Scientists pull an about face on global warming

[pssvr]

If one thinks what Latif said is a paradigm shift, or about face from scientists

Who cares if it was a paradigm shift or not? The point remains the same: Global warming enthusiasts claim extreme certainty in their models, models which are constantly under revision and which are highly sensitive to initial conditions (see weather and chaos theory).

It is equivalent to the weatherman coming on Monday morning and informing everyone that they absolutely must buy tons of bread because there will be a blizzard that will last for weeks starting Tuesday. Then on Tuesday he comes on and says he made a minor revision to his model, and his over-arching theory remains the same, but actually there will be a tornado on Wednesday.

A high-school student working on a simple science project is taught he must support his mathematical model with data. The scientific method: You ask a question; you propose an answer; you develop an experiment to determine whether your proposal is consistent with reality. Global warming enthusiasts are missing that last step, and they know they are.

[wilbur]

Who cares if it was a paradigm shift or not? The point remains the same

I believe the point is the shoddy, outright dishonest journalism on display - and its typical - even more troubling still, is just how much opinion on this issue is shaped by articles like this. Unfortunately for most, reading a few dozen, dishonest hack-jobs like this one, is what passes for their "research" on the issue.. and it shows.

We can step through just about every article posted in this section of the board and find the majority to be as flawed or more flawed than this one - and this is the stuff that reinforces the dogmatic position that the denialists scream about.

: Global warming enthusiasts claim extreme certainty in their models, models which are constantly under revision and which are highly sensitive to initial conditions (see weather and chaos theory).

No they dont claim certainty with their models. Sounds like your a victim too.

It is equivalent to the weatherman coming on Monday morning and informing everyone that they absolutely must buy tons of bread because there will be a blizzard that will last for weeks starting Tuesday. Then on Tuesday he comes on and says he made a minor revision to his model, and his over-arching theory remains the same, but actually there will be a tornado on Wednesday.

Nope, not really. This is just another version of the "we can't predict the weather very well, therefore we can't predict long term climate trends". Besides the point, many weather phenomena ARE predictable - some more than others.

A high-school student working on a simple science project is taught he must support his mathematical model with data. The scientific method: You ask a question; you propose an answer; you develop an experiment to determine whether your proposal is consistent with reality. Global warming enthusiasts are missing that last step, and they know they are.

That is the party line, but its just aint true.

[SarasotaRepub]

No they dont claim certainty with their models. Sounds like your a victim too.

Yes, a lot do Wilbur, I've read it time after time. And then you have "experts"
like Al Gore who have zero scientific cred making statements like the debate
is over...it's what we say or you're a denialist.

Al is a used car salesman. Why do you think he won't debate anyone Wilbur?

[patriot45]

All we gotta do is argue about this for about ten years or so and then we can find another false scare!
Just lets not go bankcrupt on phony theories! 2020, global colding!!

[wilbur]

Yes, a lot do Wilbur, I've read it time after time. And then you have "experts"
like Al Gore who have zero scientific cred making statements like the debate
is over...it's what we say or you're a denialist.

Al is a used car salesman. Why do you think he won't debate anyone Wilbur?

Well, I wouldn't advocate listening to Al Gore on AGW anymore than I would recommend listening to Rush or even to the author of the article in the OP on AGW.... Same for Michael Moore on health care, or Ben Stein on evolution, etc etc.

Listen much closer to what the scientists say, and you'll see much less chaos, hyperbole, and misinformation.

[PoliCon]

*yawn* The whole issue makes me wanna burn tires.

[Rockntractor]

When the house voted on it they refused to hear opposing viewpoints by scientists.

[PoliCon]

When the house voted on it they refused to hear opposing viewpoints by scientists.

BECAUSE IT'S SETTLED!1!!1!1!1!!!!! The debate is OVER! SO SAYTH THE GORACLE!!

[FlaGator]

When the house voted on it they refused to hear opposing viewpoints by scientists.

Most, if not all, of their climate predictions have been dead wrong and they still try to spin things with the "not yet but it will" response or the every amusing "you just don't understand this issue" With whole careers built on the branches of the global warming tree many of these "scientists" have way to much invested to admit they are wrong.

[wilbur]

Most, if not all, of their climate predictions have been dead wrong and they still try to spin things with the "not yet but it will" response or the every amusing "you just don't understand this issue" With whole careers built on the branches of the global warming tree many of these "scientists" have way to much invested to admit they are wrong.

Just where did this impression that the scientific predictions of AGW have failed? What were these predictions, and where did you find out about them? Articles like this one?

My guess is you catch bits here and there from Al Gore (or others like him, possibly even more extreme), dismiss them as loonie, then read oodles and oodles of articles like this or consume tons of your typical right anti-AGW media that serves to confirm and reinforce your opinion.

Then you walk away thinking how crazy those arrogant scientists are, and how misguided the rest of the people out there must be for falling for the "obvious conspiracy". All the while, one would have been lucky to encounter just one single accurate fact about AGW theory in the entire process.