James Lovelock backpeddling on climate change.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
25-04-2012, 01:46 AM
RE: James Lovelock backpeddling on climate change.
(24-04-2012 05:53 PM)germanyt Wrote:  
(24-04-2012 05:49 PM)Chas Wrote:  Except (American) conservative policies don't even look good on paper. Dodgy
Here we go.
oh no... no this time, it's all yours germanyt Tongue

[Image: sigvacachica.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-04-2012, 07:38 AM
RE: James Lovelock backpeddling on climate change.
(25-04-2012 01:46 AM)nach_in Wrote:  
(24-04-2012 05:53 PM)germanyt Wrote:  Here we go.
oh no... no this time, it's all yours germanyt Tongue
I believe it's someone else's turn.

“Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and reflect.”

-Mark Twain
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-04-2012, 05:34 PM
RE: James Lovelock backpeddling on climate change.
(24-04-2012 09:42 AM)germanyt Wrote:  
Quote:It will also reflect his new opinion that global warming has not occurred as he had expected.“The problem is we don’t know what the climate is doing. We thought we knew 20 years ago. That led to some alarmist books – mine included – because it looked clear-cut, but it hasn’t happened,” Lovelock said.
“The climate is doing its usual tricks. There’s nothing much really happening yet. We were supposed to be halfway toward a frying world now,” he said.
“The world has not warmed up very much since the millennium. Twelve years is a reasonable time… it (the temperature) has stayed almost constant, whereas it should have been rising -- carbon dioxide is rising, no question about that,” he added.
He pointed to Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth” and Tim Flannery’s “The Weather Makers” as other examples of “alarmist” forecasts of the future.

So when he was saying something in a newspaper back in 2006 you didn't want to hear he was wrong, but now the guy who believes in an earth spirit called Gaia is right because a newspaper has reported him as saying something you do want to hear?

Me, I back the science.


Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-04-2012, 06:14 PM
RE: James Lovelock backpeddling on climate change.
(25-04-2012 05:34 PM)Hafnof Wrote:  
(24-04-2012 09:42 AM)germanyt Wrote:  

So when he was saying something in a newspaper back in 2006 you didn't want to hear he was wrong, but now the guy who believes in an earth spirit called Gaia is right because a newspaper has reported him as saying something you do want to hear?

Me, I back the science.
[video=youtube]http://youtu.be/xvMmPtEt8dc[/vide]
Well yea. When someone who was wrong changes their opinion to a more correct one then yes I would have disagreed then and agree now. How is that outrageous?

And it's flawed science. But believe what you want. I just found the video interesting.

“Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and reflect.”

-Mark Twain
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-04-2012, 07:02 PM
RE: James Lovelock backpeddling on climate change.
(25-04-2012 06:14 PM)germanyt Wrote:  And it's flawed science.
Just like evolution right? Sounds like a YEC argument. So you don't trust the peer reviewed literature.

Publish your own study, win a nobel prize, and collect a cool 1 million because you single-handedly overturned thousands of man-years of work from some of the worlds smartest people by proving our current models are completely wrong.

Great...

“Forget Jesus, the stars died so you could be born.” - Lawrence M. Krauss
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-04-2012, 07:09 PM
RE: James Lovelock backpeddling on climate change.
(25-04-2012 07:02 PM)DeepThought Wrote:  
(25-04-2012 06:14 PM)germanyt Wrote:  And it's flawed science.
Just like evolution right? Sounds like a YEC argument. So you don't trust the peer reviewed literature.

Publish your own study, win a nobel prize, and collect a cool 1 million because you single-handedly overturned thousands of man-years of work from some of the worlds smartest people by proving our current models are completely wrong.

Great...
I really don't feel like getting into it. And your condescension doesn't help.

“Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and reflect.”

-Mark Twain
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-04-2012, 07:16 PM (This post was last modified: 25-04-2012 07:21 PM by DeepThought.)
RE: James Lovelock backpeddling on climate change.
And just to clarify: Neither the climate scientists nor I believed that we should "be half-way to a frying planet by now."

So some alarmist is cashing in on a book full of exaggeration and misconceptions about global warming and then flips his position to cash in some more? Am I being too superficial or is that all there is to it?
(25-04-2012 07:09 PM)germanyt Wrote:  I really don't feel like getting into it. And your condescension doesn't help.
Sorry, didn't want to come across as condescending. If anything I was being fairly blunt.

I just find it mildly irritating that's all Tongue

“Forget Jesus, the stars died so you could be born.” - Lawrence M. Krauss
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-04-2012, 08:41 PM (This post was last modified: 25-04-2012 08:48 PM by mysticjbyrd.)
RE: James Lovelock backpeddling on climate change.
(24-04-2012 02:59 PM)Logica Humano Wrote:  
(24-04-2012 02:54 PM)nach_in Wrote:  Carbon credits were a good idea that didn't work at all Sad
Like most Liberal ideals.
wasn't that a conservative idea?
Pretty sure it was a long time ago.


(25-04-2012 07:38 AM)germanyt Wrote:  
(25-04-2012 01:46 AM)nach_in Wrote:  oh no... no this time, it's all yours germanyt Tongue
I believe it's someone else's turn.
Ok, ill take this one.

You are 100% correct chas.



(25-04-2012 07:02 PM)DeepThought Wrote:  
(25-04-2012 06:14 PM)germanyt Wrote:  And it's flawed science.
Just like evolution right? Sounds like a YEC argument. So you don't trust the peer reviewed literature.

Publish your own study, win a nobel prize, and collect a cool 1 million because you single-handedly overturned thousands of man-years of work from some of the worlds smartest people by proving our current models are completely wrong.

Great...
The only thing this guy could manage to publish is his idiotic thoughts while taking a shit on twitter.

I also cant stand people who ignorantly deny science for political and religious beliefs.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-04-2012, 09:52 PM
RE: James Lovelock backpeddling on climate change.
(25-04-2012 08:41 PM)mysticjbyrd Wrote:  
(24-04-2012 02:59 PM)Logica Humano Wrote:  Like most Liberal ideals.
wasn't that a conservative idea?
Pretty sure it was a long time ago.


(25-04-2012 07:38 AM)germanyt Wrote:  I believe it's someone else's turn.
Ok, ill take this one.

You are 100% correct chas.



(25-04-2012 07:02 PM)DeepThought Wrote:  Just like evolution right? Sounds like a YEC argument. So you don't trust the peer reviewed literature.

Publish your own study, win a nobel prize, and collect a cool 1 million because you single-handedly overturned thousands of man-years of work from some of the worlds smartest people by proving our current models are completely wrong.

Great...
The only thing this guy could manage to publish is his idiotic thoughts while taking a shit on twitter.

I also cant stand people who ignorantly deny science for political and religious beliefs.
one thing only, carbon credits are an environmental idea (liberal if you wish) disguised as conservative, actually they tried to use economic methods for liberal ends, so it's a weird mix. They did work a bit, but not to the extent they hoped and they did too little to limit carbon emissions, sadly.

[Image: sigvacachica.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-04-2012, 10:15 PM
RE: James Lovelock backpeddling on climate change.
(25-04-2012 09:52 PM)nach_in Wrote:  
(25-04-2012 08:41 PM)mysticjbyrd Wrote:  wasn't that a conservative idea?
Pretty sure it was a long time ago.


Ok, ill take this one.

You are 100% correct chas.



The only thing this guy could manage to publish is his idiotic thoughts while taking a shit on twitter.

I also cant stand people who ignorantly deny science for political and religious beliefs.
one thing only, carbon credits are an environmental idea (liberal if you wish) disguised as conservative, actually they tried to use economic methods for liberal ends, so it's a weird mix. They did work a bit, but not to the extent they hoped and they did too little to limit carbon emissions, sadly.
This country has not accomplished anything meaningful since we became the United Corporations of America.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: