Nobel Physicist Resigns Over Global Warming (9.15.11)

Nobel Prize-winning physicist Ivar Giaever resigned as a Fellow from the American Physical Society Tuesday, condemning the group's official stand on global warming.

http://www.foxnews.com

To see my News & Politics Playlist, click here:
http://www.youtube.com/user/OmniChristianVids3#grid/user/CDD25DDC8F779130
_

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Fox News
• OmniChristianVids3
• Ivar Giaever
• American Physical Society
• Global warming
• Climate Change

[1tonykirk]

Rockefeller, Gore, and their boy in the UN, Maurice Strong, haven't figured out a way to install meters on our faces for breathing "THEIR AIR" yet, so they figure we are stupid enough to believe that one of the four building blocks of life is a "dangerous gas" ,and that we will let them charge us an additional enslavement tax... this one financing global government...

Say hello to George Orwell, folks!

[Visfen]

@michalchik I didn't say it was evidence that there are less disasters, I said it is evidence that it is not more dangerous extreme weather. Further, I did point out that if you track "extreme weather" (absurd expression btw) it hasn't risen. So you have nothing to stand on in suggesting it is dangerous, that there is more extreme weather and for that matter that there will be.

You're saying I have confirmation bias? Yes, I'm libertarian, 40% of MENSA is as well, an over-representation of 50~.

[Mazarbul]

Sure YOU did not understand a single word, flat-earth blondie...

[informationwarfare]

@1tonykirk hi george!

[kroggwaff]

goddamnit what a retarded blonde at the end, like...wtf? is she for real? even the guy was puzzled for a secound there, is it possible to be like that?

[michalchik]

@Visfen You dismiss it as irrelevant. A man who can't solve basic flux problem my son in highschool could. A man who never read any scientific papers or to dig into the literature except when it is corporate apologist PR. A man who thinks that every major scientific organization in the world is in some sort of conspiracy to engage in mass hysteria. There is no pro or antigovernemnt science. That is your problem you see this as a political battle. It is simply science and BS. You like the BS. 

[michalchik]

@Visfen Look, you are just making stuff up. there were no major regulatory changes in 96-97 and you are not apparently curious enough to read past the introduction. You have concluded that AGCC will cause no damage because that would violate your faith belief that no economic activity can be harmful. If you want to dismiss Time magazine as a conspiracy rag, you can. You can't argue with someone who simply says that any fact he does not like is just an opinion.

[Visfen]

@michalchik So far as species goes, why are almost all of them living in wetlands and swamps? Because something that is admitted even in the abstract, local human action has a much larger effect. It also happens to be cheaper to do something about.

Bankrolling? So we're back to conspiracy nonsense. I wonder if you have the same criticism towards government friendly AGCC-science. I don't even deny it, I deny the extreme alarmism coming from attention whores. It's a pretty darn irrelevant field.

[Visfen]

@michalchik Just of the bat, the Introduction-article you wanted me to read says something beyond absurd. That the record home sales are linked to weather events and not to the changes in regulatory practices of GME's. Further, there's really nothing in it that supports your claim that weather has become more extreme on an empirical basis. About what can be shown is that it has rained more extreme, which isn't even true nor has the aggregate rainfall gone up.

[michalchik]

@Visfen It is clear you haven't read one single scientific article on AGCC have you. You only read opinion pieces in popular liturature for layman. Do your homework and stop spouting nonsense. Google "An Introduction to Trends in Extreme Weather and Climate Events: Observations, Socioeconomic Impacts, Terrestrial Ecological Impacts, and Model Projections" and "A globally coherent fingerprint of climate

change impacts across natural systems" and "Who's Bankrolling the Climate-Change Deniers?"

[Visfen]

@michalchik There's absolutely no empirical science linking extreme weather, however you wanna define it, with warmer weather. Okay? If you wanna stick to the science, do so, don't go with ridiculous hype and alarmism because I will call you on it.

[Visfen]

@michalchik All economic intervention has consequences, most of them worse. It's the simply fact that they originate from violence and force and not voluntary evaluation and cooperation. This is as simply as I can explain the kind of philosophy you are attacking. Business wont do what is always best, corporatism for instance.

Culture is a normal term in sociology, as far as defining be my guest, as far as trying to use it to explain something, you couldn't be less precise. What is your point?