Carl Sagan and Hot Claims

[sounding]

Hear how Carl Sagan misled Congress about the Venus runaway greenhouse affect - and find out how the media exaggerates global warming while failing to mention the ongoing 8-year global cooling trend. July 10 at 1 PM at Bridgeport, at the Science & Technology club meeting.

[Two Bills]

:popcorn:

[Keefelane66]

Can we get more current than 1985?

[ThirdOfFive]

Though I disagreed with some of his positions and takes on things, I do miss Carl Sagan's presence in media. Who can forget his hypnotic voice when hosting "Cosmos", which is pretty rudimentary by today's standards but cutting-edge in the 1980s.

[Keefelane66]

I wish these seminars were on youtube

[golfing eagles]

Hear how Carl Sagan misled Congress about the Venus runaway greenhouse affect - and find out how the media exaggerates global warming while failing to mention the ongoing 8-year global cooling trend. July 10 at 1 PM at Bridgeport, at the Science & Technology club meeting.

But as we both know, the climate change weenies DON'T want to hear it

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

I read the hearing report from AP, and Sagan's original paper on the subject. I'm not seeing that he misled anyone. He gave his theory, supported it with the scientific data available at the time, and brought it to the most likely conclusion. That's what science is all about. You pose a question, do fact finding and data gathering, and attempt to answer the question.

There might be facts you don't know yet - information missing, new technology able to reveal things you would not have been capable of knowing previously. And so your answer might change. That doesn't make it misleading. It just makes it inaccurate. You can be wrong, and not be lying.

[djplong]

So tell me. Are they going to have the flat-earthers there? The JFK-QAnon folk? How about a delegation of Russians that believe Ukraine needed de-Nazification?

Yeah, I used to believe that climate change wasn't real. Eventually the evidence was overwhelming. I even remember the particular piece of evidence that convinced me that maybe a lay-person like me didn't know as much as I thought I did. After all, that's really what science is - discovering more information. And if the new, verifiable, repeatable information refutes the previous assumptions, it's time for new conclusions.

[Worldseries27]

hear how carl sagan misled congress about the venus runaway greenhouse affect - and find out how the media exaggerates global warming while failing to mention the ongoing 8-year global cooling trend. July 10 at 1 pm at bridgeport, at the science & technology club meeting.
or you give us your take on the issue for the thousands of us ( idk #) who will not be present.

[RICH1]

Denying the Heat will put you in a nice cool grave! Be careful out there.

[Blackbird45]

Is global warming real or is it a global conspiracy, I'm not a scientist so I can't give you a definitive answer. What I know is having a conspiracy of that magnitude would be unlikely. What has to be weighted here is if it is a hoax, we wasted time, money and resources that could have been used somewhere else. But if it is real, we would be saving mankind. I don't know about anyone else, but I always like to take the inconvenience on the side of some extra protection.

[skarra]

So tell me. Are they going to have the flat-earthers there? The JFK-QAnon folk? How about a delegation of Russians that believe Ukraine needed de-Nazification?

Yeah, I used to believe that climate change wasn't real. Eventually the evidence was overwhelming. I even remember the particular piece of evidence that convinced me that maybe a lay-person like me didn't know as much as I thought I did. After all, that's really what science is - discovering more information. And if the new, verifiable, repeatable information refutes the previous assumptions, it's time for new conclusions.
Agreed. There are far too many people on this earth who have no understanding of science. Faith only takes you so far.

The earth is flat, JFK Jr is alive and well, and a warming planet is fake news. We’re all frogs in that big old pot of slowly boiling water. Fortunately for us it will not affect us too much, but it will our kids and grand children. But it’s possible that along with bad things there could be some good things to come of it. No more need for winter coats up north.

Time is telling.

[mickey100]

So tell me. Are they going to have the flat-earthers there? The JFK-QAnon folk? How about a delegation of Russians that believe Ukraine needed de-Nazification?

Yeah, I used to believe that climate change wasn't real. Eventually the evidence was overwhelming. I even remember the particular piece of evidence that convinced me that maybe a lay-person like me didn't know as much as I thought I did. After all, that's really what science is - discovering more information. And if the new, verifiable, repeatable information refutes the previous assumptions, it's time for new conclusions.

Yup to all of the above. Well said. But why trust scientists? With the internet, apparently everyone is an expert.

[PersonOfInterest]

Do your own research, draw your own conclusions. I feel that whatever the conclusion its nothing I can change and its effects are beyond my future. That leads me to not really caring one way or another.

[BobGraves]

You gotta love how science is now evolving with NEW previously unknown information. I can remember a few phrases thrown around if you question, let's say, COVID, global warming, vaccine efficacy... "Science Denier, Conspiracy Theorist, Climate Denier". The question isn't "Is the atmosphere warming"? The question is "Why"? I guess it has nothing to do with the 27 million degree orb that we revolve around. "Every 1.5 millionths of a second, the sun releases more energy than all humans consume in an entire year according to NASA Space Place." But, we're supposed to believe that if I drive an electric car (how do we produce electricity?), eat less beef because cows fart, and any number of other brilliant ideas, that's what's going to save the planet. I remember reading that if the oceans didn't absorb heat the climate would be even warmer and if trees didn't use CO2 and convert it to oxygen there would be a higher concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere. Maybe that's just the way God created the earth, the solar system, the universe. It has order and just works. But you think driving an electric car is going to "save the planet"? BTW I'll answer my own question from earlier... 80% of electricity in the US is produced from fossil fuel.
Nobody is saying that we shouldn't be looking into alternative fuels, new technologies, etc. But isn't that the point? Science evolves with NEW previously unknown information.

[airstreamingypsy]

I wish these seminars were on youtube

I wish they were anywhere but here.

[Wondering]

Hear how Carl Sagan misled Congress about the Venus runaway greenhouse affect - and find out how the media exaggerates global warming while failing to mention the ongoing 8-year global cooling trend. July 10 at 1 PM at Bridgeport, at the Science & Technology club meeting.
Keep Drinking that Kool-Aide! Pathetic!

[Vermilion Villager]

Hear how Carl Sagan misled Congress about the Venus runaway greenhouse affect - and find out how the media exaggerates global warming while failing to mention the ongoing 8-year global cooling trend. July 10 at 1 PM at Bridgeport, at the Science & Technology club meeting.
Pictures don't lie...Please explain why there is picture after picture of widespread glacial melt? Sounding..... dude I think it's time you get a new thermometer!!! :1rotfl::1rotfl:

[Stu from NYC]

Pictures don't lie...Please explain why there is picture after picture of widespread glacial melt? Sounding..... dude I think it's time you get a new thermometer!!! :1rotfl::1rotfl:

How do you know that the pictures you see are an honest representation of what is going on in our world?

[golfing eagles]

Pictures don't lie...Please explain why there is picture after picture of widespread glacial melt? Sounding..... dude I think it's time you get a new thermometer!!! :1rotfl::1rotfl:

Pictures don't lie. The people choosing WHICH pictures to show DO lie. Yes, there are PARTS of the Antarctic ice shelf that are melting, and there are OTHER PARTS that are growing. Best estimates from scientists without an agenda is there is net zero melting to slight growing of the Antarctic ice.

[Whitley]

Is global warming real or is it a global conspiracy, I'm not a scientist so I can't give you a definitive answer. What I know is having a conspiracy of that magnitude would be unlikely. What has to be weighted here is if it is a hoax, we wasted time, money and resources that could have been used somewhere else. But if it is real, we would be saving mankind. I don't know about anyone else, but I always like to take the inconvenience on the side of some extra protection.

I would ask How will we save mankind? Exactly what would you propose. How would you propose we get India and other developing countries to participate. From their point of view, we went through our industrial revolution and are now putting a damper on theirs. I "believe" current EV's result in more pollution than gas autos. On top of that, many Associations in Florida are banning EV's, including bikes, due to the fire risk and their insurance carrier not allowing them. Windmills kill millions of birds a year and are not remotely close to replacing current electric generating methods. I would propose that someone (government?) present a plan. 1/3rd of Nevada to be used for solar energy to power the US (something I heard Musk discuss). Give us the cost and timeline. All I see promoted now is Ban pipelines, ban gas ovens, ban wood burning stoves with no reasonable, affordable alternative presented.

[Vermilion Villager]

How do you know that the pictures you see are an honest representation of what is going on in our world?

Thats your answer....answer a question with another question. OK....How do you know the pictures you see are not correct? So are you saying everyone is lying??? It appears in your world everything you do not agree with is a lie. Very disturbing........

[Vermilion Villager]

Pictures don't lie. The people choosing WHICH pictures to show DO lie. Yes, there are PARTS of the Antarctic ice shelf that are melting, and there are OTHER PARTS that are growing. Best estimates from scientists without an agenda is there is net zero melting to slight growing of the Antarctic ice.
Well I've flown over the Greenland ice cap routinely while in the military, and have been to Glacier NP. several times. I've personally seen it. Can you say the same??? I'll wait.......

[Regorp]

Hear how Carl Sagan misled Congress about the Venus runaway greenhouse affect - and find out how the media exaggerates global warming while failing to mention the ongoing 8-year global cooling trend. July 10 at 1 PM at Bridgeport, at the Science & Technology club meeting.

Climate change is not a new concept. It has been happening for millions of years throughout the billions of years of our planets history. Now it is a political weapon, but the beat goes on for many more millions of years to come. Nothing will change that fact.

[TeresaE]

So tell me. Are they going to have the flat-earthers there? The JFK-QAnon folk? How about a delegation of Russians that believe Ukraine needed de-Nazification?

Yeah, I used to believe that climate change wasn't real. Eventually the evidence was overwhelming. I even remember the particular piece of evidence that convinced me that maybe a lay-person like me didn't know as much as I thought I did. After all, that's really what science is - discovering more information. And if the new, verifiable, repeatable information refutes the previous assumptions, it's time for new conclusions.

Some of us don’t necessarily question that the earth is warming. What we are questioning is 1) the cause. CO2 makes up around 0.04% of the earth’s atmosphere compared 96.5% of Venus’. How can humans and their cars and cows cause the earth to warm when CO2 and methane is such a small % of our atmosphere. If the earth is warming, could it be just part of the natural cycle? Could it be lack of health plankton in the oceans “breathing in the CO2 and releasing O2. Could it be concrete sinks ie parking lots? . I could list a dozen more theories. Some should be debated some should not. And 2) the potential severity global warming? Does it really matter? Will it peak? Is the sky really falling? Many well respected climatologists have raised these questions. The science is far from settled, but the debate has been cancelled by the usual suspects. That’s the problem.

[ron32162]

climate change is not real its call brain washing and it happens over time

[Keefelane66]

Pictures don't lie. The people choosing WHICH pictures to show DO lie. Yes, there are PARTS of the Antarctic ice shelf that are melting, and there are OTHER PARTS that are growing. Best estimates from scientists without an agenda is there is net zero melting to slight growing of the Antarctic ice.
Ive been on 2 Operation Deepfreeze to Antarctica and 1 Northern Polar Operation. Been there, seen it it’s happening. Sea ice is not the issue it’s the land ice/glaciers are disappearing.

[golfing eagles]

Well I've flown over the Greenland ice cap routinely while in the military, and have been to Glacier NP. several times. I've personally seen it. Can you say the same??? I'll wait.......

And what does that prove???---NOTHING.

Unless you have flown over every ice pack on every continent and noted the amount of melting on those that are melting and the amount of growth on those that are growing and determined the volume of each, that statement is just anecdotal nonsense.

[Velvet]

So tell me. Are they going to have the flat-earthers there? The JFK-QAnon folk? How about a delegation of Russians that believe Ukraine needed de-Nazification?

Yeah, I used to believe that climate change wasn't real. Eventually the evidence was overwhelming. I even remember the particular piece of evidence that convinced me that maybe a lay-person like me didn't know as much as I thought I did. After all, that's really what science is - discovering more information. And if the new, verifiable, repeatable information refutes the previous assumptions, it's time for new conclusions.
Of course climate change is real! Look at what happened to the dinosaurs and the bit of fiery lava that came out of the sun, we now call the earth.

What we are questioning, in my opinion, is can the infinitely minuscule entity called man actually have any effect on climate, the earth or in fact, anything in nature? The hubris in us says, Yes! I find it absurd.

[golfing eagles]

OK, the other climate change thread just got closed, the one implicating media got closed 2 days ago, and I suspect this one is on life support----the question is why???? I was unable to find anything political or outright nasty on either, just the normal hot topic debate with a few gentle insults and name calling, no different than most threads. I'm not going to risk stating my theory as to why this is happening , but I think most of us can guess.

[The Chipster]

I can't believe that so many of you think our entire scientific community is somehow conspiring to BS us about climate change. Our glaciers are melting (Glacier National Park is down to 25 active glaciers from 150 about 100 years ago), sea levels are rising (one of the easiest things in science to measure), the ice masses in Greenland and Antarctica are losing volume exponentially, and the average land and atmospheric temperatures are definitely increasing each decade. So, sure, go to your little meeting and all of you froth at the mouth about how smart you are compared to the best climatologists in the world.

[golfing eagles]

I can't believe that so many of you think our entire scientific community is somehow conspiring to BS us about climate change. Our glaciers are melting (Glacier National Park is down to 25 active glaciers from 150 about 100 years ago), sea levels are rising (one of the easiest things in science to measure), the ice masses in Greenland and Antarctica are losing volume exponentially, and the average land and atmospheric temperatures are definitely increasing each decade. So, sure, go to your little meeting and all of you froth at the mouth about how smart you are compared to the best climatologists in the world.

I think that might qualify as gulping down a double dose of Kool-Aid. Fortunately, most of that post is untrue

BTW, It's not the scientific community that is conspiring----It is the "powers that be", the ones that will profit from this nonsense. The scientists are merely their pawns, with a gun to their head, trying to survive professionally and financially since to state the truth results in suicide. And of course, the media is all too happy to aid them in pushing this false narrative.

[ThirdOfFive]

Awhile back while living in Northern Minnesota I woke up one morning to reports just north of us that the mercury had plummeted to -60. A record low. Not windchill, actual temp. Wind chills were below -100. I recall going for a walk that morning just to say I walked a mile in -100 winchill and record low temperature. I could.

What is (also) newsworthy about that particular morning is that in a town north of us, maybe 60 miles or so, the bitter cold necessitated that some kind of annual "global warming" conference had to be cancelled.

One has to appreciate the irony of it all...

[golfing eagles]

Awhile back while living in Northern Minnesota I woke up one morning to reports just north of us that the mercury had plummeted to -60. A record low. Not windchill, actual temp. Wind chills were below -100. I recall going for a walk that morning just to say I walked a mile in -100 winchill and record low temperature. I could.

What is (also) newsworthy about that particular morning is that in a town north of us, maybe 60 miles or so, the bitter cold necessitated that some kind of annual "global warming" conference had to be cancelled.

One has to appreciate the irony of it all...

But you're forgetting the new mantra of the alarmists to explain that----"Global warming can cause it to be extremely cold in places". Sort of the same way physicists can prove an elephant can fall UP off a cliff.

[dougjb]

Hear how Carl Sagan misled Congress about the Venus runaway greenhouse affect - and find out how the media exaggerates global warming while failing to mention the ongoing 8-year global cooling trend. July 10 at 1 PM at Bridgeport, at the Science & Technology club meeting.

Let's see...I am debating whether to believe a world reknowned Ivy League professor (deceased) with multitudinous peer reviewed science articles written by him...namely Carl Sagan....OR should I believe one of these Village jesters who go on and on about how the whole world is wrong but they are correct about global warming being incorrect. These Village jesters do so by merely expressing their opinion without providing even one single peer reviewed science article substantiating their opinion. Perhaps it is because there are no peer review articles to support their denialism. Meanwhile, there are literally thousand and thousands of scientifically based, peer review articles supporting the general thesis that global warming is real and it is caused, in part, by human activities. Oh well, the climate change deniers will claim that peer review articles are part of a grand conspiracy against their opinions. Yet, anyone even closely connected to scientific thought, understands that peer reviewed articles are the gold standard in scientific thought.

When I first moved to the Villages I loved these clubs as presenting speakers who were experts in their field and now sharing their knowledge with other Villagers. How exciting! We have some real experts in their fields who have retired to the Villages. But, this presenter is not one of them. After hearing this speaker rattle on about the global conspiracy supporting global warming and not hearing this speaker EVER present a single well researched and peer reviewed science (despite a request being made), I really am wondering why clubs even allow this presenter to continue speaking. In actuality, the speaker who will be presenting this talk is a meteorologist, in other words, a weatherman. I do not know his educational credentials. But, those credentials would not appear to provide him with a basis to discuss climatology beyond presenting only his own opinion. If this club invites this speaker to present again, I would urge the club to change its name to Science, Technology and Fables. Maybe the next topic to be discussed is why the earth is flat...or why the sun revolves around the earth!

If you go to his presentation, try not to laugh at the presenter's imagination in presenting his material. Indeed, ask him to provide the citation for even one peer review article...and see him twist in the wind in his response. Or ask what his credentials are to speak on climatology. Did I hear crickets?

[Bill14564]

I can't believe that so many of you think our entire scientific community is somehow conspiring to BS us about climate change. Our glaciers are melting (Glacier National Park is down to 25 active glaciers from 150 about 100 years ago), sea levels are rising (one of the easiest things in science to measure), the ice masses in Greenland and Antarctica are losing volume exponentially, and the average land and atmospheric temperatures are definitely increasing each decade. So, sure, go to your little meeting and all of you froth at the mouth about how smart you are compared to the best climatologists in the world.

I think that might qualify as gulping down a double dose of Kool-Aid. Fortunately, most of that post is untrue

BTW, It's not the scientific community that is conspiring----It is the "powers that be", the ones that will profit from this nonsense. The scientists are merely their pawns, with a gun to their head, trying to survive professionally and financially since to state the truth results in suicide. And of course, the media is all too happy to aid them in pushing this false narrative.

Which parts of the post are untrue? You accuse the scientists of writing biased studies, glaciers are melting, sea level is rising, and temperatures are increasing.

Yes, I know, maybe the Greenland sheet is melting and Antarctica sheet is decreasing and maybe the glaciers in Glacier National Park are receding but those *other* glaciers are growing! And while that is anecdotal evidence (albeit on a fairly large scale), we all know there is no value in finding a global study since we "know" that study would be biased in favor of climate change anyway.

[Stu from NYC]

Thats your answer....answer a question with another question. OK....How do you know the pictures you see are not correct? So are you saying everyone is lying??? It appears in your world everything you do not agree with is a lie. Very disturbing........

Wow talk about putting words in someone mouth.

I do not know if the pictures are or are not correct but just because I ask a question, why would you think that everything that I question is a lie?

I just have this habit of thinking for myself.

[ThirdOfFive]

But you're forgetting the new mantra of the alarmists to explain that----"Global warming can cause it to be extremely cold in places". Sort of the same way physicists can prove an elephant can fall UP off a cliff.
Yeah, I've heard that explanation!

"The earth is getting warmer--so the earth is getting colder".

Makes perfect sense to me...

[golfing eagles]

Let's see...I am debating whether to believe a world reknowned Ivy League professor (deceased) with multitudinous peer reviewed science articles written by him...namely Carl Sagan....OR should I believe one of these Village jesters who go on and on about how the whole world is wrong but they are correct about global warming being incorrect. These Village jesters do so by merely expressing their opinion without providing even one single peer reviewed science article substantiating their opinion. Perhaps it is because there are no peer review articles to support their denialism. Meanwhile, there are literally thousand and thousands of scientifically based, peer review articles supporting the general thesis that global warming is real and it is caused, in part, by human activities. Oh well, the climate change deniers will claim that peer review articles are part of a grand conspiracy against their opinions. Yet, anyone even closely connected to scientific thought, understands that peer reviewed articles are the gold standard in scientific thought.

When I first moved to the Villages I loved these clubs as presenting speakers who were experts in their field and now sharing their knowledge with other Villagers. How exciting! We have some real experts in their fields who have retired to the Villages. But, this presenter is not one of them. After hearing this speaker rattle on about the global conspiracy supporting global warming and not hearing this speaker EVER present a single well researched and peer reviewed science (despite a request being made), I really am wondering why clubs even allow this presenter to continue speaking. In actuality, the speaker who will be presenting this talk is a meteorologist, in other words, a weatherman. I do not know his educational credentials. But, those credentials would not appear to provide him with a basis to discuss climatology beyond presenting only his own opinion. If this club invites this speaker to present again, I would urge the club to change its name to Science, Technology and Fables. Maybe the next topic to be discussed is why the earth is flat...or why the sun revolves around the earth!

If you go to his presentation, try not to laugh at the presenter's imagination in presenting his material. Indeed, ask him to provide the citation for even one peer review article...and see him twist in the wind in his response. Or ask what his credentials are to speak on climatology. Did I hear crickets?

As a scientist (not a climatologist), and even having had a graduate course in paleoclimatology, I would agree with you 99.5% of the time.

However, once a scientific concept becomes highly politicized with trillions of dollars on the line for those that can control the narrative, the whole game changes.

read the post from the TOTV member whose son IS a climatologist, but disagreed with anthropogenic global warming.-----Grants---DENIED, tenure---DENIED publications----DENIED. Professional reputation ruined. Family to feed, a career ahead of you, most of would just tell the world what the powers that be want them to. And "the peers" that review your research are in exactly the same boat. Then they come out with the claim that "96% of climate scientists are in agreement". Of course they are. Just as 96% (probably more) of people with a gun to their head will tell you that the Earth is a cube. Many early renaissance scientific advancements came from France, until the French Academy of Sciences in the early-mid 1700's became politicized and had to push only "approved" concepts. All new ideas and concepts that were at odds with the "accepted" narrative were squashed and scientific advancement moved on to England and Germany. Same here with climate change. Then, the narrative continues to claim that anyone who disagrees with "the science" (THEIR science) is a nut job or ignorant. Example----Believe Oswald wasn't a lone gunman?----you're a nut job, conspiracy theorist or worse.

So if I publish another paper in a journal, maybe something about the microorganisms in the carposphere of Laccaria trullisata, I would expect unbiased peer review. But I pity any climatologist who tries to publish anything contrary to the global warming narrative.

[dougjb]

As a scientist (not a climatologist), and even having had a graduate course in paleoclimatology, I would agree with you 99.5% of the time.

However, once a scientific concept becomes highly politicized with trillions of dollars on the line for those that can control the narrative, the whole game changes.

read the post from the TOTV member whose son IS a climatologist, but disagreed with anthropogenic global warming.-----Grants---DENIED, tenure---DENIED publications----DENIED. Professional reputation ruined. Family to feed, a career ahead of you, most of would just tell the world what the powers that be want them to. And "the peers" that review your research are in exactly the same boat. Then they come out with the claim that "96% of climate scientists are in agreement". Of course they are. Just as 96% (probably more) of people with a gun to their head will tell you that the Earth is a cube. Many early renaissance scientific advancements came from France, until the French Academy of Sciences in the early-mid 1700's became politicized and had to push only "approved" concepts. All new ideas and concepts that were at odds with the "accepted" narrative were squashed and scientific advancement moved on to England and Germany. Same here with climate change. Then, the narrative continues to claim that anyone who disagrees with "the science" (THEIR science) is a nut job or ignorant. Example----Believe Oswald wasn't a lone gunman?----you're a nut job, conspiracy theorist or worse.

So if I publish another paper in a journal, maybe something about the microorganisms in the carposphere of Laccaria trullisata, I would expect unbiased peer review. But I pity any climatologist who tries to publish anything contrary to the global warming narrative.

As you know, anecdotal events, not subject to scientific review, e.g. the son you refer to who is a climatologist but who was at odds to others, is, as you know, simply not scientific. Perhaps he expressed an opinion that had NO scientific basis whatsoever, perhaps he was just a poor professor, perhaps he was having an affair with the dean's wife or son. We don't know. There are many reasons why a professor may not gain tenure but to attribute it, as you do, to being in opposition to climate change, is simply not scientific. It is a good story, but without more, it is just that.

Science is science, There have been many examples where a readily accepted theory has been disproved by those who go against the grain. But, they have done so on the basis of scientific fact, and, more recently, by presenting their findings of scientific fact in a peer reviewed journal. Unfortunately, for your perspective, there are NO scientific peer reviewed journal articles (out of the many thousands that have been published on the subject of climate change and the human involvement in such a change) that I am aware of. NONE...not one! Can you present even one? Or is the earth really flat because a lone voice in the ether claims it to be so?

[Keefelane66]

As a scientist (not a climatologist), and even having had a graduate course in paleoclimatology, I would agree with you 99.5% of the time.

However, once a scientific concept becomes highly politicized with trillions of dollars on the line for those that can control the narrative, the whole game changes.

read the post from the TOTV member whose son IS a climatologist, but disagreed with anthropogenic global warming.-----Grants---DENIED, tenure---DENIED publications----DENIED. Professional reputation ruined. Family to feed, a career ahead of you, most of would just tell the world what the powers that be want them to. And "the peers" that review your research are in exactly the same boat. Then they come out with the claim that "96% of climate scientists are in agreement". Of course they are. Just as 96% (probably more) of people with a gun to their head will tell you that the Earth is a cube. Many early renaissance scientific advancements came from France, until the French Academy of Sciences in the early-mid 1700's became politicized and had to push only "approved" concepts. All new ideas and concepts that were at odds with the "accepted" narrative were squashed and scientific advancement moved on to England and Germany. Same here with climate change. Then, the narrative continues to claim that anyone who disagrees with "the science" (THEIR science) is a nut job or ignorant. Example----Believe Oswald wasn't a lone gunman?----you're a nut job, conspiracy theorist or worse.

So if I publish another paper in a journal, maybe something about the microorganisms in the carposphere of Laccaria trullisata, I would expect unbiased peer review. But I pity any climatologist who tries to publish anything contrary to the global warming narrative.
“ So if I publish another paper in a journal, maybe something about the microorganisms in the carposphere of Laccaria trullisata, I would expect unbiased peer review. But I pity any climatologist who tries to publish anything contrary to the global warming narrative.”
He’s talking about a mushroom variety

[golfing eagles]

“ So if I publish another paper in a journal, maybe something about the microorganisms in the carposphere of Laccaria trullisata, I would expect unbiased peer review. But I pity any climatologist who tries to publish anything contrary to the global warming narrative.”
He’s talking about a mushroom variety

Correct, Laccaria sp. are mushrooms. They generally receive their nutrients from compounds that leech out of tree roots. In turn, they donate the same to the area around them, called the carposphere, where microorganisms thrive as a result.

I had no idea you were so interested in the microbiology of complex ecosystems, but now you have the short explanation. Meanwhile, my posts were about normal peer review on normal scientific papers as opposed to a subject that is highly politicized and worth trillions to SOME people.

[Keefelane66]

I spend a lot of time on Rhode Island beaches and the dunes on Cape Cod never seen them but never looked for them either. We do forage and collect beach plums and rosehip for jelly preserves. Not that fond of rosehip jelly How did Rosehips Help Us Win the War? - Bangers & Balls (https://bangersandballs.co/debunking-myths/how-did-rosehips-win-the-war/)

[golfing eagles]

I spend a lot of time on Rhode Island beaches and the dunes on Cape Cod never seen them but never looked for them either. We do forage and collect beach plums and rosehip for jelly preserves. Not that fond of rosehip jelly How did Rosehips Help Us Win the War? - Bangers & Balls (https://bangersandballs.co/debunking-myths/how-did-rosehips-win-the-war/)

More likely to find them around oak and birch trees on the shores of a freshwater lake, I believe they are somewhat halophobic.

[Whitley]

Wow talk about putting words in someone mouth.

I do not know if the pictures are or are not correct but just because I ask a question, why would you think that everything that I question is a lie?

I just have this habit of thinking for myself.

The last thing they want is for you to think for yourself. After all we have gone through it is amazing some blindly follow what the government doctors/scientists say. They wouldn't lie to us.?
Fauci did knowingly mislead the public. Instead of telling us, honestly, that we didn't have enough initial PPE to protect both medical workers and the masses and that those not in healthcare settings should only use the sort of homemade cloth face masks that successfully protected many of us as the pandemic went on, Fauci simply lied to us, assuming that his overnight 180 wouldn't erode public trust in his credibility.
The government treated the people like children. It seems a portion of the population is ok with that.

[Keefelane66]

The last thing they want is for you to think for yourself. After all we have gone through it is amazing some blindly follow what the government doctors/scientists say. They wouldn't lie to us.?
Fauci did knowingly mislead the public. Instead of telling us, honestly, that we didn't have enough initial PPE to protect both medical workers and the masses and that those not in healthcare settings should only use the sort of homemade cloth face masks that successfully protected many of us as the pandemic went on, Fauci simply lied to us, assuming that his overnight 180 wouldn't erode public trust in his credibility.
The government treated the people like children. It seems a portion of the population is ok with that.
I may have survived Covid by not having the proper protection by improvising and being cautious till a vaccine was made available. Yes I was a sucker for the vaccine regiment several of my family and friends were not.

[Ontolater]

My wife and I visited Alaska and twice visited the Mendenhall Glacier. In the ten years between visits the glacier receded over 1 mile. In fact the visitors center in located in that newfound space.

[Keefelane66]

Correct, Laccaria sp. are mushrooms. They generally receive their nutrients from compounds that leech out of tree roots. In turn, they donate the same to the area around them, called the carposphere, where microorganisms thrive as a result.

I had no idea you were so interested in the microbiology of complex ecosystems, but now you have the short explanation. Meanwhile, my posts were about normal peer review on normal scientific papers as opposed to a subject that is highly politicized and worth trillions to SOME people.
Do not give me to much credit I had heard the term but had to look it up to refresh myself. In my previous life I worked for the Bell System during deregulation (1983) I had been involved with consumer products for DIY, phones, answering machines, telephone jacks although simple, instructions had to be dumbed down to eighth grade reading levels. In other words I don’t use compound or unusual words usually.

[Two Bills]

.................and all my Dahlias survive in the ground during winter these days.
30+ years ago, I would have lost the lot leaving them in.


So there!:spoken:

[Vermilion Villager]

I think that might qualify as gulping down a double dose of Kool-Aid. Fortunately, most of that post is untrue

BTW, It's not the scientific community that is conspiring----It is the "powers that be", the ones that will profit from this nonsense. The scientists are merely their pawns, with a gun to their head, trying to survive professionally and financially since to state the truth results in suicide. And of course, the media is all too happy to aid them in pushing this false narrative.
I bet you think there was a shooter on the Grassy Knoll to huh? :mornincoffee:

[golfing eagles]

I bet you think there was a shooter on the Grassy Knoll to huh? :mornincoffee:

Not sure, I wasn't there. All I can say about that is that among people interviewed at the time and since, more people, including WWII combat veterans heard shots from the grassy knoll than from the book depository. But the really interesting part is that no one, NOT ONE of those witnesses were called to testify by the Warren Commission. Only those that heard shots from the 6th floor testified. Coincidence??? Oversight???? I don't know, I was 5 years old at the time

PS: your implication that I am some kind of conspiracy theorist nut job did not go unnoticed.

[Vermilion Villager]

Awhile back while living in Northern Minnesota I woke up one morning to reports just north of us that the mercury had plummeted to -60. A record low. Not windchill, actual temp. Wind chills were below -100. I recall going for a walk that morning just to say I walked a mile in -100 winchill and record low temperature. I could.

What is (also) newsworthy about that particular morning is that in a town north of us, maybe 60 miles or so, the bitter cold necessitated that some kind of annual "global warming" conference had to be cancelled.

One has to appreciate the irony of it all...
O...M...G!!! The place is called Tower MN...the "awhile back" you refer to was Feb 3, 1996....or almost 30 years ago. -60° below zero was the all-time low temperature ever set in the state of Minnesota on that date. And if you were going to quote statistics it has never even come close to that cold temp since.
And no.... in a town of 350 people in the dead of winter or any other time is or was there a "global warming conference" scheduled unless they were going to hold it a Bob's Amaco. I know....I was there at my lake home on Feb 3, 1996...and live there now.... (I think you just got exposed on the WWW):cryin2:

[Worldseries27]

What makes me question the fear mongering over climate is that theres no corresponding angst over nuclear weapons that will give you a bad hair day in 15 minutes (sub launched). Is it because there's no money in it for the proselytizers ?

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

The last thing they want is for you to think for yourself. After all we have gone through it is amazing some blindly follow what the government doctors/scientists say. They wouldn't lie to us.?
Fauci did knowingly mislead the public. Instead of telling us, honestly, that we didn't have enough initial PPE to protect both medical workers and the masses and that those not in healthcare settings should only use the sort of homemade cloth face masks that successfully protected many of us as the pandemic went on, Fauci simply lied to us, assuming that his overnight 180 wouldn't erode public trust in his credibility.
The government treated the people like children. It seems a portion of the population is ok with that.

Actually, we did have enough. We had more than enough, and the manufacturers would've had no problem keeping up with demand. EXCEPT - hoarders gonna hoard. People were grabbing dozens of boxes off the shelves before the stores could say "only two boxes per customer." I worked at Publix when the mask stuff started, and I watched these people emptying out our store of masks, gloves, rubbing alcohol, aloe vera, chlorox, toilet paper, paper towels, hand sanitizer, ammonia, and every variety of Lysol product that we sold.

Then you could go on e-bay and Amazon and find out that individuals who'd hoarded it all, were reselling it for a premium. $100 for a box of nitrile gloves that sold for less than $12 in the pharmacy section of the supermarket.

But yeah - we had enough. We also had greedy people that Fauci hadn't counted on. He should have expected that human beings would be insensitive, uncaring, greedy animals whenever there's a crisis.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

What makes me question the fear mongering over climate is that theres no corresponding angst over nuclear weapons that will give you a bad hair day in 15 minutes (sub launched). Is it because there's no money in it for the proselytizers ?

It's because individual people have no control over what the powers with the nuclear technology do or don't do. We DO have control over our own use of water, how much we waste, whether or not we compost, how much packaging we buy compared to how much food we grow ourselves. We have control over our own behavior.

Nuclear weapons terrify me. But I, as an individual, can't do ANYTHING about it. I -can- re-use my plastic bags, and support local agriculture whenever practical, walk or ride my bike instead of taking my car everywhere, etc. It's not much, for one person to do. But if everyone did even that little bit, it'd make a pretty big impact, overall.

[Worldseries27]

not sure, i wasn't there. All i can say about that is that among people interviewed at the time and since, more people, including wwii combat veterans heard shots from the grassy knoll than from the book depository. But the really interesting part is that no one, not one of those witnesses were called to testify by the warren commission. Only those that heard shots from the 6th floor testified. Coincidence??? Oversight???? I don't know, i was 5 years old at the time

ps: Your implication that i am some kind of conspiracy theorist nut job did not go unnoticed.
draw your own conclusion

[golfing eagles]

draw your own conclusion

My favorite is the list of winners and losers in the aftermath of the assassination.

Losers:-----easy--- 173 people with some connection to the event dead, most from suspicious accidents or a violent "crime". A Cambridge Univ. mathematician used the available data of the victims' age, occupation and location to calculate the odds of this being a coincidence at 1 in 10 to the 34th power, or approx. the same odds as winning lotto on a single quick pick ticket 8 times in a row.

Winners:

Arlen Spector---author of the "magic bullet" theory---later US senator
Gerald Ford---member Warren Commision---later US president
Leon Jaworski--also on the commission--later famous as Watergate prosecutor
And my favorite, a young Dallas reporter who was one of the few to see the Zapruder film before it got locked away. Although we now know that film clearly shows Kennedy's head going back and to the left with the back of his head getting blown back onto the trunk of the limo, he reported that his head went forward as it would with a kill shot from the book depository. That winner----Dan Rather.

IF, I repeat IF there was a conspiracy, it would appears playing ball served people better than being on the "loser" list.

[Bay Kid]

It's all about money.

[sounding]

I wish these seminars were on youtube

The Weather Club can schedule these (and other) talks at other clubs and groups.

The Villages Weather Club (https://www.theweatherclubvillages.com/)

[sounding]

Pictures don't lie...Please explain why there is picture after picture of widespread glacial melt? Sounding..... dude I think it's time you get a new thermometer!!! :1rotfl::1rotfl:

There are over 100 glaciers that are growing. They are listed at Weather Club meetings.

[sounding]

I read the hearing report from AP, and Sagan's original paper on the subject. I'm not seeing that he misled anyone. He gave his theory, supported it with the scientific data available at the time, and brought it to the most likely conclusion. That's what science is all about. You pose a question, do fact finding and data gathering, and attempt to answer the question.

There might be facts you don't know yet - information missing, new technology able to reveal things you would not have been capable of knowing previously. And so your answer might change. That doesn't make it misleading. It just makes it inaccurate. You can be wrong, and not be lying.

He testified to Congress that CO2 was the primary cause of Venus 900 F surface temperature. That was a lie - and he knew it - or he fell asleep during astrophysics class.

[golfing eagles]

There are over 100 glaciers that are growing. They are listed at Weather Club meetings.

How many times do I have to repeat it-----Don't confuse the zealots with the facts, it spoils the taste of their Kool-Aid. :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

[Taltarzac725]

How many times do I have to repeat it-----Don't confuse the zealots with the facts, it spoils the taste of their Kool-Aid. :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

I am busy chugging--
Some of Glacier National Park's glaciers have lost as much as 80% of their size in the last 50 years | CNN (https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/glacier-national-park-melting-scn-trnd/index.html)

[Bill14564]

There are over 100 glaciers that are growing. They are listed at Weather Club meetings.

Well that sounds like a good time.

What about the other estimated 199,900 glaciers?

[golfing eagles]

I am busy chugging--
Some of Glacier National Park's glaciers have lost as much as 80% of their size in the last 50 years | CNN (https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/glacier-national-park-melting-scn-trnd/index.html)

I know , Tal. We really should go back to 3 word sentences or even the nothing thread :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

[Taltarzac725]

I know , Tal. We really should go back to 3 word sentences or even the nothing thread :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:


More actual information. Dramatic Decline in Multiyear Arctic Sea Ice - Ocean Conservancy (https://oceanconservancy.org/blog/2018/12/19/dramatic-decline-multiyear-arctic-sea-ice/?ea.tracking.id=22HPXGJAXX&gad=1&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIoZuwiYSHgAMVDi3UAR1tFwgUEAAYAiAA EgJL1fD_BwE)

[Bill14564]

He testified to Congress that CO2 was the primary cause of Venus 900 F surface temperature. That was a lie - and he knew it - or he fell asleep during astrophysics class.

Interesting. Sagan believed it then and every website I can find believes it today. Consensus may not be proof but it's a heck of a lot more convincing than unsubstantiated claims on ToTV.

[fdpaq0580]

I read the hearing report from AP, and Sagan's original paper on the subject. I'm not seeing that he misled anyone. He gave his theory, supported it with the scientific data available at the time, and brought it to the most likely conclusion. That's what science is all about. You pose a question, do fact finding and data gathering, and attempt to answer the question.

There might be facts you don't know yet - information missing, new technology able to reveal things you would not have been capable of knowing previously. And so your answer might change. That doesn't make it misleading. It just makes it inaccurate. You can be wrong, and not be lying.

You are right, but the climate change denier WEENIES don't want to hear it

[golfing eagles]

You are right, but the climate change denier WEENIES don't want to hear it

Sorry, but the label "weenies" has already been taken and defined. Think of something original, and not what that moron Joy whatever on "the view" that calls it a "dee-nye-yah"

[Chi-Town]

Michio Kaku is the Carl Sagan of the now. Wonder what his views on global warming are.

[Taltarzac725]

Michio Kaku is the Carl Sagan of the now. Wonder what his views on global warming are.


Official Website of Dr. Michio Kaku (https://mkaku.org/)

You could ask him! He requests that you do it on Facebook. He probably has answers about Global Warming on there.

And I found this-- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnoJuQp8h3w

[Two Bills]

Sorry, but the label "weenies" has already been taken and defined. Think of something original, and not what that moron Joy whatever on "the view" that calls it a "dee-nye-yah"

"Pricks" comes to mind. :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl: :icon_wink:

[fdpaq0580]

I think that might qualify as gulping down a double dose of Kool-Aid. Fortunately, most of that post is untrue

BTW, It's not the scientific community that is conspiring----It is the "powers that be", the ones that will profit from this nonsense. The scientists are merely their pawns, with a gun to their head, trying to survive professionally and financially since to state the truth results in suicide. And of course, the media is all too happy to aid them in pushing this false narrative.

O M G !! I would be laughing if I thought you didn’t really mean that load of dung!! Check with your cult leader because what ever you're drinking or smoking is WAY beyond a a little cherry Kool-aid, my friend.

[fdpaq0580]

Sorry, but the label "weenies" has already been taken and defined. Think of something original, and not what that moron Joy whatever on "the view" that calls it a "dee-nye-yah"

Please consider my use of your "weenies" as an homag to one of my all time favs.

[fdpaq0580]

"pricks" comes to mind. :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl: :icon_wink:

ouch!

[blueash]

Pictures don't lie. The people choosing WHICH pictures to show DO lie. Yes, there are PARTS of the Antarctic ice shelf that are melting, and there are OTHER PARTS that are growing. Best estimates from scientists without an agenda is there is net zero melting to slight growing of the Antarctic ice.

Well doctor, please provide links to those best estimates by scientists without an agenda.

Nasa has a net loss (https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/ice-sheets/). Oh, you mean that if 90% of the areas in Antartica are melting but 10% are growing so you throw it out as if the small areas not melting disproves the truth that both our north and south polar areas are warming, you know, global warming. There is a scientific explanation, science you know, as to why some areas of the ice sheet might thicken. Get ready. Some of the Antarctic is so cold that snow does not fall often. The ice only grows when water (snow) is added. There are areas where because of global warming there is more new snow than melting, those rare areas are thickening. It does not offset the net loss of ice.

I do wish you would pick an argument and stick to it.

You alternatively claim that global warming is a hoax, isn't happening rapidly and is just the expected very slow pattern seen over tens of thousands of years so nothing to see here, or we have cooling, look at the last 9 years, to it is all real but humans can do nothing.

For those of you who say there is nothing we can do, it is all meaningless, I ask you to consider Los Angeles smog. We all grew up with the constant photos of LA engulfed in air pollution. What happened? Nobody took cars and trucks off the roads. Nobody made everyone move out of LA. All it took was vigorous environmental legislation to force industry to develop cleaner cars and trucks and factories.

Each one person, one car, one building, one factory, one incinerator at a time added up to great improvement. Now LA is still the smog capital of the country but it is so much better. Because humans did sometime to reverse a human caused problem. By the way industry claimed of course (https://www.aqmd.gov/home/research/publications/50-years-of-progress) it was not man made but just a normal phenomenon caused by ozone descending from the stratosphere into the LA basin. Disproven by, yup, science.

I will look forward to your links to those scientists who say that the net ice at the south polar region is not melting to slight increase. LINKS PLEASE.

[golfing eagles]

Well doctor, please provide links to those best estimates by scientists without an agenda.

Nasa has a net loss (https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/ice-sheets/). Oh, you mean that if 90% of the areas in Antartica are melting but 10% are growing so you throw it out as if the small areas not melting disproves the truth that both our north and south polar areas are warming, you know, global warming. There is a scientific explanation, science you know, as to why some areas of the ice sheet might thicken. Get ready. Some of the Antarctic is so cold that snow does not fall often. The ice only grows when water (snow) is added. There are areas where because of global warming there is more new snow than melting, those rare areas are thickening. It does not offset the net loss of ice.

I do wish you would pick an argument and stick to it.

You alternatively claim that global warming is a hoax, isn't happening rapidly and is just the expected very slow pattern seen over tens of thousands of years so nothing to see here, or we have cooling, look at the last 9 years, to it is all real but humans can do nothing.

For those of you who say there is nothing we can do, it is all meaningless, I ask you to consider Los Angeles smog. We all grew up with the constant photos of LA engulfed in air pollution. What happened? Nobody took cars and trucks off the roads. Nobody made everyone move out of LA. All it took was vigorous environmental legislation to force industry to develop cleaner cars and trucks and factories.

Each one person, one car, one building, one factory, one incinerator at a time added up to great improvement. Now LA is still the smog capital of the country but it is so much better. Because humans did sometime to reverse a human caused problem. By the way industry claimed of course (https://www.aqmd.gov/home/research/publications/50-years-of-progress) it was not man made but just a normal phenomenon caused by ozone descending from the stratosphere into the LA basin. Disproven by, yup, science.

I will look forward to your links to those scientists who say that the net ice at the south polar region is not melting to slight increase. LINKS PLEASE.

Res ipsa loquitur

[fdpaq0580]

Res ipsa loquitur

Glad you agree with the records. 420 and increasing straight months of global warming.

[golfing eagles]

Glad you agree with the records. 420 and increasing straight months of global warming.

I don't

[fdpaq0580]

I don't

Good. I was wrong. It's been updated to 526 consecutive months of global increases.
Have a good day, and keep hydrated, my friend.