Rebel scientists force Royal Society to accept climate change scepticism

[pintobean]

<snip>
The society appears to have conceded that it needs to correct previous statements. It said: “Any public perception that science is somehow fully settled is wholly incorrect — there is always room for new observations, theories, measurements.” This contradicts a comment by the society’s previous president, Lord May, who was once quoted as saying: “The debate on climate change is over.”
<snip>

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article7139407.ece

[RaleighNCDUer]

1. bullshit

It does not force the Royal Society to accept climate change skepticism. It merely acknowledges that, while the FACT of climate change is settled, there is room for discussion on degrees, whys and wherefores.

[Nederland]

2. The problem is

...the correct response to climate change depends entirely on "degrees, whys and wherefores". The proper response to a 1°C increase is very different from the proper response to a 5°C increase.

[guardian]

3. You didn't read the article

>>It merely acknowledges... the FACT of climate change is settled

No you are wrong. The quote from the article says, “Any public perception that science is somehow fully settled is wholly incorrect". YOU may feel the science is settled, however certain members of the Royal Society conclude the science is not settled.

Of course I'm sure these skeptics are just a bunch of teabagging, toothless, knuckle-dragging, poo-flinging, fundi Christian fanatics who think the earth is 600 years old, sitting in the basement of the Heritage Foundation or Exxon corporate headquarters.

Of course saying that wouldn't be the same as "being labelled a denier or flat-Earther because we say the science is not settled. The bullying of people into silence has unfortunately been effective.”

Maybe once enough people recognize the scam of AGW then we can divert the money wasted on carbon reduction to doing some real good for the planet like cleaning up the oil mess in the Gulf.

[jpak]

4. The Earth IS Flat and Global Warming is a Fraud - yup!

:rofl:

[Barrett808]

5. What is it with engineers and geologists?

Sir Alan, 72, an electrical engineer, is a member of the advisory council of the climate sceptic think-tank, the Global Warming Policy Foundation.

Is there something about these disciplines that encourages hubris?

[guardian]

6. Is there something about these disciplines?

It's not hubris. It's a results oriented mind set. Engineers actually have to produce tangible/correct results or bad things happen. In most cases, being wrong becomes fairly obvious very quickly. You can't build a bridge with fuzzy gum-drop theories or incomplete models or wishful thinking. Predicting climate 100 years out when nobody will remember your name or care that your conclusions were totally wrong on the other hand ...

[Nederland]

7. Hubris?

Which group displays more hubris, the people saying that we are so smart we can accurately predict what the climate will look like 100 years from now, or the people saying we don't understand climate well enough to make 100 year predictions?

Hmmmmmm...

[Nihil]

8. Oi!

> What is it with engineers and geologists?

I agree that it is frustrating when electrical engineers pipe up
merrily trample the experts in other fields in their desire to
get *their* pet solution adopted but why did you include geologists?

:spank: