Not 97% but .3% of Climatologists agree.

Discussion in 'Politics' started by jem, Sep 16, 2013.

  1. Lucrum

    Lucrum




    [​IMG]
     
    #1141     Dec 3, 2013
  2. Ricter

    Ricter

    Getting you going is perhaps the only victory some of our locals can experience lately. Think about it, righties have lost on every issue of importance since 2010. That's going to leave a mark. :D
     
    #1142     Dec 3, 2013
  3. Tsing Tao

    Tsing Tao

    What leaves a mark is that righties have lost on just about every issue at the polling booths. But were found to be correct after the case on many of them.
     
    #1143     Dec 3, 2013
  4. Lucrum

    Lucrum

    Our country and it's productive tax paying citizens are the real losers, dumb ass.
     
    #1144     Dec 3, 2013
  5. jem

    jem

     
    #1145     Dec 3, 2013
  6. jem

    jem

    reality is now a conspiracy for ricter.
    these guys are the astronauts and the rocket scientists part of NASA...


    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/04/...emprical-evidence-rather-than-climate-models/


    The full text of the letter:

    March 28, 2012

    The Honorable Charles Bolden, Jr.
    NASA Administrator
    NASA Headquarters
    Washington, D.C. 20546-0001

    Dear Charlie,

    We, the undersigned, respectfully request that NASA and the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) refrain from including unproven remarks in public releases and websites. We believe the claims by NASA and GISS, that man-made carbon dioxide is having a catastrophic impact on global climate change are not substantiated, especially when considering thousands of years of empirical data. With hundreds of well-known climate scientists and tens of thousands of other scientists publicly declaring their disbelief in the catastrophic forecasts, coming particularly from the GISS leadership, it is clear that the science is NOT settled.

    The unbridled advocacy of CO2 being the major cause of climate change is unbecoming of NASA’s history of making an objective assessment of all available scientific data prior to making decisions or public statements.

    As former NASA employees, we feel that NASA’s advocacy of an extreme position, prior to a thorough study of the possible overwhelming impact of natural climate drivers is inappropriate. We request that NASA refrain from including unproven and unsupported remarks in its future releases and websites on this subject. At risk is damage to the exemplary reputation of NASA, NASA’s current or former scientists and employees, and even the reputation of science itself.

    For additional information regarding the science behind our concern, we recommend that you contact Harrison Schmitt or Walter Cunningham, or others they can recommend to you.

    Thank you for considering this request.

    Sincerely,

    (Attached signatures)

    CC: Mr. John Grunsfeld, Associate Administrator for Science

    CC: Ass Mr. Chris Scolese, Director, Goddard Space Flight Center

    Ref: Letter to NASA Administrator Charles Bolden, dated 3-26-12, regarding a request for NASA to refrain from making unsubstantiated claims that human produced CO2 is having a catastrophic impact on climate change.

    /s/ Jack Barneburg, Jack – JSC, Space Shuttle Structures, Engineering Directorate, 34 years

    /s/ Larry Bell – JSC, Mgr. Crew Systems Div., Engineering Directorate, 32 years

    /s/ Dr. Donald Bogard – JSC, Principal Investigator, Science Directorate, 41 years

    /s/ Jerry C. Bostick – JSC, Principal Investigator, Science Directorate, 23 years

    /s/ Dr. Phillip K. Chapman – JSC, Scientist – astronaut, 5 years

    /s/ Michael F. Collins, JSC, Chief, Flight Design and Dynamics Division, MOD, 41 years

    /s/ Dr. Kenneth Cox – JSC, Chief Flight Dynamics Div., Engr. Directorate, 40 years

    /s/ Walter Cunningham – JSC, Astronaut, Apollo 7, 8 years

    /s/ Dr. Donald M. Curry – JSC, Mgr. Shuttle Leading Edge, Thermal Protection Sys., Engr. Dir., 44 years

    /s/ Leroy Day – Hdq. Deputy Director, Space Shuttle Program, 19 years

    /s/ Dr. Henry P. Decell, Jr. – JSC, Chief, Theory & Analysis Office, 5 years

    /s/Charles F. Deiterich – JSC, Mgr., Flight Operations Integration, MOD, 30 years

    /s/ Dr. Harold Doiron – JSC, Chairman, Shuttle Pogo Prevention Panel, 16 years

    /s/ Charles Duke – JSC, Astronaut, Apollo 16, 10 years

    /s/ Anita Gale

    /s/ Grace Germany – JSC, Program Analyst, 35 years

    /s/ Ed Gibson – JSC, Astronaut Skylab 4, 14 years

    /s/ Richard Gordon – JSC, Astronaut, Gemini Xi, Apollo 12, 9 years

    /s/ Gerald C. Griffin – JSC, Apollo Flight Director, and Director of Johnson Space Center, 22 years

    /s/ Thomas M. Grubbs – JSC, Chief, Aircraft Maintenance and Engineering Branch, 31 years

    /s/ Thomas J. Harmon

    /s/ David W. Heath – JSC, Reentry Specialist, MOD, 30 years

    /s/ Miguel A. Hernandez, Jr. – JSC, Flight crew training and operations, 3 years

    /s/ James R. Roundtree – JSC Branch Chief, 26 years

    /s/ Enoch Jones – JSC, Mgr. SE&I, Shuttle Program Office, 26 years

    /s/ Dr. Joseph Kerwin – JSC, Astronaut, Skylab 2, Director of Space and Life Sciences, 22 years

    /s/ Jack Knight – JSC, Chief, Advanced Operations and Development Division, MOD, 40 years

    /s/ Dr. Christopher C. Kraft – JSC, Apollo Flight Director and Director of Johnson Space Center, 24 years

    /s/ Paul C. Kramer – JSC, Ass.t for Planning Aeroscience and Flight Mechanics Div., Egr. Dir., 34 years

    /s/ Alex (Skip) Larsen

    /s/ Dr. Lubert Leger – JSC, Ass’t. Chief Materials Division, Engr. Directorate, 30 years

    /s/ Dr. Humbolt C. Mandell – JSC, Mgr. Shuttle Program Control and Advance Programs, 40 years

    /s/ Donald K. McCutchen – JSC, Project Engineer – Space Shuttle and ISS Program Offices, 33 years

    /s/ Thomas L. (Tom) Moser – Hdq. Dep. Assoc. Admin. & Director, Space Station Program, 28 years

    /s/ Dr. George Mueller – Hdq., Assoc. Adm., Office of Space Flight, 6 years

    /s/ Tom Ohesorge

    /s/ James Peacock – JSC, Apollo and Shuttle Program Office, 21 years

    /s/ Richard McFarland – JSC, Mgr. Motion Simulators, 28 years

    /s/ Joseph E. Rogers – JSC, Chief, Structures and Dynamics Branch, Engr. Directorate,40 years

    /s/ Bernard J. Rosenbaum – JSC, Chief Engineer, Propulsion and Power Division, Engr. Dir., 48 years

    /s/ Dr. Harrison (Jack) Schmitt – JSC, Astronaut Apollo 17, 10 years

    /s/ Gerard C. Shows – JSC, Asst. Manager, Quality Assurance, 30 years



    the list goes on.




















     
    #1146     Dec 3, 2013
  7. More bullshit from jerm. " Cook had not considered whether scientists and their published papers had said climate change was “dangerous”."

    So what?! Who cares if they didn't say "It was dangerous" ? What a ludicrous and immaterial criteria! The fact is that 97% of climate scientist agree and your repeating bullshit like a retarded broken record doesn't change that. Do you even understand the bullshit you spew? 0.3% ...really? It's beyond absurd.

    Here's a hint: If it from the TV weatherman Watt's website there is a very high probability it is bullshit. Try NOAA or NASA or any real source of the science.


    Quote from jem:

    97% claim exposed / debunked.

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/09/...or-math-errors/


    “0.3% climate consensus, not 97.1%”

    PRESS RELEASE – September 3rd, 2013

    A major peer-reviewed paper by four senior researchers has exposed grave errors in an earlier paper in a new and unknown journal that had claimed a 97.1% scientific consensus that Man had caused at least half the 0.7 Cº global warming since 1950.

    A tweet in President Obama’s name had assumed that the earlier, flawed paper, by John Cook and others, showed 97% endorsement of the notion that climate change is dangerous:

    “Ninety-seven percent of scientists agree: #climate change is real, man-made and dangerous.” [Emphasis added]

    The new paper by the leading climatologist Dr David Legates and his colleagues, published in the respected Science and Education journal, now in its 21st year of publication, reveals that Cook had not considered whether scientists and their published papers had said climate change was “dangerous”.

    The consensus Cook considered was the standard definition: that Man had caused most post-1950 warming. Even on this weaker definition the true consensus among published scientific papers is now demonstrated to be not 97.1%, as Cook had claimed, but only 0.3%.

    Only 41 out of the 11,944 published climate papers Cook examined explicitly stated that Man caused most of the warming since 1950. Cook himself had flagged just 64 papers as explicitly supporting that consensus, but 23 of the 64 had not in fact supported it.
     
    #1147     Dec 3, 2013
  8. Ricter

    Ricter

    I sure hope so, because while it looks like a long list here, it is undoubtedly a small percentage of all who work for NASA.
     
    #1148     Dec 3, 2013
  9. So what? They are partisan and not qualified. You may as well ask a group of musicians about it.

    Just more total bullshit from you. Will you ever get a clue?
     
    #1149     Dec 3, 2013
  10. jem

    jem

    Its the climate agw nutters at NASA who are partisan.
    these guys are astronauts and rocket scientists. Many are retired...They have no axe to grind... they just know that Hansen (who has now out of NASA) was putting out propaganda and pretending it was settled science.



     
    #1150     Dec 3, 2013