Heartland Institute documents reveal strategy of attacks against climate science

By: Dr. Jeff Masters , 3:15 PM GMT on February 17, 2012

Share this Blog
67
+

Documents illegally leaked from the Heartland Institute, one of the most active groups engaged in attacking the science of climate change, provide an unprecedented look into how these groups operate. The story was broken Tuesday by DeSmogBlog, a website dedicated to exposing false claims about climate change science. The documents reveal that donors to Heartland included oil billionaire Charles Koch, and Heartland has spent several million dollars over the past five years to undermine climate science. Tens of thousands of dollars are slated to go this year to well-known climate contrarians S.Fred Singer, Craig Idso, and Anthony Watts of the Watts Up With That? website. Naturally, the leaked documents have lit up the blogosphere, but none of the revelations are particularly surprising. The U.S. has a very successful and well-funded climate change denial industry, primarily funded by fossil fuel companies, that has spent hundreds of millions of dollars over the past few decades on a PR campaign against climate change science. I made a lengthy post on the subject in 2009 called, The Manufactured Doubt industry and the hacked email controversy. I won't say more here, but getenergysmartnow.com has compiled a long list of blogs that have interesting posts on the Heartland Institute affair for those interested in following this story.



Eight books challenging the Manufactured Doubt industry
Important scientific findings should always be challenged with the goal of finding flaws and improving our scientific understanding. But there's nothing a scientist hates more than to see good science attacked and the reputations of good scientists smeared in name of protecting corporate profits or ideology. A number of scientists have fought back against the recent unfounded assaults on climate change science by publishing books calling attention to the Manufactured Doubt industry's tactics and goals. Anyone priding themselves on being a open-minded skeptic of human-caused global warming should challenge their skepticism by reading one of these works. I thought so highly of Unscientific America, Merchants of Doubt, and Climate Coverup, that I donated 50 copies of these books to undergraduates at the University of Michigan last year. Here's a short synopsis of eight books published in the past three years defending climate change science against the attacks of the Manufactured Doubt industry:

Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming, by Naomi Oreskes and Erik Conway. If you're going to read one book on the attacks on climate science, this should probably be the one--Dr. Oreskes, a history professor at UC San Diego, was voted climate change communicator of the year in 2011. A review of Merchants of Doubt and a video of her defending her book against skeptics is at climateprogress.org, my favorite website for staying current on the politics of climate change. From the review: "Make the journey with them, and you’ll see renowned scientists abandon science, you’ll see environmentalism equated with communism, and you’ll discover the connection between the Cold War and climate denial. And for the most part, you’ll be entertained along the way."

Climate Cover-up: The Crusade to Deny Global Warming, by desmogblog.com co-founders James Hoggan and Richard Littlemore. The main author, James Hoggan, owns a Canadian public relations firm, and is intimately familiar with how public relations campaigns work. It's another fascinating and very readable book.

Unscientific America: How Scientific Illiteracy Threatens our Future, by science writer Chris Mooney. He writes a blog focusing on science communication called the intersection. This is a fantastic book, and should be required reading for all college science majors.

Climate Change Denial: Heads in the Sand, by Haydn Washington and John Cook. John Cook writes for one of my favorite climate science blogs, skepticalscience.com, which focuses on debunking false skeptic claims about climate science. The book does a great job debunking all the classic climate change denial arguments.

Doubt is Their Product: How Industry's Assault on Science Threatens Your Health, by George Washington University epidemiologist David Michaels, who now heads the Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA). This meticulously-researched book has just one chapter on climate change, and focuses more on tobacco and hazardous chemicals. About the the tobacco industry's Manufactured Doubt campaigns, Michaels wrote: "the industry understood that the public is in no position to distinguish good science from bad. Create doubt, uncertainty, and confusion. Throw mud at the anti-smoking research under the assumption that some of it is bound to stick. And buy time, lots of it, in the bargain". The title of Michaels' book comes from a 1969 memo from a tobacco company executive: "Doubt is our product since it is the best means of competing with the 'body of fact' that exists in the minds of the general public. It is also the means of establishing a controversy".

The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars: Dispatches from the Front Lines, by climate scientist Dr. Michael Mann. Dr. Mann is the originator of the much-debated "hockey stick" graph of global temperatures over the past 1,000 years, which looks like a hockey stick due to the sharp increase in temperatures in recent decades. This book just came out last week, and I hope to write a review on it this spring. Dr. Mann is one of the main contributors to my favorite web site for staying current on climate change research, realclimate.org. John Cook of skepticalscience.com wrote a review, calling it "an eye-opening account of the lengths the opponents of climate science will go to in their campaign to slander climate scientists and distract the public from the realities of human caused global warming."

Fool Me Twice: Fighting the Assault on Science in America by Shawn Lawrence Otto. I haven't had a chance to read this one yet, but it looks interesting. A review by Katherine O’Konski of Climate Science Watch called the book "a fascinating look at the status of science in American society."

The Inquisition of Climate Science, by Dr. James Lawrence Powell, a geochemist with a distinguished career as a college teacher, college president, museum director, and author of books on earth science for general audiences. I haven't read it, but John Cook of skepticalscience.com wrote a review, calling it "a must-read for anyone who wishes to understand the full scope of the denial industry and their modern day persecution of climate science."

Have a great weekend, everyone! I'll be taking a few vacation days next week, and wunderground meteorologist Angela Fritz will probably be doing most of the blogging for me during the coming week.

Jeff Masters

Reader Comments

Comments will take a few seconds to appear.

Post Your Comments

Please sign in to post comments.

or Join

Not only will you be able to leave comments on this blog, but you'll also have the ability to upload and share your photos in our Wunder Photos section.

Display: 0, 50, 100, 200 Sort: Newest First - Order Posted

Viewing: 1180 - 1130

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32Blog Index

Quoting SPLbeater:
Nah, i go play chess :D


U any good?
Member Since: July 25, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 572
BUT..the 18Z GFS has completed earlier, and i nw see a new level of snowfall forecast...a 1:5 ratio would give me 2.85 inches. a 1:10 ratio would give me 5.7 inches :D


Hey TA, want to argue this one? lol..the last one kinda died..
Member Since: August 4, 2011 Posts: 46 Comments: 4486
Quoting CaribBoy:


Low SSTs and developping El Nino...


It doesn't matter how many systems form in any given season,as the important thing is it only takes one system to do all the harm to a place.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
wel i won my chess game as usual. I also see the snow line hasnt moved...grr....lol
Member Since: August 4, 2011 Posts: 46 Comments: 4486
Quoting Skyepony:
Pile up on I-75 in TN from the snow.

West Africa has moved into harsh drought. That should keep storms too choked to form til they are farther west like 2005.

Death toll of the kids in Afghanistan dead from the cold has gone from 10 to 40.


If the drought extends thru the Summer,then a below average CV Season may be in the cards.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
@ Caribboy.... even if it's true, it's still funny...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting GeorgiaStormz:


why?


Low SSTs and developping El Nino...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
1173. Skyepony (Mod)
Pile up on I-75 in TN from the snow.

West Africa has moved into harsh drought. That should keep storms too choked to form til they are farther west like 2005.

Death toll of the kids in Afghanistan dead from the cold has gone from 10 to 40.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting CaribBoy:
2012 season = bust


why?
Member Since: February 11, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 9731
2012 season = bust
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting hydrus:
Check out the massive front on the CMC in 144 hours. Actually south of the Bay of Compeche.


I talked about this a few days ago but got long range climate outlooks (about how warm with no cold fronts it would be) thrown in my face:)
Now this front better go according to my plans so i can laugh at some people(not calling any names);)
Member Since: February 11, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 9731
Wonder if i will see any snow this week for my vacation in the Poconos.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting PlazaRed:
This is an interesting link I found on the BBC, to do with the increase of CO2 in the oceans and how it will possibly affect sea life:-

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-170 88154

Here's a couple of lines from it:-
"This CO2 is a stressor. Some organisms can adapt but there are only a few species that can handle it. If I extend the gradient up to the year 2100 - that represents a 30% loss in biodiversity."
AND:-
"Shells, like this Hexaplex trunculus, dissolve at CO2 levels predicted for later this century."

Not really in my field but I'm sure somebody will understand it in the scientific world.



Yes, it's been known and I've seen a few versions of this.

Apparently, certain types of sea life could be significantly stressed or threatened as early as 2030, by some calculations.

We are also over fishing the oceans significantly. Populations of sharks, tuna, and even predatory game fish have declined by 90% in the past several decades. Tuna have a fairly long life cycle, so it's not easy for them to recover if they get dangerously low. This means we'll eventually need to convert even more lands to farms to replace the lost food supplies from fishing.

World population is going to grow by about 30% over the next 20 years, and virtually all of the food for these people will be coming from forests converted to farm lands.
Member Since: January 25, 2012 Posts: 33 Comments: 1520
Quoting belizeit:
Talking about hurricane season it feels like it could be a real bad one temps today reached 98 thats real hot for feb and if you look at ocean teps you know it could be bad.
Hey, neighbour.... that temp seems extreme even 4 the tropics. My concern with weak El nino is that it's not much better than neutral conditions for the Caribbean and GoM, numberwise. The big story will be tracks. Recent El Nino years haven't been so good to us. Except for 06.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Nah, i go play chess :D
Member Since: August 4, 2011 Posts: 46 Comments: 4486
Maybe i should just go to sleep for awhile to pass some time. Aint nothin moving in last half hour with snow
Member Since: August 4, 2011 Posts: 46 Comments: 4486
Miami NWS Discussion

MUCH COOLER AND DRIER AIR SWEEPS OVER THE REGION BEHIND THE FRONT
LATE TONIGHT, WITH HIGH TEMPERATURES TOMORROW (DESPITE BEING ONLY
A COUPLE OF DEGREES BELOW NORMAL) A GOOD 7-12 DEGREES LOWER THAN
TODAY. ALTHOUGH WINDS SHIFT TO THE NE BY LATE MONDAY AFTERNOON,
SOME RESIDUAL COLD AIR ADVECTION WILL LEAD TO THE COOLEST PERIOD
BEING MONDAY NIGHT/TUESDAY MORNING OVER ALL BUT THE COASTAL
SECTIONS OF SOUTHEAST FLORIDA. LOWS WILL BE IN THE 50S MOST
LOCATIONS, EXCEPT LOWER 60S NEAR THE EAST COAST AS ONSHORE WINDS
MODERATE TEMPERATURES. A SLOW WARMING TREND IS FORECAST TO TAKE
PLACE FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE WEEK AS DEEP-LAYERED HIGH PRESSURE
OVER THE BAHAMAS AND NW CARIBBEAN REESTABLISHES ITSELF. MAX
TEMPERATURES ARE EXPECTED TO BOUNCE BACK TO AROUND 80 ON WEDNESDAY
AND IN THE LOWER TO MID 80S ONCE AGAIN FOR THE LATTER PART OF THE
WEEK. NEXT COLD FRONT INDICATED BY GFS AND ECMWF MAY AFFECT THE
REGION ON SATURDAY. UNTIL THEN, LITTLE IF ANY PRECIPITATION
EXPECTED.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Galveston 1900 would be a leap year.

Member Since: January 25, 2012 Posts: 33 Comments: 1520
Quoting ScottLincoln:


Got to be careful buddy, the GFS can be run slightly different in different places. Different ensembles might be used. Different snow estimation schemes. Even that one page I shared with you has many options for changing the algorithm used and also the compaction effects.

Snow is one of the most difficult things to forecast and models can give you very different answers with only a few tweaks. Thus, for all these reasons, playing the "you're wrong I'm right" game with snow totals from a weather forecast model probably isn't very productive.



ah heck wit accumulation forecasts then if its got to be so complicated lol.

its either going to snow or not.

Member Since: August 4, 2011 Posts: 46 Comments: 4486
This is an interesting link I found on the BBC, to do with the increase of CO2 in the oceans and how it will possibly affect sea life:-

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-170 88154

Here's a couple of lines from it:-
"This CO2 is a stressor. Some organisms can adapt but there are only a few species that can handle it. If I extend the gradient up to the year 2100 - that represents a 30% loss in biodiversity."
AND:-
"Shells, like this Hexaplex trunculus, dissolve at CO2 levels predicted for later this century."

Not really in my field but I'm sure somebody will understand it in the scientific world.

Member Since: January 21, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2092
Quoting SPLbeater:


a 1:5 ratio makes the snow total from 00z at 2.15 inches. lol TA still wrong xD



Got to be careful buddy, the GFS can be run slightly different in different places. Different ensembles might be used. Different snow estimation schemes. Even that one page I shared with you has many options for changing the algorithm used and also the compaction effects.

Snow is one of the most difficult things to forecast and models can give you very different answers with only a few tweaks. Thus, for all these reasons, playing the "you're wrong I'm right" game with snow totals from a weather forecast model probably isn't very productive.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting hydrus:
Check out the massive front on the CMC in 144 hours. Actually south of the Bay of Compeche.

Yeah, the CMC brings some cold air down into the northern portion of the USA in that general timeframe...So does the GFS.
Member Since: July 6, 2010 Posts: 113 Comments: 32277
please say this snowstorm will survive and hit us
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
1157. hydrus
Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:

I'm sorry, but it really didn't.

To each their own I guess...
Check out the massive front on the CMC in 144 hours. Actually south of the Bay of Compeche.
Member Since: September 27, 2007 Posts: 1 Comments: 21418
Quoting SPLbeater:



are you just sad u wont get any??

No. I'm just trying to get through your head that the 00Z GFS gave Sanford North Carolina less than or near an inch of snow.
Member Since: July 6, 2010 Posts: 113 Comments: 32277
Multiple Deaths in Washington Avalanche

SEATTLE (AP) -- Authorities say two people are reported dead and as many as eight more are missing after an avalanche near a Washington state ski resort.

King County sheriff's Sgt. Cindi West says her office began receiving word about the avalanche near Stevens Pass, in the Cascade Mountains northeast of Seattle, just after noon Sunday.

West says rescue crews are in route.

She also says that a snowboarder has been killed in a separate incident at the Alpental ski area east of Seattle. The snowboarder went over a cliff.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
o.0

SNOW LINE DOWN TO CHATAM COUNTY NC.

gettin closer!!
Member Since: August 4, 2011 Posts: 46 Comments: 4486
Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:

I'm sorry, but it really didn't.

To each their own I guess...



are you just sad u wont get any??
Member Since: August 4, 2011 Posts: 46 Comments: 4486
Quoting ScottLincoln:


One problem with the table is that on the warmer end of things, it has a 10:1 ratio. Many times, especially wetter environments, this can be a much smaller value, like 5:1.

For more specific info on what a model might be predicting for snow, you might find this helpful:
http://www.meteor.iastate.edu/~ckarsten/bufkit/da ta/index.html

It puts the various model outputs through the Cobb algorithm which I think is one of the better snow forecasting techniques available. Haven't seen a study on that, however.


a 1:5 ratio makes the snow total from 00z at 2.15 inches. lol TA still wrong xD

Member Since: August 4, 2011 Posts: 46 Comments: 4486
Quoting SPLbeater:



lol.

THE 00Z GFS GAVE ME 4.3 INCHES OF SNOW. PERIOD.

I'm sorry, but it really didn't.

To each their own I guess...
Member Since: July 6, 2010 Posts: 113 Comments: 32277
Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:

You see this? 'Nuff said.




lol.

THE 00Z GFS GAVE ME 4.3 INCHES OF SNOW. PERIOD.
Member Since: August 4, 2011 Posts: 46 Comments: 4486
Quoting SPLbeater:


very helpful, thx.

i think TAwx13 should look at that too...cuz it backs me up when i say, The 00z run of GFS gave me 4.3 inches of snow :D


One problem with the table is that on the warmer end of things, it has a 10:1 ratio. Many times, especially wetter environments, this can be a much smaller value, like 5:1.

For more specific info on what a model might be predicting for snow, you might find this helpful:
http://www.meteor.iastate.edu/~ckarsten/bufkit/da ta/index.html

It puts the various model outputs through the Cobb algorithm which I think is one of the better snow forecasting techniques available. Haven't seen a study on that, however.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Snow line still hanging in Randolph county NC..would be nice if it dove southeast for another 75 miles lol
Member Since: August 4, 2011 Posts: 46 Comments: 4486
Quoting SPLbeater:


that chart has average snowfall equals to liquid water.

at 00z, the GFS gave me a total of 0.43 snowfal(measured in liquid) so, that table gives that the average amount for 0.43 is around 4.3 inches. Im sorry you didnt see it, because i am NOT lying.

You see this? 'Nuff said.

Member Since: July 6, 2010 Posts: 113 Comments: 32277
Quoting belizeit:
Talking about hurricane season it feels like it could be a real bad one temps today reached 98 thats real hot for feb and if you look at ocean teps you know it could be bad.

Where are you?
Member Since: January 21, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2092
Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:

It gave you less than an inch. You can't ignore TwisterData, which gives you the actual snowfall totals.


that chart has average snowfall equals to liquid water.

at 00z, the GFS gave me a total of 0.43 snowfal(measured in liquid) so, that table gives that the average amount for 0.43 is around 4.3 inches. Im sorry you didnt see it, because i am NOT lying.
Member Since: August 4, 2011 Posts: 46 Comments: 4486
Quoting CybrTeddy:
Glad I'm not the only to have noticed the trend for leap years, no matter the ENSO pattern, to be a particular nasty year.

2008 - Hurricane's Dolly, Ike & Gustav.
2004 - Hurricane's Charley, Frances, Ivan & Jeanne.
2000 - Hurricane Keith.
1996 - Hurricane's Bertha, Fran & Hortense.
1992 - Hurricane Andrew.
1988 - Hurricae's Gilbert & Joan
1984 - Hurricane Diana.
1980 - Hurricane Allen,
We're using the cursed hurricane list this year.I've been one of the first bloggers to point out the leap year hurricane seasons and how bad they get for the U.S.I just don't believe this one will be that bad.No matter how hot those sst are.
Quoting WxGeekVA:


It isn't over yet for snow! Latest HRRR:

Won't be much when it gets here.
Quoting belizeit:
Talking about hurricane season it feels like it could be a real bad one temps today reached 98 thats real hot for feb and if you look at ocean teps you know it could be bad.
I'm not scared this year.May be by Issac...
Member Since: August 14, 2010 Posts: 10 Comments: 17093
Quoting SPLbeater:


very helpful, thx.

i think TAwx13 should look at that too...cuz it backs me up when i say, The 00z run of GFS gave me 4.3 inches of snow :D

It gave you less than an inch. You can't ignore TwisterData, which gives you the actual snowfall totals.
Member Since: July 6, 2010 Posts: 113 Comments: 32277
Quoting WxGeekVA:


High Resolution Rapid-Refresh (Experimental)


http://www.meteor.iastate.edu/~slincoln/model/
A looper I made for HRRR data and others. Some people may find it useful. Sometimes it is a bit slow to load the HRRR data, but it seems like they only create some of the images on-demand, so I have to have iframes requesting the individual pages so that the images are created for the looper thingy.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting ScottLincoln:


1" of rainfall does not usually equal 10" of snow. That's just the average of many cases. The range is pretty wide around that average.

I've found this table to be helpful:
http://www.erh.noaa.gov/box/tables/snowfall-meltw ater.html
but even using that table one must be very cautious, they are still basically hypothetical averages with ranges.


very helpful, thx.

i think TAwx13 should look at that too...cuz it backs me up when i say, The 00z run of GFS gave me 4.3 inches of snow :D
Member Since: August 4, 2011 Posts: 46 Comments: 4486
Quoting Jedkins01:




You who despise wisdom, I'm very glad you aren't any position of power.

I remember when I used to love this blog, now it reeks with nonsense. Good riddance.


i ignore all political and GW conversations! :D

i waited a year to join here for de weather conversation, n by golly das what ima be talkin bout!
Member Since: August 4, 2011 Posts: 46 Comments: 4486
Quoting SPLbeater:


in parenthases, (liquid equivalent) which means the snow is measured like rain. so, you said 1 inch of rain usually equals 10 inches of snow, multiply the snow number THERE and get your total.


1" of rainfall does not usually equal 10" of snow. That's just the average of many cases. The range is pretty wide around that average.

I've found this table to be helpful:
http://www.erh.noaa.gov/box/tables/snowfall-meltw ater.html
but even using that table one must be very cautious, they are still basically hypothetical averages with ranges.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Xyrus2000:


What's ridiculous is your abject refusal to even attempt to understand the science. You don't even know what you're talking about. And worse, you don't even want to know. The IPCC report describes the models in layman's terms. They don't use weather models to predict climate. Weather models are not nearly robust enough. Nor are their outputs geared for producing climatological diagnostics.

You also seem to conveniently forget the fact that the climate models are only used for guidance. The scientists take the results from the models and integrate them into their research to produce likely climate scenarios. Climate models have never been, nor ever will be, the end all be all of climate science. They are simply a tool to be used.

Granted human beings have affected the global climate, but to what exact degree cannot really be known. There really is no way to be exactly sure how human damage will affect the global climate in the future as apposed to what it would have been without human contribution or now with human contribution natural climate shift.


Again you are demonstrating your ignorance of the science. Or just making stuff up. Either way, your statement is pure nonsense. Again, I refer you to the IPCC report which describes what we know and how we know it in terms that even a middle-school student can understand.

We can make educated guesses based on lab experiments and current climate and meteorological knowledge, but that's about it.


And again your ignorance continues to show. This is not how climate science is conducted, nor is it limited to only "current" conditions. There's even an entire branch of climate science called paleoclimatlogy, which explicitly studies the various climates from the Earth's history.


The climate of the earth is extremely complex, we as humans are just scratching the surface of this science of weather and climate, so when I am told that my home in the Tampa Bay area will be underwater from sea level rise when I am a grandfather, I do laugh. Not because I am a denier of climate change, no sir there is real science there indeed. But I laugh when people make these projections and treat them like they are fact.


Again you're quite incorrect. We have a pretty good understanding of the climate. Climate models do a pretty good job of replicating our climate over the past 200 years or so, and that's with using proxy data for areas that had sparse or no records.

You're laughing because you simply have no comprehension of climate science. Temperatures are warming. Ice packs are melting. The sea level is rising. You don't even need to be a climate scientist to recognize what's going to happen. Warmer global temperatures, regardless of cause, increases sea level height.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying we shouldn't have them, but they need to stay in the lab where they belong, not exist outside the lab as tools for political propaganda.


How old are you? You certainly seem to have very little grasp of how scientists operate or their actual influence on politics. Let me explain.

Politics is big business these days. In order to influence politics, you need money. Climate scientists do not have money. The don't have a multi-million dollar PR firm. They don't have someone like the Heartland Institute greasing palms and influencing school curricula. You can make more money being a programmer than being a climate scientist.

So here's how this game works. Congress calls for a hearing on climate science. The real scientists get called in and present their research. Then the bought and paid for congress-people (big donations from energy companies and like) call in their widely discredited "scientists". But they present science, mainly because they don't have any. Instead they attack the real scientists. They make up incorrect graphs, make baseless accusations, appeals to emotion, and basically any other nonsense their sugar daddies approve of.

And you know what happens? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. And then congress cuts the science budget.

So your "political tool" argument is pure BS. Try watching C-SPAN when they have a climate science panel discussion. It's a joke. Half the idiots wouldn't even pass a basic high school science test and the other half are getting too much money to give a crap. And the worst part is the real scientists know it's a joke (try reading some of the books mentioned in this blog).

Science needs to get the heck out of politics, I love science, but we can't expect science to become the tool to save the planet, as soon as people are willing to give up their freedom in the name of "science" that's when things get really ugly.


The science wasn't IN politics. It was dragged there by the Manufactured FUD companies at the behest of Big Fossil Fuels.

You're either really young or really naive. Every time scientific results threatened profits from big companies, EVERY SINGLE TIME, without fail, this is what happens. The scientist are dragged through the mud. The science itself is denigrated and ridiculed. It gets hauled into politics and turned into a farce. The same thing happened with tobacco. The same thing happened with asbestos. The same thing happened with acid rain. The same thing happened with the ozone hole. In fact, the companies who did all the astro-turfing and FUD spreading before are THE SAME DAMN COMPANIES DOING IT NOW.

Eventually, public outcry reaches a point where politicians' self-preservation kicks in and only then is something done about it, usually years or decades after the fact.

Granted you may mock me, but I'm really not concerned about that. Unfortunately very few seem to pay close attention to history and how mankind gets into trouble, us humans so easily get caught up exchanging wisdom for some new school of thought that sounds exciting but really is a sugar coated remake of an already failed philosophy.


O_o

What are you talking about? Climate science, and in particular the greenhouse theory, has been around for over 120 years. It is not a new school of thought.

Its funny, people arrogantly act like science is opening the mind form blind religion and superstition, in some ways that's true. However for science is becoming a new religion whether you admit it or not, its a new god. Human beings always find their way back to religion one way or another, hmmm I wonder why that might be? There's nothing new under the sun, man.


Science is not a religion. Science is falsifiable. Religion is not. The theory of global warming exists because the results of over a century of research and observation provide evidence for the theory. Religions can make no such claim.

So let's recap. You are willfully ignorant of climate science, and wish to remain so. You've made a series of false assumptions and false allegations about the science. You've established no scientific premise nor presented any evidence for any of your positions. You contrived to show scientists as political tools, when it's simply not the case. And you are equating science with religion.

You have created a religion that is diametrically opposed to anything scientific in regards to this topic. No amount of scientific evidence, research or reasoning will alter your beliefs. There is no point in having any further discussion of this topic with you.




You who despise wisdom, I'm very glad you aren't any position of power.

I remember when I used to love this blog, now it reeks with nonsense. Good riddance.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Now:



A year ago:



Two years ago:



2009:

Member Since: July 6, 2010 Posts: 113 Comments: 32277
Glad I'm not the only to have noticed the trend for leap years, no matter the ENSO pattern, to be a particular nasty year.

2008 - Hurricane's Dolly, Ike & Gustav.
2004 - Hurricane's Charley, Frances, Ivan & Jeanne.
2000 - Hurricane Keith.
1996 - Hurricane's Bertha, Fran & Hortense.
1992 - Hurricane Andrew.
1988 - Hurricae's Gilbert & Joan
1984 - Hurricane Diana.
1980 - Hurricane Allen,
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Maybe i can git my thunderstorm on thursday. high forecast of 70, 30% chance of showers..:D

GFS shows high of 68 with some possible isolated showers thursday 2
Member Since: August 4, 2011 Posts: 46 Comments: 4486
1134. yqt1001
I believe this whole leap year thing to be a joke. On average, the US gets 1 hurricane landfall per year and 1 MH landfall every 2 years. Most leap years are just an average year. 2004 is a huge exception though. :P
Member Since: November 19, 2010 Posts: 1 Comments: 1286
Quoting GTcooliebai:
This is a leap year, things always seem to go wrong in a leap year. '92 Andrew hit South FL, '96 was nasty for North Carolina, '00 Keith did a number on Central America, '04 Storms made an "X" over FL. and '08 Ike devastated the coastline of Texas.

The list keeps on goin'
Hurricane Gilbert and Joan in '88
Hurricane Diane in '84
Hurricane Allen in '80
nothing in '76
Agnes in '72
nothing in '68
Dora, Hilda and Cleo in '64

it keeps on going!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:

A majority of the ENSO models are predicting weak El Nino conditions for the upcoming hurricane season. This means it will be weaker overall than last year and 2010, but that doesn't mean it will go without landfalls. This year could end up being worse than the past year as it only takes one...


FWIW, I've been predicting El Nino in 2012 since 2007 ;)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting washingtonian115:
I do keep in mind however about potential effects the season could have.I love to track hurricanes and with a el niño forming that would likely limit the amount of storms their is to track.Take 09 for an example.


u always got the Northwest Pacific...averageing 18 storms a year:)

all my balloons lost their heat last night and all on the floor....even my red one:(
Member Since: August 4, 2011 Posts: 46 Comments: 4486
Talking about hurricane season it feels like it could be a real bad one temps today reached 98 thats real hot for feb and if you look at ocean teps you know it could be bad.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Viewing: 1180 - 1130

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32Blog Index

Top of Page

About

Jeff co-founded the Weather Underground in 1995 while working on his Ph.D. He flew with the NOAA Hurricane Hunters from 1986-1990.

Local Weather

Overcast
53 °F
Overcast