A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Rutan on Global Warming



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old August 8th 09, 10:20 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Peter Dohm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,754
Default Rutan on Global Warming

"George" wrote in message
...
My small nitpicking point is that if the Earth wasn't doing whatever
the Earth did we'd be still in the Wurm Glaciation with most of
Northern America and Europe under several hundred feet of ice.


I think that you and I are really on ths same page.

Basically, warming would be mostly a good thing, since there is prabably
more oxigen trapped in the oceans in the form of disolved CO2 than is free
in the atmosphere; but the most recent warming cycle seems to have passed
and we, as humans, never had much to do with it.

Also, let us not forget that the same political groups were shouting about
global cooling (and the comming ice age) about 30 years ago.

OTOH, CO2 really is plant food; but to make full use of it requires exactly
the sort of large scale water management (and conversion to nuclear energy)
to which the "environmentalists" object.

Peter



  #32  
Old August 9th 09, 12:27 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Brian Whatcott
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 915
Default Rutan on Global Warming

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

Dan Luke wrote:
....Just about everyone agrees the past few decades are warmer ...

~*~
... Not everyone agrees the cause is human.

~*~
No, just every scientific professional organization in the world.


~*~
Can you provide anything, ANYTHING, that supports that wild
assertion?


~*~
Here's the list, with some links illustrating the various bodies'
positions:
American Association of Petroleum Geologists
..and dozens more.... /snipped/



I don't need a list of them. Your assertion was that EVERY scientific
professional organization in the world agrees that humans are the cause for
the past few decades being warmer than previous. If there exists just one
professional organization that disputes that your wild assertion is proven
false. The George C Marshall Institute is such an organization.



GC Marshall IS an organization. It is a Republican think tank.
That does not qualify them as a *Scientific* organization.
Far from it! Here's a little essay from the guy who used to RUN this
institute:

[2009 essay, former Marshall Institute Executive Director, Matthew B.
Crawford] wrote that after he commenced with the group in September 2001
"certain perversities became apparent as I settled into the job. It
sometimes required me to reason backward, from desired conclusion to
suitable premise. The organization had taken certain positions, and
there were some facts it was more fond of than others. As its
figurehead, I was making arguments I didn't fully buy myself. Further,
my boss seemed intent on retraining me according to a certain cognitive
style — that of the corporate world, from which he had recently come."

~*~

Here's another note from a head of this think tank.

"... in the late nineties, then GMI President Jeffrey Salmon wrote,
"when the Institute turned its attention to the science of global
warming, it decided it would appeal successfully to industry for
financial support." This fall, the Institute received its first-ever
grant from a corporate foundation-- the Exxon Education Foundation.
(http://web.archive.org/web/200209130...rg/funding.htm)

According to Media Transparency.org, the Institute received $5,757,803
since 1985 from conservative foundations including the Castle Rock
Foundation (Coors), Earhart Foundation, John M. Olin Foundation, the
Sarah Scaife Foundation, Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, and the
Carthage Foundation. "

But note: Exxon has only placed $840 thousand with them.

Sincerely

Brian Whatcott
p.s. Take care Dan. You might just find a renta-mob comes to
demonstrate outside your house like they sent to the Town Hall meetings
about Health Car Reform? :-)
  #33  
Old August 9th 09, 01:06 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Dan Luke[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 713
Default Rutan on Global Warming


"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
...
Dan Luke wrote:
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
news
Dan Luke wrote:

Just about everyone agrees the past few decades are warmer than
previous. Not everyone agrees the cause is human.

No, just every scientific professional organization in the world.


Can you provide anything, ANYTHING, that supports that wild
assertion?



Here's the list, with some links illustrating the various bodies'
positions:
American Association of Petroleum Geologists
http://dpa.aapg.org/gac/statements/climatechange.pdf
American Geophysical Union
http://www.agu.org/sci_soc/prrl/prrl0335.html American Astronomical
Society http://aas.org/governance/resolutions.php#climate
American Institute of Physics (2004) http://www.aip.org/gov/policy12.html
American Physical Society
http://www.aps.org/policy/statements/07_1.cfm American Chemical
Society http://tinyurl.com/nepc8b American Statistical Association
http://www.amstat.org/about/pressrel...matechange.pdf
InterAcademy Council
Joint Science Academies
http://royalsociety.org/document.asp?tip=0&id=7821 International
Council of Academies of Engineering and Technological Sciences
http://www.caets.org/cms/7122/7735.aspx European Academy of Sciences and
Arts
http://www.euro-acad.eu/downloads/me...ct._2008.p df
Network of African Science Academies
National Academy of Science/National Research Council (US)
http://dels.nas.edu/dels/rpt_briefs/...2008_final.pdf
International Council for Science
European Science Foundation
http://www.esf.org/activities/esf-co...=311&year=2009
American Association for the Advancement of Science
http://www.aaas.org/news/press_room/..._statement.pdf
Federation of American Scientists http://tinyurl.com/neaehf
World Meteorological Organization
American Meteorological Society
http://www.ametsoc.org/policy/2009ge...statement.html
Royal Meteorological Society (UK)
http://www.rmets.org/weather/liverpool.php Australian Meteorological
and Oceanographic Society http://tinyurl.com/kpsnbz
Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences
International Union for Quaternary Research
American Quaternary Association
http://www.agu.org/fora/eos/pdfs/2006EO360008.pdf
Stratigraphy Commission of the Geological Society of London
International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics
Max Planck Institute http://tinyurl.com/knuex6
European Geosciences Union
Canadian Federation of Earth Sciences
Geological Society of America
http://www.geosociety.org/positions/pos10_climate.pdf
The Royal Society http://royalsociety.org/downloaddoc.asp?id=1630

I'd be interested to see your list of professional scientific
organizations who say human activities are *not* responsible for the
warming of past few decades.


I don't need a list of them. Your assertion was that EVERY scientific
professional organization in the world agrees that humans are the cause
for the past few decades being warmer than previous. If there exists just
one professional organization that disputes that your wild assertion is
proven false. The George C Marshall Institute is such an organization.


*Scientific professional organization*, McNicoll, i. e., an organization of
science professionals. You know, people whose careers are in the sciences.
People who actually *do* science.

My assertion isn't wild, it's factual. The George C. Marshall Institute is
not a scientific professional organization, it is a think tank. What are
you going to offer next, the Heartland Institute?

Keep trying. I know a couple of fake ones; see if you can find them.

As usual, you are playing your ultra literalist game. Shaving the issue
down to an atomic scale point relieves you of the burden of being relevant,
doesn't it?

And where are those cites you promised?

--
Dan

T182T at 4R4


  #34  
Old August 9th 09, 02:56 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Jim Logajan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,958
Default Rutan on Global Warming

"Dan Luke" wrote:
wrote:
Just about everyone agrees the past few decades are warmer than
previous.

Not everyone agrees the cause is human.


No, just every scientific professional organization in the world.


The scientific organization I belong to didn't poll its members before
adopting its position. I have no doubt the statements issued by many
organizations were decided by the leaders of said groups.

Anyway, so where is the IEEE position?
Or the Quasar Equatorial Survey Team?
Or ... well, you get the idea. Your statement _was_ a tad sweeping.
  #35  
Old August 9th 09, 03:09 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Steven P. McNicoll[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 721
Default Rutan on Global Warming

brian whatcott wrote:

GC Marshall IS an organization. It is a Republican think tank.
That does not qualify them as a *Scientific* organization.
Far from it!


The GCMI is an organization, it has scientists on staff, thus it is a
scientific organization. If having political or government connections is
disqualifying then the list provided by Dan Luke is wiped out as well.

Gotcha!


  #36  
Old August 9th 09, 03:11 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Steven P. McNicoll[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 721
Default Rutan on Global Warming

Dan Luke wrote:

*Scientific professional organization*, McNicoll, i. e., an
organization of science professionals. You know, people whose
careers are in the sciences. People who actually *do* science.

My assertion isn't wild, it's factual. The George C. Marshall
Institute is not a scientific professional organization, it is a
think tank. What are you going to offer next, the Heartland
Institute?


The GCMI is an organization, it has scientists on staff, thus it is a
scientific organization. If having political or government connections is
disqualifying then the list you provided is wiped out as well.

Gotcha!


  #37  
Old August 9th 09, 03:16 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Dan Luke[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 713
Default Rutan on Global Warming


"Jim Logajan" wrote in message
.. .
"Dan Luke" wrote:
wrote:
Just about everyone agrees the past few decades are warmer than
previous.

Not everyone agrees the cause is human.


No, just every scientific professional organization in the world.


The scientific organization I belong to didn't poll its members before
adopting its position. I have no doubt the statements issued by many
organizations were decided by the leaders of said groups.


So? Read the one I posted from the American Association of Petroleum
Geologists. It is tepid, equivocal and obviously written to appease members
who are violently opposed to the idea of AGW, while still not denying the
overwhelming scientific evidence for same. Then read the rest of the links.
No equivocation there. Do you think they are misrepresenting substantial
portions of their memberships?


Anyway, so where is the IEEE position?
Or the Quasar Equatorial Survey Team?
Or ... well, you get the idea. Your statement _was_ a tad sweeping.


The IEEE is an engineering association.

QUEST is not a professional association, it is a research group.

Associations of scientific professionals, you know? Like the AMA for
doctors, the ABA for lawyers. Is this a difficult concept?

--
Dan

T182T at 4R4


  #38  
Old August 9th 09, 03:23 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Steven P. McNicoll[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 721
Default Rutan on Global Warming

Dan Luke wrote:

So? Read the one I posted from the American Association of Petroleum
Geologists. It is tepid, equivocal and obviously written to appease
members who are violently opposed to the idea of AGW, while still not
denying the overwhelming scientific evidence for same. Then read the
rest of the links. No equivocation there. Do you think they are
misrepresenting substantial portions of their memberships?


I suggest you review their position on AGW.


  #39  
Old August 9th 09, 03:23 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Dan Luke[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 713
Default Rutan on Global Warming


"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
m...
Dan Luke wrote:

*Scientific professional organization*, McNicoll, i. e., an
organization of science professionals. You know, people whose
careers are in the sciences. People who actually *do* science.

My assertion isn't wild, it's factual. The George C. Marshall
Institute is not a scientific professional organization, it is a
think tank. What are you going to offer next, the Heartland
Institute?


The GCMI is an organization, it has scientists on staff, thus it is a
scientific organization. If having political or government connections is
disqualifying then the list you provided is wiped out as well.

Gotcha!


Not hardly, McNicoll.

You cannot falsify my assertion by making up your own definition of a
scientific professional organization. Keep trying--a little harder next
time, please.

--
Dan

T182T at 4R4



  #40  
Old August 9th 09, 03:27 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Steven P. McNicoll[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 721
Default Rutan on Global Warming

Dan Luke wrote:

Not hardly, McNicoll.

You cannot falsify my assertion by making up your own definition of a
scientific professional organization. Keep trying--a little harder
next time, please.


Wrong. You cannot have one standard for organizations that support AGW and
another standard for those that do not.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Global Warming The debbil made me do it Denny Piloting 442 April 5th 08 12:26 PM
My Modest Proposal to End Global Warming, Revitalize General Aviation, and End Our Dependence on Foreign Oil Skylune Owning 0 October 19th 07 10:47 PM
My Modest Proposal to End Global Warming, Revitalize General Aviation, and End Our Dependence on Foreign Oil Skylune Owning 0 October 19th 07 09:21 PM
I have an opinion on global warming! Jim Logajan Piloting 89 April 12th 07 12:56 PM
Aviation Conspiracy: CBS Spotlights Aviation's Effect On Global Warming!!! Free Speaker General Aviation 1 August 3rd 06 07:24 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:34 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.