Stephen Schneider in 1979

To help support Climate Denial Crock of the Week
Go to
http://climatecrocks.com/

One of the earliest, strongest, and most consistent voices on Climate Change.
Stephen Schneider sounded a strikingly prescient alarm in 1979.
Schneider passed away, 7/19/10.

• Category

  Science & Technology

[smartalek65]

@greenman3610 What I've demonstrated is I have much better grasp of the subject than you do. Whereas you only know the advocate/alarmist side of it, and can only present the feeblest rebuttals when confronted by science-often hypocritical, off-topic, and/or unresponsive; more science-literate skeptics already understand the issues and the arguments presented by your side.

[greenman3610]

we await your imminent scientific publications and Nobels.

[smartalek65]

@greenman3610 You missed the point, yet again. The problem I have with the like of Schneider and his pal Micheal Oppenheimer is that when changing their minds, it was one anthropogenic climate change catastrophe for another. They still have only the vaguest idea what they're talking about.

[greenman3610]

right.

and you do, as you've so richly demonstrated.

[smartalek65]

Stephen Schneider: a few years before this, he was talking about another imminent ice age-human causing it, of course. Fortunately, one Dr. Richard Feynman was around to tell us an obvious truth: "I don't think these guys know what they're talking about."

[greenman3610]

Schneider and Rasool is the paper in which they asked the question as to whether man caused aerosols would cool the planet toward another ice age.

They got the wrong answer, people showed them they were wrong, they admitted it, and moved on to the right answer.

That's how science works. Changing your mind in the face of evidence is not

a sign of weakness.

[smartalek65]

@bvdek You should read again what I pointed out of his actions here. His NAMECALLING is what i was adressing, where do I do that in this exchange? As the science goes, the fundamental argument isn't what do GHG's do? We know that, but the fundamental argument is what happens next. A sizeable body of scientific work shows that those feedbacks dampen the warming effect.

[bvdek]

lol you haven't demonstrated anything! You've presented no science to be 'confronted' whatsoever.. Only expressed your outright disagreement with the fundamental argument.

Sorry, but you can't actually be Dr. Richard Feynman..

In reality you're doing exactly what you criticised 'thesparitan' for doing to you: insulting someone's intelligence in an attempt to discredit their opinion, and support your own.. only difference is you disguise it in rhetoric, and try to sound intellectual.

[smartalek65]

@thesparitan To break it down to terms even you can get: calling someone else names isn't a point, and makes you lower than what you call them. Simple enough?

[thesparitan]

Doesn't make any sense sorry. Your thinking is poor.

[smartalek65]

The only person in denial of reality is someone who says that about others in order to argue a point. It means he/she/it has only the feeblest retort to answer any point. It's alot like schoolboys back in my day, saying "yo' mama!" when another student thoroughly embarrassed him.

[thesparitan]

How does it feel to be a moronic person in denial of reality, I am curious because I have never know this experience for myself because I listen to the evidence.