence and causation and I will.

[sleepymagpie]

But in truth, the fact that the climate didn't get dryer, according to that article is a side show. What matters is that the climate changed. Not only did new species evolve rapidly in this time period, there where also extinctions. That means ecological disruption.

Anthropogenic climate change does not just mean that average temperatures will wise, it means that entire weather patterns may well shift.

[sleepymagpie]

We already have a state of play where some north American forests show negative growth thanks to the effects of acid rain (Thanks Fred); add to that changing weather patterns and you have conditions for the hole sale collapse of the north american forest and lakes ecosystems. Bye bye canadian and US paper industries.

[sleepymagpie]

Always nice to see one of the merchants of doubt plying their trade. Singer has been on the wrong side of a lot of issues, from acid rain to second hand smoke, and now Anthropogenic Global Climate Change, this is a man who has sold science down the river to support his ideology in the face of any amount of evidence. For this man, doubt is a product, to be produced either for a profit, or to undermine the work of others. The real wonder is, that any one still listens to him.

[spellbinder00]

E-mail were Not Hacked, but Leaked by insiders scare of legal reprecussions from the lies being told to the public by University of East Anglias Climate Research Unit and the IPCC higher ups.

[sleepymagpie]

Do you have evidence to support that statement? I mean, given that House of Commons Science and Technology Committee, Science Assessment Panel, and the UEA's own internal investigation all disagree with you, so I'd be fascinated to see if you have actual evidence to support your position.

[OvoidCranium]

Watson doesn't seem to understand the Dansgaard-Oeshger/Bond cycles.

Bond events are unusually cool periods during interglacials that occur ~1000 - 1500 years apart 10 -20% of the glacial/interglacial temperature variations the last on we had was the little ice ace and now the earth is recovering from that.

[drkstrong]

Watson runs rings around Singer. Fred seems passed it.

"No evidence that any data has been destroyed"

[mrbassman25]

thats the idiot that stated that the use of the word ''trick'' was a different meaning for scientists when stating on the released hacked email's ... he should be fired and charged with fraud!!!!!!

[sleepymagpie]

@mrbassman25

Trick is a word that has different uses depending on context. I can say, ' I tricked john into buying me a pint', and 'there is a trick to juggling.' Both uses are accurate, the first implies deception, the second does not. It is in the second manner, that the term is used in UEA CRU emails.

[sleepymagpie]

If you actually read the email, and read around the subject describe, this is all rather clear, but I suspect it is much easier just to have your views confirm by right wing pundits.

[mrbassman25]

@sleepymagpie

very true indeed. thanks for that. :)

[MarcusCMarcellus]

If this were a private finance scandal, the east anglia "scientists" would be arrested and charged with fraud.