The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Heretical thoughts about science and society > Comments

Heretical thoughts about science and society : Comments

By Don Aitkin, published 15/12/2017

'A favorite word of Freeman's about doing science and being creative is the word 'subversive'.'

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. Page 5
  7. All
Don
It is irksome when I provide references which represent the work of thousands of climate scientists; I can understand that when you have held a particular view. I gave a list of climate scientists and have seen research produced by them, or seen them interviewed on films.

Climate scientists almost universally agree that CO2 is an important greenhouse gas. Experiments can be performed to show that to be the case, an example was provided. Humlum does not agree with that proposition.
You are not a climate scientist, and cannot say what is right or wrong in weighing up one reference against many.

I provided a couple of references where climate scientists provided a critique of Humlumís work.

You can provide an opinion ; but, opinions do not hold up against science.

Enjoy your Christmas.
Posted by ant, Sunday, 24 December 2017 6:44:21 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Don

You say Humlum cannot be debunked, I gave a Guardian reference previously which had a hyperlink to published critiques of Humlum and other contrarian climate scientists in Theoretical and Applied Climatology.

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00704-015-1597-5

Apart from the Journal critique, they provided supplementary commentary on how they arrived at showing Humlum et al being wrong.

http://static-content.springer.com/esm/art%3A10.1007%2Fs00704-015-1597-5/MediaObjects/704_2015_1597_MOESM1_ESM.pdf

The team tried to replicate conclusions Humlum et al provided, page 57 shows a graph that debunks Humlum et al, there is prior discussion. It is very brave to suggest Humlum et al cannot be debunked. The prior discussion indicated that data that did not fit the Humlum et al conclusions was not used.

This information had already been given in prior references provided.

The reference on Oceans virtually provided an anthology of what was seen to be be happening in 2016, 451 pages referenced by over a thousand scientists. The foundation of this huge Report is that CO2 is a greenhouse gas which is the official view held by climate scientists and peak Science Agencies eg AGU.
Posted by ant, Tuesday, 26 December 2017 8:13:24 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. Page 5
  7. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy