"Many of the scientists listed lost funding by changing their positions." Please name them. Drs. Baliunus & Soon don't count; they are discussed in detail below. Please provide better examples than them. "Much more money is available from the federal government to "promote" man caused global warming than is available for the skeptics." Please offer evidence. I believe you'll find the contrary to be true. The track record of the Bush administration in censoring and suppressing climate research is well-documented. Why would the Feds, especially in this administration, favor research that so discomforts the fossil fuels industry? The size of the Sierra Club's operating budget, or Greenpeace's for that matter, is irrelevant. (Shall we compare their budgets to just the ad budget of Exxon?) "I don't think the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution is bought out by oil companies nor the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics (one of the prominent skeptics of man caused global warming)." The Woods Hole web pages you provided are at best a rational and laudable plea for careful data gathering and a caution against jumping too quickly to conclusions. Always good advice. Not by any stretch of the imagination do those pages refute the central tenets of anthropogenic global climate change. The Harvard-Smithsonian reference and the idea of "smeared" scientists, however, is a howler. You're referring to Sallie Baliunas, co-author of the Fraser Institute's now widely-discredited pamphlet "Global warming: a guide to the science." The Fraser Institute receives $60,000 per year from Exxon Mobile. Dr. Baliunas is a senior scientist at the George C. Marshall Institute (received $310,000 from Exxon Mobil). She's also the "enviro-sci" host of TechCentralStation.com (received $95,000 from Exxon Mobil) and is on science advisory boards of the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow ($252,000 from Exxon) and the Annapolis Center for Science-Based Public Policy ($427,500 from Exxon). She has given speeches before the American Enterprise Institute ($960,000 from Exxon) and the Heritage Foundation ($340,000 from Exxon). The Heartland Institute ($312,000 from Exxon) publishes her op-ed pieces. Dr. Soon is similarly associated with virtually the same set of "think tanks." The paper that caused Baliunas & Soon's "persecution" was refuted by a panel of 13 scientists, the authors of the papers Baliunas and Soon cited in reaching their anti-global warming conclusions. Several editors of "Climate Research", the journal which published the paper, later resigned in protest at a flawed peer review process which allowed the publication. Source: Jeff Nesmith, Cox News Yep, the poor persecuted scientists. Seth -----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces+sjarvis=slco.org@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces+sjarvis=slco.org@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Don J. Colton Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 11:34 AM To: 'Utah Astronomy' Subject: RE: [Utah-astronomy] Solar Caused Global Warming Many of the scientists listed lost funding by changing their positions. The Sierra Club, whom I support on some of their positions, has a budget in excess of $500 million per year not to mention Greenpeace. I think both sides of the issue are getting money and support from political groups. I don't think the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution is bought out by oil companies nor the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics (one of the prominent skeptics of man caused global warming). The Sargasso Sea data, historical accounts about the Medieval Warming Period as well as Greenland ice cores showing both the Medieval Warming Period and warmer temperatures than at present during the Roman era can not be explained by CO2 as the driving factor.
From the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics website:
"While most of official Washington was captivated with the fight on the Senate floor to pass an energy bill before Congress left town for its August vacation, a vicious campaign was under way behind the scenes to smear two leading scientists for pointing out serious flaws in the science behind the theory of human-caused climate change. The targets were Willie Soon and Sallie Baliunas, both astrophysicists at Harvard, who were characterized as fringe scientists whose work should be ignored. What did they do to attract such characterizations? They had the audacity to pull back the curtain on the wizard of global warming. The issue focuses on a paper by them that supports the widely held view that the climate of the last millennium has been quite variable and includes a Medieval Warm Period and subsequent Little Ice Age. This is only controversial because it, and the wider body of scientific literature that exists, directly contradicts recent research by Michael Mann, a leading global warming proponent. Mr. Mann argues global air temperatures have been stable over the last 1,000 years, with the exception of the last 100. It is the "Mann-made" warming to which Mr. Soon and Ms. Baliunas have objected." -----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces+djcolton=piol.com@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces+djcolton=piol.com@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Seth Jarvis Sent: Monday, May 21, 2007 4:38 PM To: Utah Astronomy Subject: RE: [Utah-astronomy] Solar Caused Global Warming Fine, let's have the debate. I apologize in advance for the use of this forum for this discussion. There's just as much "debate" in the area of global warming as there was 20 years ago about the addictive and dangerous aspects of tobacco. Then, as now, industry interests manufactured a phony controversy to distract policymakers and provide cover for maintaining the status quo. Take a look at the global denial lobby. Who are they? By and large they're oil/coal/gas/automobile industry affiliated writers with significant conflicts of interest. Look at who funds these guys. You'll find Exxon fingerprints all over them and the "think tanks" that pay for their publications. That, or they're writers venting reactionary angst because some folks just can't abide the notion that "ivory tower intellectuals" (or other talk-radio pejoratives de jour) are telling people that we can no longer live with our collective heads stuck in the sand. You can't simultaneously say "Appeals to authority do not cut water as far as real science is concerned," and then offer vastly inferior appeals to authority by citing some web pages, a book on Amazon.com and an article in the Stanford Review written by an undergraduate majoring in Human Biology. I'll make you a deal - you refrain from posting further citations from Senator Inhofe's blog and I'll refrain from citing Mother Jones. Neither should be the nation's brain trust for deciding matters of vital public policy. Why am I supposed to take seriously articles published on web sites such as "NewsBusters.org: Exposing & Combating Liberal Media Bias," but not take seriously the American Meteorological Society, the National Academy of Science or the AAAS? Is science once again the boogeyman of the political right? I get it that a lot of global warming deniers would rather eat worms than agree with anything Al Gore says, but is that really a good way to formulate important public policy? Is our nation so irretrievably polarized that we can't or won't accept an objective, testable scientific conclusion unless it's delivered by someone with whom we agree politically? Global Warming deniers need to either rack up a thousand or so peer-reviewed articles by qualified climate researchers published in professional science journals making the case that global warming is not anthropogenic, or they need to admit that they're really just throwing a tantrum because they don't like what they're learning from the people actually doing the research. Seth -----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces+sjarvis=slco.org@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces+sjarvis=slco.org@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Don J. Colton Sent: Monday, May 21, 2007 2:10 PM To: 'Utah Astronomy' Subject: RE: [Utah-astronomy] Solar Caused Global Warming I think a healthy debate of all viewpoints is needed before making draconian political decisions that could affect all of us. Appeals to authority do not cut water as far as real science is concerned. You could find almost the same group of organizations opposed to continental drift in the 1960's, yet they were dead wrong. Order the book "The Role of the Sun in Climate Change", Oxford University Press see http://www.amazon.com/Role-Sun-Climate-Change/dp/019509414X/ref=pd_bbs_s r_1/103-4233475-8101463?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1179775211&sr=8-1 None of the CO2 driven advocates of Global Warming can explain the Medieval Warming Period see http://www.skepticism.net/articles/2002/000033.html and http://www.whoi.edu/page.do?pid=12455&tid=282&cid=9986 and http://www.whoi.edu/page.do?pid=12455&tid=441&cid=8722&ct=61&article=384 2 Get out your Norton Star Atlas and look at a comparison of sunspot activity for the 1800's vs. the 1900's. Finally there is strong evidence particulate emissions have a cooling effect on climate. See: http://www.stanfordreview.org/Archive/Volume_XXXVI/Issue_8/Opinions/opin ions1.shtml The author of this article fails to discuss the large amount of particulate pollution now coming from China and they are also proponents of CO2 as a the major factor in global warming. See a list of all the proponents of CO2 as the major factor who have changed their positions in the last few years: http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressRoom.Blogs&Conten tRecord_id=927B9303-802A-23AD-494B-DCCB00B51A12 http://newsbusters.org/node/12793 Finally, a recent article in Energy and Environment, German researcher Ernst-Georg Beck, shows that the pre-industrial level is some 50 ppm higher than the level used by computer models that produce all future climate predictions. Completely at odds with the smoothly increasing levels found in the ice core records, Beck concludes, "Since 1812, the CO2 concentration in northern hemispheric air has fluctuated, exhibiting three high level maxima around 1825, 1857 and 1942, the latter showing more than 400 ppm." See: http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/global-warming051407.htm -----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces+djcolton=piol.com@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces+djcolton=piol.com@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Seth Jarvis Sent: Monday, May 21, 2007 10:09 AM To: Utah Astronomy Subject: RE: [Utah-astronomy] Solar Caused Global Warming Bill, I've been away for a few days. Sorry for the delay in responding. The only remotely astronomical connection to the issue of Global Warming comes from a handful of folks who say that rather than being the result of human activity, the global climate change we're currently experiencing is caused by a change in solar output. That's just not so - it's been investigated thoroughly. Natural causes (solar output, volcanoes, etc.) can account for only a small fraction of the climate change we're experiencing ("Climate Change Science Moves from Proof to Prevention" Scientific American, Feb 1, 2007). Citing an opinion piece by a right-wing blowhard in a Canadian newspaper does not mean the decades of work by thousands of working scientists who've published their work in peer-reviewed professional journals has somehow been disproved. Our sense of "fairness" has been distorted to the point that anyone can say anything, no matter how nonsensical it is, and the press feels obligated to give their ideas equal consideration with the scientific data that professional researchers have labored long and hard to acquire. Remember "Intelligent Design?" The National Academies of Science, the Association for the Advancement of Science, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, American Meteorology Society and other organizations representing professional climate researchers are unequivocal in their position that the global climate change we're seeing is primarily the result of human activities, and they've got libraries of hard scientific fact to back them up. Professional climate esearchers are finding _more_ evidence, not less, that the majority of the climate change we're seeing around the world is caused by us. Global Warming deniers have been shown the data and they're not letting go of their delusions. What good comes from arguing with them? Seth -----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces+sjarvis=slco.org@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces+sjarvis=slco.org@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Lockman Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 1:42 PM To: Utah Astronomy Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Solar Caused Global Warming I would be very interested to know why you would object to a posting with obvious astronomical ties being put on this forum. Bill Seth Jarvis wrote:
I respectfully recommend that we all voluntarily refrain from using this forum for posting articles and opinions on global warming. The internet offers zillions of other places to do that.
Seth
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.utahastronomy.com
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.utahastronomy.com _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.utahastronomy.com _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.utahastronomy.com _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.utahastronomy.com _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.utahastronomy.com