And who do you think have been paying for the costs over the last 50 years for the IPCC computer model? And where is the evidence? Not one working model that you or me can run on our PC!
bob carter has corporate vested interest ties. His opinion is suspect. He doesn't have a study to back up his claims, doesn't actively study the affects humans have on climate, and is a marine geologist by trade. So who cares what he thinks?
I recommend reliance on what EVERY respected scientific institution has been saying for years. We humans are warming the planet by burning fossil fuels and clearing the land. The consequences are not good. It's time for change.
Very interesting, I remember watching a programme about climate change in the early 1980's as a child. The Greenpeace scientists claimed that the shape of the British Isles would be changed beyond recognition and Blackpool would infact become an island and all this would have taken place by 2020! Hmmm, seems I wasted a lot my time worrying about the future of our planet. I have no time for fearmongers anymore.
Like thinning carter has anything meaningful to contribute. He doesn't. But to get to him you have to ignore the many, many very credible experts out there that have studies and respected institutions to back them up. Keep digging, you'll find carter under a rock slimed with vested interest goo. Those corporate interests care nothing for our future generations. They want carter slimed up and looking slick!
Just the facts. rp rejects science. It would be at the expense of our future generations. Business-as-usual or MORE deregulation as rp prefers only makes the problem worst.
Here's rhetoric, another buzz phrase for you... Read what the experts have to say or provide credible evidence to the contrary. rp's libertarian philosophy is out of touch with the current realities.
@vitalitutorials And I thought I base on an rp vid! My mistake but the story is valid, the evidence is clear. In the light of the overwhelming evidence it's amazing that denial and ignorance (those that lack information if it makes you feel better) push so many to fools like bob carter. Hell, some even glum onto even less credible sources like glen beck, john coleman, inhofe, etc. Talk about transparent! Seek help, seek some HONEST research. Need some suggestions? Just ask.
@ReduceGHGs So go to the graph at 1:07 then read what he says : .".global temperature cooled for 30 years at a time ...that emissions were rising most rapidly "
Do you know how research your sources for credibility? I do. I don't attack carter personally I attack his motivations. He has no study to back up his claims. I asked him. Want his email address?
Try not to play scientist of fall for the vested interest propaganda.
Read what NAS, NASA, NOAA, AAAS, AGU, and all the rest have to say. Denial may keep you from doing HONEST research, sorry.
@ReduceGHGs You are onto a hiding to nothing with this argument because obviously the vested interest argument applies to everyone or are you going to tell me that the sums suggested - 2-3% of GDP from carbon tax etc. Vast sums- are not going to benefit anyone individually? Pull the other one mate.
@tincoffin Odd how you apparently respect an industry hack like bob carter but reject the findings of NAS, NASA, AAAS, AGU, SOCC, and all the other respected scientific institutions. What's up? Can't handle the truth? Find ONE that agrees with you. You can't. Must be a global 30+ year conspiracy, right? Know where the idea of a carbon tax came from? Not likely. Know about environmental externalities? No, not likely. Capitalism got us into this mess and the same profit motive get us out.
@ReduceGHGs It is the nature of organisations that you should be looking at . All organisations are composed of corruptible humans and it doesn't matter if they are government funded like the ones you cite of public companies. Generally speaking the larger the organisation the more harm it does so the actions of governments are the most harmful of all.
The NAS, for example, has been a very reliable and credible organization. This goes back well before their first study on global warming in 1979.
Google: The Charney Report 1979
Remember why We The People came together to form governments? This global climate crisis that requires national and global policy changes to move us to sustainability.
Here's a good paper about the problem with our current business model.
@tincoffin Temps cooled because there are more factors than CO2 at work. In the case of those 30 years it was dust, pollution etc in the atmosphere from dirty industry and power plants.They got cleaned up, dust/pollution vanished.So the temperature rebounded up.In fact spraying the atmosphere full of pollutants is one idea which has been raised to try to counteract CO2 caused warming.Understanding the interaction of various factors is why there are climate scientists, and Bob Carter is not one!
@indulis1 He is more of climate scientist than you.
Bob Carter is an adjunct research professor in the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University, Queensland and the University of Adelaide, South Australia. He is a geologist specializing in palaeontology, stratigraphy, marine geology, and environmental science. Carter is a former Director of Australia's Secretariat for the Ocean Drilling Program and a Co-Chief Scientist for drilling leg 181. Honorary Fellow of the Royal Soc. of NZ.
@m1aws Well whether I am a climate scientist or not is besides the point. The point is that Bob Carter is not , yet he contradicts thousands of scientists and scientific studies by experienced, published scientists working for years in their field of science. Many factors cause change- that's fact! How the factors cause change are understood by real climate scientists. And none of them are contributing significantly to warming now. e.g. CO2 from volcanoes, change in solar radiation.
@indulis1 He is a climate scientist, the most important weather system lies in our lower atmosphere -- the sea! He is not in the pay of those working for easy pickings. When he checked the works of Jones and Wang, he found their findings to be nothing more than an outright lie.. so why don't they and their peer reviewers sue him? They can't because he has the weight of proof against them.
ICSC appoints Professor Bob Carter as Chief Science Advisor
Ottawa, Canada, 16/09/10: The Executive Director of the International Climate Science Coalition announces the appointment of Professor Bob Carter as the Chief Science Advisor to the coalition. Professor Carter is the author of the important new book on climate science and policy, “Climate: the Counter Consensus”.
He Is famous for saying that "the role of peer review in scientific literature was
overstressed, and whether or not... a scientist had been funded by the
fossil fuel industry was irrelevant to the validity of the research."
To hear him tell it, one man's opinion should be enough. To hell with what everybody else thinks, even if they have been studying the problem for decades. And the question of money is irrelevant? Only a fool would think so.
@aerospacejunkie Who funds research is irrelevant. Dismissing research because of who funds it is known as an ad hominem; when you can't refute an opponent's argument, you call him fat. Same thing.
I like the use of calling out fallacies and I agree with your view aquahelixone, however, it does matter who funds research. It will ALWAYS matter who funds research. Just because he is funded by petrol companies (and I have no idea if he is or not) doesn't mean he is wrong or lying or anything, but it is a reason to examine his position more closely. Its not an ad hominim to question someones motivation because of funding. Once again, I agree with his position.
And who do you think have been paying for the costs over the last 50 years for the IPCC computer model? And where is the evidence? Not one working model that you or me can run on our PC!
Your on the loosing side the myth is busted!
Blizzard14ub 2 months ago
bob carter has corporate vested interest ties. His opinion is suspect. He doesn't have a study to back up his claims, doesn't actively study the affects humans have on climate, and is a marine geologist by trade. So who cares what he thinks?
I recommend reliance on what EVERY respected scientific institution has been saying for years. We humans are warming the planet by burning fossil fuels and clearing the land. The consequences are not good. It's time for change.
FMI try... UCSUSA(dot)org
ReduceGHGs 3 months ago
Very interesting, I remember watching a programme about climate change in the early 1980's as a child. The Greenpeace scientists claimed that the shape of the British Isles would be changed beyond recognition and Blackpool would infact become an island and all this would have taken place by 2020! Hmmm, seems I wasted a lot my time worrying about the future of our planet. I have no time for fearmongers anymore.
larcybird 6 months ago
Ooh, hot blond at 2:18.
I guess there was some kind of talk about global climate or something too...
FantasticBob7000 9 months ago
Here's a chant for deniers....
.
"Ignore the best, dig for the rest!"
.
Like thinning carter has anything meaningful to contribute. He doesn't. But to get to him you have to ignore the many, many very credible experts out there that have studies and respected institutions to back them up. Keep digging, you'll find carter under a rock slimed with vested interest goo. Those corporate interests care nothing for our future generations. They want carter slimed up and looking slick!
ReduceGHGs 11 months ago
@ReduceGHGs
You're on this page too, again with nil facts and plenty of rhetoric. You would die if it weren't for buzz words!
vitalitutorials 9 months ago
@vitalitutorials .
Just the facts. rp rejects science. It would be at the expense of our future generations. Business-as-usual or MORE deregulation as rp prefers only makes the problem worst.
Here's rhetoric, another buzz phrase for you... Read what the experts have to say or provide credible evidence to the contrary. rp's libertarian philosophy is out of touch with the current realities.
ReduceGHGs 9 months ago
@vitalitutorials And I thought I base on an rp vid! My mistake but the story is valid, the evidence is clear. In the light of the overwhelming evidence it's amazing that denial and ignorance (those that lack information if it makes you feel better) push so many to fools like bob carter. Hell, some even glum onto even less credible sources like glen beck, john coleman, inhofe, etc. Talk about transparent! Seek help, seek some HONEST research. Need some suggestions? Just ask.
ReduceGHGs 9 months ago
@ReduceGHGs So go to the graph at 1:07 then read what he says : .".global temperature cooled for 30 years at a time ...that emissions were rising most rapidly "
Now give us your take on this
Ad hom attacks help noone
tincoffin 8 months ago
@tincoffin .
Do you know how research your sources for credibility? I do. I don't attack carter personally I attack his motivations. He has no study to back up his claims. I asked him. Want his email address?
Try not to play scientist of fall for the vested interest propaganda.
Read what NAS, NASA, NOAA, AAAS, AGU, and all the rest have to say. Denial may keep you from doing HONEST research, sorry.
ReduceGHGs 8 months ago
@ReduceGHGs You are onto a hiding to nothing with this argument because obviously the vested interest argument applies to everyone or are you going to tell me that the sums suggested - 2-3% of GDP from carbon tax etc. Vast sums- are not going to benefit anyone individually? Pull the other one mate.
tincoffin 6 months ago
@tincoffin Odd how you apparently respect an industry hack like bob carter but reject the findings of NAS, NASA, AAAS, AGU, SOCC, and all the other respected scientific institutions. What's up? Can't handle the truth? Find ONE that agrees with you. You can't. Must be a global 30+ year conspiracy, right? Know where the idea of a carbon tax came from? Not likely. Know about environmental externalities? No, not likely. Capitalism got us into this mess and the same profit motive get us out.
ReduceGHGs 6 months ago
@ReduceGHGs It is the nature of organisations that you should be looking at . All organisations are composed of corruptible humans and it doesn't matter if they are government funded like the ones you cite of public companies. Generally speaking the larger the organisation the more harm it does so the actions of governments are the most harmful of all.
tincoffin 6 months ago
@tincoffin
The NAS, for example, has been a very reliable and credible organization. This goes back well before their first study on global warming in 1979.
Google: The Charney Report 1979
Remember why We The People came together to form governments? This global climate crisis that requires national and global policy changes to move us to sustainability.
Here's a good paper about the problem with our current business model.
Google: environmental externalities sankar
ReduceGHGs 6 months ago
@tincoffin Temps cooled because there are more factors than CO2 at work. In the case of those 30 years it was dust, pollution etc in the atmosphere from dirty industry and power plants.They got cleaned up, dust/pollution vanished.So the temperature rebounded up.In fact spraying the atmosphere full of pollutants is one idea which has been raised to try to counteract CO2 caused warming.Understanding the interaction of various factors is why there are climate scientists, and Bob Carter is not one!
indulis1 6 months ago
@indulis1 He is more of climate scientist than you.
Bob Carter is an adjunct research professor in the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University, Queensland and the University of Adelaide, South Australia. He is a geologist specializing in palaeontology, stratigraphy, marine geology, and environmental science. Carter is a former Director of Australia's Secretariat for the Ocean Drilling Program and a Co-Chief Scientist for drilling leg 181. Honorary Fellow of the Royal Soc. of NZ.
m1aws 3 months ago
@m1aws Well whether I am a climate scientist or not is besides the point. The point is that Bob Carter is not , yet he contradicts thousands of scientists and scientific studies by experienced, published scientists working for years in their field of science. Many factors cause change- that's fact! How the factors cause change are understood by real climate scientists. And none of them are contributing significantly to warming now. e.g. CO2 from volcanoes, change in solar radiation.
indulis1 3 months ago
@indulis1 He is a climate scientist, the most important weather system lies in our lower atmosphere -- the sea! He is not in the pay of those working for easy pickings. When he checked the works of Jones and Wang, he found their findings to be nothing more than an outright lie.. so why don't they and their peer reviewers sue him? They can't because he has the weight of proof against them.
m1aws 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ICSC appoints Professor Bob Carter as Chief Science Advisor
Ottawa, Canada, 16/09/10: The Executive Director of the International Climate Science Coalition announces the appointment of Professor Bob Carter as the Chief Science Advisor to the coalition. Professor Carter is the author of the important new book on climate science and policy, “Climate: the Counter Consensus”.
Read news release at tinyurl[dot]com/2f4pgxw
TomHarrisICSC 1 year ago
He Is famous for saying that "the role of peer review in scientific literature was
overstressed, and whether or not... a scientist had been funded by the
fossil fuel industry was irrelevant to the validity of the research."
To hear him tell it, one man's opinion should be enough. To hell with what everybody else thinks, even if they have been studying the problem for decades. And the question of money is irrelevant? Only a fool would think so.
aerospacejunkie 1 year ago
@aerospacejunkie Who funds research is irrelevant. Dismissing research because of who funds it is known as an ad hominem; when you can't refute an opponent's argument, you call him fat. Same thing.
aquahelixone 1 year ago
@aquahelixone Pull real hard. That popping sound is your head coming out of your ass.
aerospacejunkie 1 year ago
@aerospacejunkie wow, another one. you just can't do it can you?
aquahelixone 1 year ago
@aquahelixone
I like the use of calling out fallacies and I agree with your view aquahelixone, however, it does matter who funds research. It will ALWAYS matter who funds research. Just because he is funded by petrol companies (and I have no idea if he is or not) doesn't mean he is wrong or lying or anything, but it is a reason to examine his position more closely. Its not an ad hominim to question someones motivation because of funding. Once again, I agree with his position.
Walden039 7 months ago
Ah
That's what I still keep you in my subscriptions for - interesting material.
Education and reason - not propaganda and hysteria :-)
Keep it up NZone
grraadd 1 year ago