On Fri, 28 Jan 2011 13:12:22 -0800, "anorton"
wrote:


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 28 Jan 2011 09:26:04 -0700, Lewis Hartswick
wrote:

Rich Grise wrote:
Dave__67 wrote:
On Jan 27, 9:09 am, ignator wrote:
NOVA has become total goo-goo-gaa-gaa science, and is now intended for
kids. I wish they would replay the original shows I remember from
1976, these were not dumb down. Oh well, the intent is to get more
kids in science. Just what I need more kids that are academic, and
have no "knack".
Same with scientific american- they dialed the smarts waaaay back.

I used to have a supscription to SA; I dropped it in the 1970's when
they
went warmingist.

Uh, don't you mean "coldingist", sir? The exact same data (up to that
year) they're looking at now -used- to point to another ice age,
remember? All I can say for sure is that "climate" scientists have a
long, long way to go, both in understanding and modeling, before
they're accurate. Humans can't predict squat...yet.
Humans 0, Mother Nature 1.


No, not really. There were a few speculative papers talking about a
possible cooling trend that were picked up and sensationalized in 1975 by
Newsweek and others. Even then, by far, most published research pointed to
warming not cooling. Pretty much all papers back then emphasized the need
to more study and more computer power. See here for more info:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/ice-...s-in-1970s.htm

I remember many headlines about ice and can't remember any about
warming from back then, and I took up the environmental sword at that
time. I've been recycling, reducing, and reusing for 40 years. That
site you linked is run by an Aussie AGWKer who usurped the skeptic
name, the blackguard. sigh


You stated above: "All I can say for sure is that "climate" scientists have
a long, long way to go, both in understanding and modeling, before they're
accurate." That would have been be an accurate conclusion 36 years ago, and
that is why you did not hear a call to action back then even if you did
catch pieces of the scientific debate. However, A lot of progress has been
made in 36 years, and the fundamental question of human-produced CO2 causing
warming is settled in the minds practically every one who has any expert
knowledge in the subject.

OK, show me a single one of those "climate" scientists who can make
their current modeling software -accurately- predict the future. Hell,
they can't even make it track the _past_ accurately, and they have
exact data for that. Go ahead, prove me wrong.

Jayzuss, I can't believe that, even after the scandals about doctoring
data and keeping skeptic papers from getting published, you bastids
still don't accept facts and can't see that the burning wool is being
pulled over your eyes by scam artists going for the enviro-loot.
deep sigh

--
We're all here because we're not all there.