Draft APS Statement on Climate Change

[IanC]

Curry suggested that the comments would come in slowly. I am looking forward to seeing how a supporter will communicate their approval.

 

[Crick]

Do you believe the people visiting Curry's website accurately represent the APS membership?

 

[orogenicman]

So, Curry does not like the fact that fellow scientists believe that they and their descendents have a stake in policys in regard to Global Warming. No decision is a decision, and no policy is a policy. Curry can play the sweet little virgin that just doesn't get involved with nasty things like what should we do about the effects of the GHGs in the atmosphere, and how do we go about doing those neccessary things. She has placed herself, and her opinions, in a position of irrelevancy.

Quite the reverse actually. I think what she is saying is that at the end of the day, decade, century, nothing can be known for sure. And when nothing can be known, the citizenry of the world will be less willing to believe what science declares, if science is made a tool of statecraft.

When you politicize science, science becomes political. It shouldn't become political.

I beg to differ. At the end of the day, decade, century, Judith Curry will find (has found) that is she who is irrelevant.

 

[Politico]

I see. So scientists should sit on their hands, and say nothing at all if the political structure ignores obvious dangers. Now that is about as fucking dumb as it gets.

No they should say nothing because they are clueless.

 

[Crick]

And you know this because an ex-weatherman told you so? And it was heartily confirmed by the fossil fuel industry? Well, that seems reasonable.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Consensus is a cult word

 

[jc456]

So, Curry does not like the fact that fellow scientists believe that they and their descendents have a stake in policys in regard to Global Warming. No decision is a decision, and no policy is a policy. Curry can play the sweet little virgin that just doesn't get involved with nasty things like what should we do about the effects of the GHGs in the atmosphere, and how do we go about doing those neccessary things. She has placed herself, and her opinions, in a position of irrelevancy.

Quite the reverse actually. I think what she is saying is that at the end of the day, decade, century, nothing can be known for sure. And when nothing can be known, the citizenry of the world will be less willing to believe what science declares, if science is made a tool of statecraft.

When you politicize science, science becomes political. It shouldn't become political.

I beg to differ. At the end of the day, decade, century, Judith Curry will find (has found) that is she who is irrelevant.

huh? can you try again in a statement that makes sense? Thanks, don't forget to water your ear.

 

[jc456]

And you know this because an ex-weatherman told you so? And it was heartily confirmed by the fossil fuel industry? Well, that seems reasonable.

nope, the big sphere called earth did.

 

[IanC]

Do you believe the people visiting Curry's website accurately represent the APS membership?

Well, you have to supply APS identication to post, so.....

The draft statement is at odds with the conclusions of the expert panel that was convened to study the question. So apparently the statement is political rather than science based. There is no vote, and while comments are being accepted they are not being made public.

Let's reiterate. The draft statement was written by a group that ignored their own experts and don't wish to find out the opinions of the membership. And crick doesn't like Curry for hosting a public forum for APS members to post their (one and only allowed) comment to APS before it goes into the round filing cabinet.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Good. Is that the money Stephanie was talking about? Does Stephanie pay a carbon tax? Is the carbon tax in your neighborhood, Ian, making anyone rich? Do you think it was levied to make someone rich? Was it levied to put more money in the government's coffers? Do you have some evidence that it was NOT put into place to reduce carbon emissions?

If you use electricity you are paying a carbon tax..

If you use natural gas your paying a carbon tax...

If you buy a vehicle and use any fuel your paying a carbon tax..

Why are liberals so fucking stupid?

 

[Politico]

And you know this because an ex-weatherman told you so? And it was heartily confirmed by the fossil fuel industry? Well, that seems reasonable.

No I know the climate changes. You GW kooks are the ones listening to weathermen.

 

[Crick]

Weather men are generally not scientists. Anthony Watts is certainly not. The IPCC most certainly is an organization of scientists compiling the work of other scientists: thousands of them. The vast majority of active, degreed climate scientists accept AGW as valid. The vast majority of their published work accepts and supports AGW. So, from where comes your information about climate change?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

IPCC is on record that Climate "Science" is about money and has nothing to do with science

"One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore," -- IPCC - See more at: UN IPCC Official Admits We Redistribute World s Wealth By Climate Policy

 

[jc456]

Weather men are generally not scientists. Anthony Watts is certainly not. The IPCC most certainly is an organization of scientists compiling the work of other scientists: thousands of them. The vast majority of active, degreed climate scientists accept AGW as valid. The vast majority of their published work accepts and supports AGW. So, from where comes your information about climate change?

is the IPCC made up of scientists? Are you going with that statement?

 

[jc456]

IPCC is on record that Climate "Science" is about money and has nothing to do with science

"One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore," -- IPCC - See more at: UN IPCC Official Admits We Redistribute World s Wealth By Climate Policy

Frank, he stated that the IPCC is made up of scientists. Holy Crap!!!!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

IPCC, another entity that needs to be defunded

 

[Politico]

Weather men are generally not scientists. Anthony Watts is certainly not. The IPCC most certainly is an organization of scientists compiling the work of other scientists: thousands of them. The vast majority of active, degreed climate scientists accept AGW as valid. The vast majority of their published work accepts and supports AGW. So, from where comes your information about climate change?

You go ahead and keep fighting to prevent cow farts. I wish I could be around to see all the kooks confused faces when the next ice age still happens.

 

[Crick]

So no one here is able to identify a reliable source for your rejection of AGW.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

So no one here is able to identify a reliable source for your rejection of AGW.

The planet itself is mocking your "theory" so badly you had to change it from "Global Warming" to "Climate Change"

 

[Crick]

Frank, you only make yourself look more stupid with such comments.