Comments on: Asheville Scientist Explains Economics of Global Warming

By: Gordon Smith

Gordon Smith — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 21:30:09 +0000

TruckNutz

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Michael Muller

Michael Muller — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 18:59:57 +0000

TruckNutz?

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Gordon Smith

Gordon Smith — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 14:11:09 +0000

Dave,

I thought ‘the subject’ was the fun petition.

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Doug Gibson

Doug Gibson — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 14:08:05 +0000

Dave,

Humane Letters is an honorary degree, the sort of thing you get for distinguished service in your field. So, no, that alone doesn’t qualify him, though it’s probably an indicator of his qualifications that he was chosen to receive such an honor.

On the other hand, I’m guessing that a PhD in meteorology qualifies one to talk about how predicted global warming will affect weather patterns.

Gordon, seven percent of the signers were DVM’s? Wow, that’s amazing. So there’s no consensus on global warming among veterinarians, apparently.

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Gordon Smith

Gordon Smith — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 12:29:45 +0000

You want the subject to be your fun petition? O.K., but let’s not pretend that talking about CO2, peer reviewed science, and the caprice of gambling with the planet’s future isn’t germane.

Here’s a great response to your petition.

I’ll excerpt a few bits for you:

To understand the problems with Robinsonâ€™s â€œGlobal Warming Petition Projectâ€, we must first examine how the petition itself was distributed and how signatures were collected. To a sample of persons on the mailing list of American Men and Women of Science, Robinson sent a petition packet consisting of a petition card, a return envelope, a cover letter from Seitz, and a 12-page review of the literature on the human-caused global warming hypothesis authored by the two Robinsons and Willie Soon.

Sounds very sciency!

In the end, â€œvalidâ€ and signed petition cards were obtained from 31,072 persons with degrees in the following fields: Earth science (3,697 persons or 12% of the total); computer science and mathematics (903 or 3%); physics and aerospace sciences (5,691 or 18%); chemistry (4,796 or 15%); biology and agriculture (2,924 or 9%); medicine (3,069 or 10%); and engineering and general science (9,992 or 32%). The breakdown according to educational level was: PhD (9,021 or 29%); MS (6,961 or 22%); MD and DVM (2,240 or 7%); and BS or equivalent (12,850 or 41%).

41% with bachelor’s degrees making a decision on the future of our planet based on a 12-page brief from some climate change deniers? I’m sold!

In conclusion, through his Global Warming Petition Project, Arthur Robinson has solicited the opinions of the wrong group of people in the wrong way and drawn the wrong conclusions about any possible consensus among relevant and qualified scientists regarding the hypothesis of human-caused global warming. His petition is unqualified to deliver answers about a consensus in which the public is interested. He has a right to conduct any kind of petition drive he wishes, but he is not ethically entitled to misrepresent his petition as a fair reflection of relevant scientific opinion. He has confused his political with his scientific aims and misled the public in the process.

Please, Dave. While I understand that there will always be a minority who will insist that climate change has nothing to do with human beings, I’m also aware that there will always be people who think TruckNutz are cool. I’m not going to take either group too seriously.

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Gordon Smith

Gordon Smith — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 05:06:09 +0000

What website, Dave?

You’re saying humans have no role in climate change despite pouring CO2 into the atmosphere since the dawn of the industrial revolution. Despite the thousands of peer reviewed scientists who have made it plain to all but the most stubborn, you’re clinging to the idea that humans can’t effect changes in the environment?

Make your argument if you have one. Please! And, if you can work it in, explain how it’s conservative to gamble with the future of our planet if you’re wrong.

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: David Roat

David Roat — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 01:29:34 +0000

Climatologists have long predicted that global warming would create extreme weather patterns. We had drought for the past two years and a severe storm yesterday. The drought compromised the root structure of trees and the intense storm yesterday knocked down many large trees in West Asheville at their roots causing widespread power outages. My power was out for over 24 hours.

The climate shift deniers will predictably say that, “no one could have anticipated this”.

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Gordon Smith

Gordon Smith — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 21:29:59 +0000

Dave,

You’re a climate change denier? Do tell.

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: greenasheville

greenasheville — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 20:21:13 +0000

I’d like to see a study on how many people who biked, walked and/or rode the bus during strive not to drive week are still doing so…

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Doug Gibson

Doug Gibson — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 20:16:27 +0000

Yeah, nothing drives people crazy like trying to tell the truth when people don’t want to hear it. It’s even harder than it looks.

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Gordon Smith

Gordon Smith — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 19:50:29 +0000

Those crazy internationally renowned scientists leading a global effort to save the planet!

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Doug Gibson

Doug Gibson — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 19:24:47 +0000

Umm, because they aren’t trained to look telegenic when someone sitting at their feet snaps their picture with a cellphone camera while they’re trying to speak intelligently to a roomful of people?