PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Extinction Rebellion are threatening to shut down Heathrow Airport with drones
Old 12th Jun 2019, 21:10
  #129 (permalink)  
20driver
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: US
Posts: 507
Received 5 Likes on 3 Posts
global temperature

Ian W - very interesting graph. The geocraft website is an interesting trove. I did some time in Geology before I switched to engineering.
One thing I observe about the AGW debate is the remarkable absence of geo professionals (and statisticians, another serious omission) in the discussion. As they tend to have a long term view, the ones I know tend to be quite dismissive of the climate modelers and regard the idea of humans controlling climate as rather amusing if not just plain stupid.
Climate modelers are a very very small community who approve each others papers and grants. One modeler from U of T was on Charle Rose and said there are 20 credible climate modeling groups in the world. Think about it. Each of these groups is run by , or was started by a very smart person, as they are sure to let you know. You will not work there or get funded unless you agree with the boss. That is peer reviewed science 101, sorry that is the way it works. That was very clear in the climate gate emails.
That is a very small number of people to rely on to restructure the words economy. . As I told Dr Dre, look up Barry Marshall, Noble Prize 2005, for the value of "consensus".
When the American Physical Society set up a committee, run by Dr Stephen Koonin, to look at the "incontrovertible evidence of human AGW" they invited several physicists not involved in the global warming movement to participate. When the summary did not suit the politics, the statement was was changed to something more PC.
The IPCC was set up to advise governments on how to adapt to climate change, not to make an assessment of the science. One big problem I have with the IPCC is that the section authors are reviewing their own papers. The section members are chosen by governments, ie Al Gore. There is no real question of the underlying assumptions. Most people involved are going on faith that it is a problem and the models are correct.
I can still remember when I was growing up the big thing was the next ice age. There were serious proposals to sprinkle carbon black on the ice sheets to melt them.
Y2K anyone?
20driver
20driver is offline