A Cool-Headed Climate Conversation With Aerospace Legend Burt Rutan

[IanC]

the opinions of smart, competent people are usually interesting. Rutan, like McIntyre, looked into global warming because it was an interesting topic that 'smelled funny'. here is a Forbes' piece by Larry Bell that gives an intro into the process of what Rutan did when he caught the scent of bullshit coming off the concensus of climate science.

A Cool-Headed Climate Conversation With Aerospace Legend Burt Rutan - Forbes

Then, what really drew me into the subject, was when I found that I couldn’t obtain the raw data that I was looking for. I was shocked to find that there were actually climate scientists who wouldn’t share the raw data, but would only share their conclusions in summary graphs that were used to prove their various theories about planet warming. In fact I began to smell something really bad, and the worse that smell got, the deeper I looked.

I even read Al Gore’s book, which was very enlightening…but not in a good way. When you look for data to back up his claims, you immediately discover that they are totally unsubstantiated. This was frankly astonishing because analyzing data is something I’m very good at. All my professional life I have been analyzing complex flight test data, interpreting it and presenting it. Something that I always did in flight test is to make a chart that shows every bit of the data, and only then, decide later on the basis of real observed results which parts of the data were valid.

Tragically, policymakers have thrown horrendous amounts of taxpayer money needed for other purposes at solving an unsubstantiated emergency. It is scandalous that so many climate scientists who fully knew that Al Gore had no basis for his irresponsible claims stood mute. Meanwhile, that alarmism has generated billions of dollars more to finance a rapidly growing climate science industry with budgets that have risen by a factor of 40 since the early 1990s. I consider this failure to speak up just as unethical as the behavior of those who put out the false catastrophic claims.

if you liked the Forbes article, you should check out his website www.burtrutan.com

 

[Old Rocks]

As much as I respect and admire Rutan's skills in building airplanes, he is totally wrong on this subject. As far as availability of data is concerned, in the nearly five decades that I have been interested in this subject, there has never been a lack of data. But don't go asking a busy researcher to spend a day or two to look it up for you, do it yourself, it is there.

AGW Observer

This site has many papers from peer reviewed journals, and many of the seminal papers from the past century.

We are now at a new record for the minimum ice in the Arctic.

Northern Hemisphere Sea Ice Area

A minimum that is a significant drop from that of 2007.

As the leading re-insurance companies of the world, Swiss Re and Munich Re, have pointed out, we are seeing an increase in extreme weather events that threatons the insurance industry around the world.

But you people still claim nothing is happening, and that GHGs have nothing to do with it if it is happening. Calling bullshit on all of you.

 

[Old Rocks]

http://climatenexus.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/signals.pdf

 

[mamooth]

Given that the raw data is available on line, Burt clearly didn't bother looking very hard for it. Didn't stop him from claiming a conspiracy to hide it.

He also babbles a bunch of idiot denalist mantras (CO2 is plant food! 1938 was the warmest year ever!), and then, unbelievably, stoops to lying about the climategate nonscandal.

Basically, he's a prime example of an engineer who thinks he's a scientist, doesn't understand the difference between the two fields, vastly overestimates his own abilities and thus gets it all shockingly wrong.

 

[Old Rocks]

"Four years ago I couldn't even spell engineer, now I are one"

 

[IanC]

Given that the raw data is available on line, Burt clearly didn't bother looking very hard for it. Didn't stop him from claiming a conspiracy to hide it.

He also babbles a bunch of idiot denalist mantras (CO2 is plant food! 1938 was the warmest year ever!), and then, unbelievably, stoops to lying about the climategate nonscandal.

Basically, he's a prime example of an engineer who thinks he's a scientist, doesn't understand the difference between the two fields, vastly overestimates his own abilities and thus gets it all shockingly wrong.

ahhhh. I guess you are our newest CAGW apologist and propagandist. good luck with that, and make sure you dont accidentally think about what is put in front of you as evidence. hahahaha


raw data online? have you totally ignored the last decade's worth of denied requests for information and methodologies? much of the recent data is only available because sceptics forcibly prised it out of clutched hands that wanted to keep it out of reach to the public.

CO2 is plant food! the '30s were the warmest decade in the USA. and clearly, anyone who doesnt think the climategate emails were scandalous didnt read them.

you denigrate a hugely successful engineer who could have turned his intelligence and creativity to a different scientific field, presumably even the less-than-distinguished field of climate science. there are two things to consider- it is easier to check the validity of a paper or idea than to create it in the first place, and basic mathematical and scientific principles overlap into all fields. Rutan is easily capable enough to spot areas where the supposed evidence is insufficient to support the exaggerated claims and conclusions of AGW and CAGW.


politics and popularity have overtrumped scientific study in the climate science area. the IPCC is a stark example of this. if you or anyone else wants to believe that mankind is burning up the planet then you are entitled to your opinion, just dont tell me that 'science' has proved it.