Prev: 9-11 Truth makes HUGE showing at Los Angeles Peace March
Next: Help Save Eurotrash Re: Tax Bert's Water!
From: Giga2 on 13 Apr 2010 05:55
On 12 Apr, 19:51, Meteorologist <dchristain...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Evidence Suggests Man-Made Warming
> Greatly Exaggerated, Richard Lindzen
>
> http://global-warming.accuweather.com/2010/04/evidence_suggests_manma...
>
> Please discuss or debate fully.  I want
> to know what usenetters think.
>
> David Christainsen

The full article is GRRREAT!

http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2010/032010/03212010/533612/index_html?page=1

And I don't find much evidence for Lindzen denying tobacco is
addictive or even cancer-causing to some extent. He seems to have cast
doubt on some of the secondary smoking 'science' which I can perfectly
understand. He is clearly someone who enjoys asking difficult
questions, even against the tide of interllectual fashion. Such people
should be treasured not attacked, as even if wrong they play a very
valuable role in science by forcing popular theories to become even
better, or helping science out of dead ends.
From: MahFL on 13 Apr 2010 06:12
Since when was HIV a religion ?

Don't feed the trolls..........
From: Martin Brown on 13 Apr 2010 06:49
Giga2 wrote:
> On 12 Apr, 19:51, Meteorologist <dchristain...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> Evidence Suggests Man-Made Warming
>> Greatly Exaggerated, Richard Lindzen
>>
>> http://global-warming.accuweather.com/2010/04/evidence_suggests_manma...
>>
>> Please discuss or debate fully. I want
>> to know what usenetters think.
>>
>> David Christainsen
>
> The full article is GRRREAT!
>
>
http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2010/032010/03212010/533612/index_html?page=1

If you removed the word "greatly" from the original heading. I would
agree with Lindzens comments. He is not liked by the AGW alarmists, but
his critique of the modellers and their models is generally very good.

I agree entirely with what he says about Enron and carbon credits. They
will be the next global-banking-crisis-in-the-making with spivs and
speculators piling in to make a quick buck in the new Ponzi scheme. It
is already the vehicle for massive VAT based Carousel Fraud in the EEC.
>
> And I don't find much evidence for Lindzen denying tobacco is
> addictive or even cancer-causing to some extent. He seems to have cast
> doubt on some of the secondary smoking 'science' which I can perfectly
> understand. He is clearly someone who enjoys asking difficult
> questions, even against the tide of interllectual fashion.

His contributions on passive smoking are pretty dodgy though.

> Such people
> should be treasured not attacked, as even if wrong they play a very
> valuable role in science by forcing popular theories to become even
> better, or helping science out of dead ends.

People who ask awkward questions based on scientific evidence should
indeed be treasured. Only by finding faults in the current theories can
science hope to progress. The scientific method is ultimately self
correcting - it is a pity that the political system is not.

Regards,
Martin Brown
From: leonard78sp on 13 Apr 2010 15:53
On Apr 13, 5:55 am, Giga2 <justho...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
....
>
> And I don't find much evidence for Lindzen denying tobacco is
> addictive or even cancer-causing to some extent.

Ø What has that to do with climate science??
Absolutely nothing.

Stay on topic, FOOL!!


From: Giga2 on 14 Apr 2010 05:12
On 13 Apr, 20:53, "leonard7...(a)gmail.com" <leonard7...(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Apr 13, 5:55 am, Giga2 <justho...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> ...
>
>
>
> > And I don't find much evidence for Lindzen denying tobacco is
> > addictive or even cancer-causing to some extent.
>
> Ø What has that to do with climate science??
>      Absolutely nothing.
>
>      Stay on topic, FOOL!!

You are right in that, however earlier posters were claiming that
Lindzen was a 'tobacco denier' (whatever that means) to besmirch his
scientific reputation. I breifly looked for some evidence of that and
found only that he questioned the science of secondary smoking being a
big problem. This is a much more reasonable position than the false
impression they are trying to give. Of course they have to try
personal attacks on these people as AGWers so rely on scientific
authority figures. But as you say even if he had said that tobacco is
great for your body it would have no bearing on his brilliant analysis
of AGW. In the future perhaps you could read the whole thread so you
are up to speed on the conversation.
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: 9-11 Truth makes HUGE showing at Los Angeles Peace March
Next: Help Save Eurotrash Re: Tax Bert's Water!