Climate-change skeptic: ‘You should not be a skeptic.’
Richard Muller, a physics professor at Cal-Berkeley, has been a celebrated skeptic about the true extent of climate change.
Muller has questioned whether the data had been skewed by the “heat-island effect.” He has had his doubts about the so-called “hockey stick,” which shows global temperatures rising much faster since the early 19th century than at any point in the last thousand years. In the past, he has called the hockey stick “an incredible error” and “the artifact of poor mathematics.” And he has been quite harsh in his condemnation of fellow scientists involved in the s0-called ClimateGate scandal:
“I frankly as a scientist — I now have a list of people whose papers I’m won’t read anymore. You’re not allowed to do this in science. This is not up to our standards.”
So Muller, acting in the best traditions of science, decided to redo that work. He put together a top-notch team that included Saul Perlmutter, who just recently won the Nobel Prize in physics, and Judith Curry of Georgia Tech, another noted scientist who has been critical of some of the work of some of her peers. Their project — funded in part by a grant from the Charles M. Koch Foundation — just completed its two-year work.
Last week, Muller and the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature team released its findings (the results have yet to undergo peer review). As Muller described it:
Our biggest surprise was that the new results agreed so closely with the warming values published previously by other teams in the US and the UK. This confirms that these studies were done carefully and that potential biases identified by climate change skeptics did not seriously affect their conclusions.
As he wrote in the Wall Street Journal:
“When we began our study, we felt that skeptics had raised legitimate issues, and we didn’t know what we’d find. Our results turned out to be close to those published by prior groups. We think that means that those groups had truly been very careful in their work, despite their inability to convince some skeptics of that. They managed to avoid bias in their data selection, homogenization and other corrections.”
Here’s a chart produced by Muller’s team, documenting the findings of three other research teams as well as the BEST team. Note how closely the findings track each other.
This is how science works. It checks upon itself. And when the position that you had previously taken has been proved false, you do what Muller has done:
You change your position.
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
399 comments Add your comment
WOODSTOCK MIKE
October 24th, 2011
2:00 pm
“Have you ever noticed how the Fright Wing, when confronted with incontrovertible evidence that blows their entire assumptions out of the water, resort to “attack and distract” tactics. Witness the “Al Gore profits from global warming” posts. Very interesting.”
So please explain what the exact cause of global warming is? This should be funny…
WOODSTOCK MIKE
October 24th, 2011
2:01 pm
“al gore was born wealthy….
envious?”
Granny, I’m a Republican, we don’t hate the rich like you…
Soothsayer
October 24th, 2011
2:01 pm
To paraphrase: admitting that you have a problem is one of the first steps to correcting that problem. Denial helps nothing.
AmVet
October 24th, 2011
2:01 pm
barking frog, out of 117 measured summers in Georgia, this one was number 116, in terms of the hottest ever.
The Texas summer of 2011 was the hottest of the 117. Several other southeastern states had similar readings.
Coincidence? Nobody knows for sure.
Yet.
And that is what terrifies the Republican gainsayers.
Even so, with them it is good to see baby steps.
It was only a couple of years ago, that almost none of them even acknowledged the earth’s sudden rising temps.
Now they begrudgingly do, but come up with endless malarkey to explain it away…
Matti's Southern Drawl
October 24th, 2011
2:01 pm
Truth and reality exist and occur independently of what we think about them, how we feel about them, or how we prefer to interpret them. Just sayin’.
getalife
October 24th, 2011
2:01 pm
mikey,
I don’t know his personal finances and don’t care. It is none of my business.
I do like him fighting for our planet.
Somebody had to step up and lead on this issue and I praise him for that.
I believe we are heavily tilted for profits over our planet and country and hope that changes.
rightwingextreme
October 24th, 2011
2:02 pm
Hey Jay…I fixed your reply.
Jay
October 24th, 2011
1:29 pm
Wow jm. I didn’t know presidents had the power to add private-sector jobs like that. Somebody ought to tell Barack Obama, don’t you think?
Normal
October 24th, 2011
2:02 pm
getalife
October 24th, 2011
1:52 pm
You have to remember that Del, Scout and myself are ex-military. In being that, we have always blamed our plight, especially since most of it is beyond our control, on our superiors. It’s a natural carry over to blame the President for those things that you don’t like and remain beyond your control. Just being what they were trained to be, is all. In my day, the word was…”A bitchin’ sailor is a happy sailor”. Figure that works for Marines, too…
Bosch
October 24th, 2011
2:03 pm
Sooth,
Humans smelled alot worse back then!
Soothsayer
October 24th, 2011
2:03 pm
Heck, Woodstock Rightie, maybe this has something to do with it. Ya think?
Mick
October 24th, 2011
2:03 pm
Mudfoot
October 24th, 2011
2:03 pm
Climate change and and all other forms of natural and man-made disaster could be easily solved if we’d just cut taxes to zero
Mudfoot
October 24th, 2011
2:04 pm
Right Ty?
Soothsayer
October 24th, 2011
2:04 pm
“Humans smelled alot worse back then!”
They still had soap and the local crick.
WOODSTOCK MIKE
October 24th, 2011
2:04 pm
“I don’t know his personal finances and don’t care. It is none of my business.”
Oh, I thought you hate the rich?
TaxPayer
October 24th, 2011
2:05 pm
I hope those Koch-funded scientists were not hoping for more Koch funding with results like that.
I mean, “Watts Up” with those people!!! 
getalife
October 24th, 2011
2:05 pm
Thanks Normal.
I will keep that in mind
AmVet
October 24th, 2011
2:07 pm
This topic perfectly exemplifies the equally bizarre and self-destructive collective stance by the far right-wing fringe AGAINST the American middle class.
They seem to be able to constantly outdo their own lunacy…
Mick
October 24th, 2011
2:08 pm
woodstock
We don’t hate the rich, we just want more of their money. The problem is that there are too many rubes running around trying to exempt them from paying more. They can keep their fortunes, just pay more in line what they earn, end of story…
Paul
October 24th, 2011
2:08 pm
Bruno
“Does that clear things up?”
No.
From your earlier post: “While Paul and some others here were apparently focusing on the most inflammatory of the global warming “deniers”, the mainstream conservative message has remained the same. We’re all in support of developing “alternative” fuel sources. It’s more a matter of alarmist vs. non-alarmist, IMO.”
Are you saying mainstream conservatives accept climate change?
Are you saying mainstream conservatives do or do not believe man bears responsibility for part of the change?
If man does not contribute, then why look for alternate fuel sources?
getalife
October 24th, 2011
2:09 pm
mikey,
You thought wrong.
I don’t hate anybody.
I don’t like the 1 % controlling our government to get nothing but corporate welfare that wastes American taxpayer’s money and hope that changes. The 1 % does not need any help.
I support the 99 % trying to change that fact.
global warming solution
October 24th, 2011
2:10 pm
End capitalism, it’ll end global warming!
TaxPayer
October 24th, 2011
2:11 pm
I just don’t see the big deal, like the cons here, about global warming that will not impact us for at least another hundred or more years when we have much more serious things to worry about right now such as protecting our grandchildren from the ravages of increased national debt and taxation and social security benefits and Medicare and environmental REGULATIONS against air pollution and water pollution and such!!!! The horrors!!!!
global warming solution
October 24th, 2011
2:12 pm
It is time for a state run ecomony where the politicans tell us what we deserve to earn and keep!
Meme Mine
October 24th, 2011
2:12 pm
Boycott all fear mongering climate crisis media.
Climate change crisis from Human CO2 isn’t about pollution or tankers or little kids planting trees. It’s a climate crisis and nothing could possibly be worse than a climate crisis outside of a comet hit and nuclear war. This is literally the end of life for civilization that is being spewed here with billions of children being issued CO2 death warrants. Can someone act like it’s the ultimate emergency please?
Pollution is real but death of the planet by it or Human CO2 is not real.
REAL planet lovers are happy for the planet in climate change being a tragic exaggeration committed by exploiting scientists and unconscionable news editors.
real john
October 24th, 2011
2:12 pm
Two points:
1. Wasn’t it when we had all of the harsh snows, the liberals changed it to Climate Change, not Global Warming?
2. So if I’m reading this graph right, the earth’s temperature raised a whole 1 degrees. So what?? Please don’t tell me cities will go crashing into oceans, that’s complete crap. So the temperature goes up a degree or two; that’s like saying it was 74 instead of 73 today. Do you really notice a big difference.
3. Jay, if you spent as much time investigating how the current president is the most disasterous president in modern history as you do trying to find every little thing to nitpick at Republicans, you probably would be a Pulitzer Prize winner at this point.
A few suggestions:
–Investigating how Bush tried several times to warn that we had a impedning crisis; yet people like Barney Frank said everything was fine.
–Where in the world did $800 billion in stimulus dollars go and what good did it go?? And no, “jobs saved” does not count. All you are doing is prolonging and making the problem worse in the long run.
—since liberals always talk about science, how about doing some investigating to see how our current entitlements, S.S.; Medicare, Medicaid will continue to explode in costs the next few years and what the Dems propose how to slow it??
–How about an article showing campaign contributions to Obama from the evil Wall Street People??
I could go on for awhile but you get the point. Instead of just trying to create more hate and drama, why don’t you look at the Democratic party and do some soul searching. They haven’t exactly been perfect.
Can you name one thing Obama has done to help the economy?? You can’t, because he hasn’t…I don’t know how bad it has too get; before Dems realize that trying to inject “fairness” in our economy, will only hurt more people. Raise “rich” people’s taxes and see what happens? Impose more environmental regulations to businesses…see what happens…trust me, it won’t be pretty for the middle class and poor
Mick
October 24th, 2011
2:12 pm
bruno
Looks like every 50 to 100k years there is a spike in temp.
Paul
October 24th, 2011
2:13 pm
Woodstock Mike
I’ve never heard anyone on the left on this blog say they hate the rich.
I have heard, many times, those on the Right say that’s what the Left believe. But I’ve never heard the Left agree.
Some of the most prominent people on the Left are very, very rich. Like Hollywood types.
And many on the Right do seem to hate them.
Grasshopper
October 24th, 2011
2:13 pm
Change your light bulbs — quick! That will surely help.
Until you throw the broken new $15 bulb in the trash and the dog eats the mercury. Oops.
getalife
October 24th, 2011
2:13 pm
bruno,
Answer Paul’s questions.
Honestly.
allen981
October 24th, 2011
2:13 pm
Too bad Al Gore wasn’t around to save the dinosaurs – ergo, “Earth as we know it – from that horrific cooling period that killed them all.
Since natural, ongoing changes in the physics of the Earth apparently have nothing to do with climate change, such change must have been dinosaur-induced, and ‘ol Al could have lead a campaign for all dinos to ‘pass less gas and save the Earth…’
This of course, is a ridiculous analogy, as is the idea that mankind can control the inexorable physical forces that create the environment in which we live.
Jay B referred to ‘a thousand years’ a few comments back, as if that were a meaningful time frame. Balderdash. In the scope of the timeline of this planet, a thousand years is faster than the blink of an eye. In fact, it was just 10,000 years ago that retreating glaciers formed the English Channel and even the Great Lakes…that’s a nanosecond in the history of this planet.
Oh, and a final question: with all the talk of climate change, increasing storm intensity, etc., where have the hurricanes been this year? And last year?
It’s a shame that every climatalogical event is now perceived as an example of climate change on the planet. Too cool? Climate change; too dry? climate change…
All in all, it’s just weather.
yuzeyurbrane
October 24th, 2011
2:13 pm
I wish I could think that your to-the-point article would drive a stake thru the hearts of the Luddite skeptics . . . but I doubt that will happen.
WOODSTOCK MIKE
October 24th, 2011
2:13 pm
Soothsayer –
It’s not about denying global warming. It’s about spending hundreds of millions on companies and ideas that we aren’t even sure will help. Are you saying your position is to bankrupt the system trying to fight global warming?
Matti's Southern Drawl
October 24th, 2011
2:13 pm
Bruno,
I saw my company’s Websense message blocking your link under the category “Malicious Web Sites.”
Paul
October 24th, 2011
2:14 pm
Bruno
Tell you what I see?
Someone who won’t answer questions to clarify an earlier post?
jm
October 24th, 2011
2:16 pm
Woodstock Mike 2:13 – that’s the beauty of the carbon tax. Use it, and the market can find the least expensive solution to solve the problem.
Cap & Trade just creates more cronyism and winners and losers.
I’m not saying the Carbon Tax is a great idea. I’m just saying what it can do. There are still big risks to it.
AmVet
October 24th, 2011
2:17 pm
Brother B, I already addressed it in an earlier post.
Look at that red line at the far right end of the graph.
It goes STRAIGHT UP FROM APPROXIMATELY 280 TO 360 PPMV in no time flat.
The only other similar increase is when it went from 190 to 290 around 150,000 years ago.
And it took 10,000 years to do so.
Not a few decades.
Truth
October 24th, 2011
2:18 pm
The issue is not climate change but what is causing climate change.
BADA BING
October 24th, 2011
2:20 pm
Hell, 7 billion people is what the problem is. Put the World’s population growth chart up with the other charts and see if it looks similar. You can’t address climate change without including the reduction of the population.
AmVet
October 24th, 2011
2:21 pm
Wasn’t it when we had all of the harsh snows, the liberals changed it to Climate Change, not Global Warming?
A completely fallacious suggestion.
For the umpteenth time, an article from National Geographic dated 2006.
Scientists often use the term “climate change” instead of global warming. This is because as the Earth’s average temperature climbs, winds and ocean currents move heat around the globe in ways that can cool some areas, warm others, and change the amount of rain and snow falling. As a result, the climate changes differently in different areas.
Mick
October 24th, 2011
2:21 pm
bada
The more the merrier…
Bosch
October 24th, 2011
2:22 pm
“The issue is not climate change but what is causing climate change.”
Only for a few people who no one listens to — for the rest of us, we know what is causing it and supporting those companies and scientists who are finding solutions to mitigate it’s effects.
Truth
October 24th, 2011
2:23 pm
BADA BING;
Your solution to fixing the problem could be a problem.
WOODSTOCK MIKE
October 24th, 2011
2:23 pm
Hey Paul, who do you agree with? Steve Jobs or Obama?
“You’re headed for a one-term presidency,” he told Obama at the start of their meeting, insisting that the administration needed to be more business-friendly. As an example, Jobs described the ease with which companies can build factories in China compared to the United States, where “regulations and unnecessary costs” make it difficult for them.
Jobs also criticized America’s education system, saying it was “crippled by union work rules,” noted Isaacson. “Until the teachers’ unions were broken, there was almost no hope for education reform.” Jobs proposed allowing principals to hire and fire teachers based on merit, that schools stay open until 6 p.m. and that they be open 11 months a year.”
Bruno
October 24th, 2011
2:23 pm
Are you saying mainstream conservatives accept climate change?
I’m saying that conservatives see the current “climate change” as part of a long-term pattern of “climate change”. I’ve put the graph up several times. I’m not sure how I can be any clearer.
Are you saying mainstream conservatives do or do not believe man bears responsibility for part of the change?
Again, referring to the graph, the current temperature spike isn’t any different from previous temperature spikes, in spite of the fact that the CO2 concentration is higher. As such, I don’t see how anyone can draw a firm conclusion that our current spike is “man-made”, or even being driven by CO2 at all. As I’ve stated several times, climatology is a developing science, such that current predictions are unreliable.
If man does not contribute, then why look for alternate fuel sources?
It’s simply good common sense to look for and utilize “clean” energies. There’s no difference on either side of the political aisle in that regard, other than perhaps how to go about things in an economically sound fashion.
Truth
October 24th, 2011
2:23 pm
Bosch:
I would encourage you to “Follow the Money” and you may change your opinion on what is causing climate change.
St Simons - we're on Island time
October 24th, 2011
2:24 pm
kinda on-topic, with Perry being the anti science standard bearer
Rick Perry Takes a Stand on Birthers – He Is One –
Just In on Yahoo News:
Governor, That’s not a definitive, “Yes, I believe (Obama was born here)”—
Perry: Well, I don’t have a definitive answer, because he’s never seen my birth certificate.
Parade Reporter: But you’ve seen his.
Perry: I don’t know. Have I?
Reporter: You don’t believe what’s been released?
Perry: I don’t know. I had dinner with Donald Trump the other night.
Reporter: And?
Perry: That came up.
Reporter: And he said?
Perry: He doesn’t think it’s real.
aaaaand then there were how many clowns in the car?
Soothsayer
October 24th, 2011
2:25 pm
Well, my scientific research has led to only one conclusion as to what is causing global climate change: senior flatulence. Yes, that’s correct! A bunch of us “old farts” are what’s causing it all. Heck, some days I even contribute twice my normal share just for the fun of it!
Waheema
October 24th, 2011
2:25 pm
And from this chart, Bookman would have us imporverish ourselves to stop a natural cycle of warming adn cooling that has been happening since the beginning of time.
Global warming skeptic is not the same thiing as those who accept the data but doubt the assertion that man is the cause and that the trends can be reversed.
Mick
October 24th, 2011
2:25 pm
woodstock
That’s why jobs did what he did, because he wasn’t a politician and certainly was clueless about education reform, but hey he made some great computers and phones…
Richard Muller no skeptic | JunkScience.com
October 24th, 2011
2:27 pm
[...] Muller, whose recent “study” on surface temperatures, has caused headlines like “Climate-change skeptic: ‘You should not be a skeptic.’“, the San Francisco Chronicle reported in 2006: … Muller estimates 2 in 3 odds that [...]
AmVet
October 24th, 2011
2:27 pm
Wed, Nov 17, 2010
A new Pew poll shows a dramatic change in opinion on climate change among Republicans that seems to mirror a new tone on the issue taken up by GOP politicians.
In the poll, 53 percent of Republicans said there is no evidence for climate change, when only three years ago 62 percent of GOPers said they did believe in global warming. Almost 80 percent of Democrats and a majority of independents said there is solid evidence for global warming.
About half of the approximately 100 freshmen GOP Congressmen do not believe in man-made global warming. The soon-to-be chair of the House Science Committee is a climate-change skeptic.
Even among more moderate Republicans, climate change has become a no-go zone.
New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, who ran on a clean-energy platform just a year ago, told a town hall last week he “can’t figure this stuff out” when asked if he is convinced man-made global warming is a problem.
BADA BING
October 24th, 2011
2:28 pm
Yes Truth, fixing the proplem is going to hurt. Leaders will not want to impose strict popuation control on their people .But millions of people are going to die painfully of disease and hunger. Why have children that are just going to die horribly?
AmVet
October 24th, 2011
2:30 pm
And the most significant reason why most people reject this bizarre Republican intransigence?
The scientific consensus about man-made global warming — which includes 97 percent to 98 percent of researchers in the field, according to the National Academy of Sciences — is getting stronger, not weaker, as the evidence for climate change just keeps mounting.
TaxPayer
October 24th, 2011
2:30 pm
…There is overwhelming evidence that humans are the dominant cause of this warming, mainly due to our greenhouse gas emissions. Based on fundamental physics and math, we can quantify the amount of warming human activity is causing, and verify that we’re responsible for essentially all of the global warming over the past 3 decades…
WOODSTOCK MIKE
October 24th, 2011
2:30 pm
“That’s why jobs did what he did, because he wasn’t a politician and certainly was clueless about education reform, but hey he made some great computers and phones…”
Yeah, Jobs didn’t know anything about business, he just created one of the largest companies on the planet, LOL. Why should anybody listen to him?
jm
October 24th, 2011
2:30 pm
St. Simons – nice selective editing. And it ended:
“And you said?
I don’t have any idea. It doesn’t matter. He’s the President of the United States. He’s elected. It’s a distractive issue.”
St. Simons, don’t lie. Liberals are looking worse and worse, desperation.
Jay
October 24th, 2011
2:31 pm
If that’s truly the issue, Truth, why all the big controversy about “ClimateGate”, etc.? That whole thing was about conservative claims that the planet wasn’t warming, that it was all made up and fraudulent.
What we have here is what military strategists would call defense in depth, requiring a series of fallback positions to delay the advance of a superior force. In this case the layers are:
A. The planet isn’t warming and if it is you can’t prove it.
B. OK, you can prove the planet is warming, but you can’t prove mankind is causing it.
C. OK, you can demonstrate that an overwhelming percentage of climate scientists say that man is contributing to climate change — a position that even George W. Bush acknowledged as true — but you can’t prove we can do anything about it.
D. OK, even if you can prove that there are reasonable things we can do to slow global warming, I don’t want to and you can’t make me. So there!
Bruno would like to pretend that conservatives have already abandoned Points A and B and perhaps even C, because he knows that debate over those points is intellectually embarrassing to the right. He’s right that afew years ago, things did seem headed in that direction, but more recently conservatives have returned to arguing A and B again.
Jack
October 24th, 2011
2:33 pm
It has been determined that all the fuss about climate change has been due to bovine flatulence. I’m gonna due my part by putting filters on all my cows. And bulls.
Thulsa Doom
October 24th, 2011
2:34 pm
So when CO2 concentrations were 4 times higher during the age of the dinosaurs were they driving around in humvees? It was so hot that cold blooded dinosaur fossils can be uncovered in the far north of Canada. I wonder if the Chinese, the Indians, and the rest of the world outside of the greens in western Europe give a damn about this so called warming climate? Something tells me they don’t. Must be awesome for the Chinese to get carbon credits subsidized by German taxpayers to pay for the 3 gorges damn that would have been built anyway. The Chinese say Thank you German environmentalist taxpayer fools!
AmVet
October 24th, 2011
2:34 pm
On this matter, it is once again demonstrable that today’s Republicans are, nearly to a man, NOT conservative.
Conservatives, as a whole, have never been anti-science.
They have never been anti-environmental.
They have never been anti-academia.
And they have never been pro-dumbass like this motley crew is.
And one of the few bright bulbs in that party knows so and has the nads to say it
Jon Huntsman Jr., a former Utah governor and ambassador to China, isn’t a serious contender for the Republican presidential nomination. And that’s too bad, because Mr. Hunstman has been willing to say the unsayable about the G.O.P. — namely, that it is becoming the “anti-science party.” This is an enormously important development. And it should terrify us.
WOODSTOCK MIKE
October 24th, 2011
2:35 pm
“At least 70-80% of the Earth’s warming effect comes from water vapor and clouds not CO2. CO2 traps about 10-20% of the world’s heat. Other contributors to warming include high altitude cirrus clouds and sunspots.”
“Currently, the United States Congress is debating a potential five trillion dollar energy policy. This policy will place carbon caps on corporations. This will raise cost of energy significantly. Money raised from these caps would be redistributed to more expensive renewable energy projects. The poor will suffer the most as they will have to contend with rising food prices, rising gas prices and now rising energy costs.”
Mick
October 24th, 2011
2:36 pm
woodstock
Comparing steve jobs with the president doesn’t make much sense. First, I don’t think he’s running or ever wanted to, and if we are going to elect presidents on the basis of successful businesses, wouldn’t bill gates take the cake?
Bruno
October 24th, 2011
2:36 pm
Look at that red line at the far right end of the graph.
It goes STRAIGHT UP FROM APPROXIMATELY 280 TO 360 PPMV in no time flat.
The only other similar increase is when it went from 190 to 290 around 150,000 years ago.
AmVet–Believe it or not, I see the same increase in CO2. What I don’t see is a corresponding spike in temps. In fact, it looks like we’re still a bit cooler than about 8000 years ago, when man’s impact on the environment was minimal.
Having said that, we’re both on the same team as far as moving away from burning fossil fuels. Whether climatology is a settled science or not doesn’t change that fact. Our preferred paths about how to get there may differ, but the goal is the same.
Ft. Smith
October 24th, 2011
2:36 pm
So, in the last forty years the temperatures have risen by one degree. But they fell by half a degree in a period of ten years in the first decade of the 19th century and then rose three quarters of a degree in the next decade at which point they fell another half a degree before they began, in the 1840s their inexorable rise to the 1940s. And then they were stable for thirty years before they rose one degree over the last forty years.
So there you have it. Science.
Thulsa Doom
October 24th, 2011
2:36 pm
Jay and the sky is falling chicken little crowd. Ya’ll sing out in unison now ” The sky is falling. The sky is falling”.
Soothsayer
October 24th, 2011
2:36 pm
“It has been determined that all the fuss about climate change has been due to bovine flatulence. I’m gonna due my part by putting filters on all my cows. And bulls.”
Jack, if you could put some kind of collection device on your cattle, you’d have enough methane to heat your house in the winter!
Jay
October 24th, 2011
2:37 pm
In the meantime, we all support prudent management of the planet which involves developing alternative energy sources which are economically viable.
In other words, Bruno wants us to do nothing, because if judged solely on grounds of economic viability, fossil fuels will continue to be cheaper for quite a while to come.
Paul
October 24th, 2011
2:38 pm
Woodstock Mike
You asked me if I agreed with Jobs or Obama but you quoted only from Jobs. You did not provide examples from Pres Obama for me to bump it up against.
Jobs was a businessman. Of course he wants to lower his cost of doing business. But as has been demonstrated on this blog, the pace of regulation has lessened under Obama than it was under Bush. Jobs did not provide any background on what regulations impair his or other businesses from competing.
Or how the supposed anti-business attitude has coexisted with the highest after-tax corporate profits in 80 years.
As far as teachers’ unions, I’m a bit mystified. We did not have teachers’ unions in the last couple of states I’ve lived in and those problems seemed to mirror states with teachers’ unions. I also notice Jobs did not address the increased costs of an 11-month school year (districts modify their first class of the day times to save dollars on electricity, so I’m not sure how they’ll cope with Jobs’ proposal).
AmVet
October 24th, 2011
2:38 pm
Feb 5, 2007
Only 13 percent of congressional Republicans say they believe that human activity is causing global warming.
This has been the magnitude of dumbassery in the dysfunctional GOP…
godless heathen
October 24th, 2011
2:40 pm
jm,
To a geologist 500 years ain’t even that.
Yes Jay, man evolved to match the climate – the sub-saharan Africa climate. Now humans live in places like Greenland, Scandanavia, and even Chicago. Places than have “climates” more than 1 or 2 degrees warmer than central Africa. How is that possible? Through technology.
The expansion of technology is going to make this a total non-issue in another 100 years.
AmVet
October 24th, 2011
2:41 pm
And the worst of the worst of the ostriches?
Not surprisingly, the Tea Party.
78 percent of Democrats, 71 percent of Independents, and 53% of Republicans believe in global climate change, while only 34 percent of tea Party members do.
Let them eat astro-turf!
godless heathen
October 24th, 2011
2:42 pm
But Jay, I thought we were running out of fossil fuels.
Which sky is falling this week?
Normal
October 24th, 2011
2:43 pm
To those talkin’ about the Lybian legal system…
http://xfinity.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20111023/ML.Libya/
WOODSTOCK MIKE
October 24th, 2011
2:43 pm
“A team of MIT scientists recorded a nearly simultaneous world-wide increase in methane levels -the first increase in ten years. What baffles the team is that this data contradicts theories stating humans are the primary source of increase in greenhouse gas. It takes about one full year for gases generated in the highly industrial northern hemisphere to cycle through and reach the southern hemisphere. Since all worldwide levels rose simultaneously throughout the same year, however, it is probable that this may be part of a natural cycle – and not the direct result of man’s contributions.”
DawgDad
October 24th, 2011
2:44 pm
Science is interesting and informative. Politicized, it is immensely dangerous. We live in very dangerous times.
Science is based on hypothesis and scientific method. When political and social operatives pressure people to accept theory as fact against their free will they act as tyrants.
Modern science is corrupted by politics and moneyed interests, because scientific research is often very expensive. Governments and special interests invest in science for a reason, perhaps for the “good of the public” or “advancement of scientific knowledge” or perhaps for profit and power. Even absent the grants and funding ties once scientific research is is published it is subject to these political, social, and business influences.
So, when you try to convince me [and many, many others] we need to act on “climate change” in the public arena I call for you to please stop advocating we spend taxpayer money to promote your personal or special interests. Liberty and freedom are FAR more important than the selfish interests of the “environmentalists” and others who attempt to profit or power trip off the backs of taxpayers by limiting our freedoms to exist freely.
It’s just like Warren Buffet’s ridiculous demagoguery on tax increases. If you want to do your part to address “climate change”, then by all means I will respect your wishes and contributions. Just don’t tread on me.
AmVet
October 24th, 2011
2:45 pm
One last stat to chew on.
Only 14% of Republicans believe global warming is the result primarily of human action
Their ideology trumps everything.
WOODSTOCK MIKE
October 24th, 2011
2:46 pm
“Comparing steve jobs with the president doesn’t make much sense. First, I don’t think he’s running or ever wanted to, and if we are going to elect presidents on the basis of successful businesses, wouldn’t bill gates take the cake?”
You guys are hilarious. Nobody is comparing Steve Jobs to Obama, the point is simple, liberals continue to preach that new regulations imposed by the Obama adminstration don’t hinder American business. Steve Jobs clearly disagrees and with all due respect to you, he knows more than you do about business.
Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)
October 24th, 2011
2:46 pm
Hmmmmm. I wonder if this Charles Koch Foundation’s got any money for a study I want to do. I wouldn’t need but a hour or so to find what kind of answers the guy wants. And he’d get them in spades.
I’m going to talk this over with my buddy Jim Earl and my other buddy Joe Bill up at Billy Bob’s during our weekly Monday meeting tonight. Seems to me things is looking up. And besides, there’s no reason a bunch of eggheads have to get all the money that’s floating around.
Have a good p.m. everybody.
md
October 24th, 2011
2:47 pm
“It goes STRAIGHT UP FROM APPROXIMATELY 280 TO 360 PPMV in no time flat.
The only other similar increase is when it went from 190 to 290 around 150,000 years ago.
And it took 10,000 years to do so.
Not a few decades.”
I guess folks see what they want to see……..look at it again, and the temperature variation does not mimic past cycles in relation to amount of CO2………the temp spike is actually quite similar to previous spikes, it has not increased in ratio as those past spikes have, the temp is actually lower when one would think it should be higher………………
TaxPayer
October 24th, 2011
2:48 pm
The fact that we have past warming events associated with higher levels of CO2 actually reinforces the theory and data regarding the increased CO2 and the corresponding warming of our planet. It in no way provides evidence to the contrary. Further, the present day increase in CO2 (beyond the natural fluctuations) is known to be due to man’s burning of fossil fuels because it actually leaves a unique “fingerprint” of sorts that can be checked.
godless heathen
October 24th, 2011
2:48 pm
Yea, what does a businessman know about business? Politicians know so much more.
Bruno
October 24th, 2011
2:49 pm
Bruno would like to pretend that conservatives have already abandoned Points A and B and perhaps even C, because he knows that debate over those points is intellectually embarrassing to the right. He’s right that afew years ago, things did seem headed in that direction, but more recently conservatives have returned to arguing A and B again.
Jay–I’m not sure where you came up with this progression of arguments. My position, which I think accurately reflects the average, mainstream, conservative position, hasn’t changed. Whether this fits scenario A, B, or whatever is for you to decide, since it’s your framework.
The fact remains that no dramatic spike in temperatures has occurred in relation to the spike in CO2. Do you see the facts in a different way??
AmVet
October 24th, 2011
2:50 pm
Ah yes, another of the many “dabble around the edges” argument.
This one being proffered by DawgDad that the scientists are all paid off to come up with erroneous data.
And for me, it is always interesting that NEVER ONCE have I seen this assertion corroborated in ANY way, with ANY facts, ANY data, ANY evidence at all to support that oft-parroted claim.
Dad’s certainly has none. As in zero.
Somehow though, this “angle” seems to have passed neo-con peer review…
mm
October 24th, 2011
2:50 pm
“Yawn. No point in America worrying about global warming when China and India don’t give a crap about it.”
Yep, I was waiting for that one.
And we’re following India and China into the slave labor markets as well.
Thank you righties. 13 more months of this and we’ll see a huge turnaround for Obama. You can’t shovel sh*t everyday without a few more people picking up the smell.
WOODSTOCK MIKE
October 24th, 2011
2:50 pm
“Only 14% of Republicans believe global warming is the result primarily of human action”
Include these guys in the 86%…
“Authors Dennis Avery and Fred Singer looked at the work of more than 500 scientists and argue that these experts are doubtful the phenomenon is caused by man-made greenhouse gases.
Climate change is much more likely to be part of a cycle of warming and cooling that has happened regularly every 1,500 years for the last million years, they say.
And the doom and gloom merchants, who point to the threat to the polar bear from the melting North Pole, are wrong, the authors say.
Even if our climate is changing, it is not all bad, they suggest, because past cold periods have killed twice as many people as warm periods. Mr Avery said: “Not all of these researchers who doubt man-made climate change would describe themselves as global warming sceptics but the evidence in their studies is there for all to see.”
md
October 24th, 2011
2:52 pm
“In other words, Bruno wants us to do nothing, because if judged solely on grounds of economic viability, fossil fuels will continue to be cheaper for quite a while to come.”
Just the reality of the situation………unless the dems want the “poor and middle” class to bear the brunt of the shift, as they surely will pulling all these gas guzzlers off the roads and the cost of goods increasing due to increases in related transportation costs are absorbed into the economy……
DawgDad
October 24th, 2011
2:53 pm
“This one being proffered by DawgDad that the scientists are all paid off to come up with erroneous data.”
I did NOT say that. Read again.
godless heathen
October 24th, 2011
2:54 pm
Interesting thing about Mulley’s study is that it was partially funded by the Koch Foundation, yet the neo-libs love it. If the results of Mulley’s study had not agreed with their dogma, they would have claimed it was invalid for that reason alone.
AmVet
October 24th, 2011
2:55 pm
Mike, what part of The scientific consensus about man-made global warming — which includes 97 percent to 98 percent of researchers in the field, according to the National Academy of Sciences — is getting stronger, not weaker, as the evidence for climate change just keeps mounting. escapes you?
AmVet
October 24th, 2011
2:57 pm
So what is your point, Dad?
Bruno
October 24th, 2011
2:57 pm
In other words, Bruno wants us to do nothing, because if judged solely on grounds of economic viability, fossil fuels will continue to be cheaper for quite a while to come.
Hyperbole much Jay?? I intentionally mentioned economically viability because it is so conspicuously absent from liberal discussions about developing alternative fuels. It’s part of the equation, but not the sole factor. At any rate, it’s worth it to keep pushing the research forward. Do you know any conservatives who think otherwise, whether a category A, B, C, or D??
Thulsa Doom
October 24th, 2011
2:58 pm
The fact remains that no dramatic spike in temperatures has occurred in relation to the spike in CO2. Do you see the facts in a different way??- Bruno
This is a factual statement unless of course the 1 degree that temps have risen in the past 100 years constitutes “a dramatic spike in termps directly related to CO2″. Is a 1 degree rise in 1 century dramatic? Um. No. And if it were dramatic is the evidence absolutely conclusive that this 1 degree rise in temps is from man made activities? Um. Nope.
Road to Victory
October 24th, 2011
3:00 pm
“This one being proffered by DawgDad that the scientists are all paid off to come up with erroneous data.”
They were, AmVet. Sorry you missed all the e-mails that were leaked.
Granny Godzilla
October 24th, 2011
3:02 pm
expense….
like the infrastucture that had to be built to get gas lights to our cities? and then the do-over to switch to electricity?
should we have not spent that money?
perhaps we should never have created infrastucture for telephones, since we were eventually going to have cell towers.
md
October 24th, 2011
3:02 pm
Asked this the other day, and had no takers:
Since the majority of scientists have concluded that the Shroud of Turin can not be duplicated even with today’s technology, does that prove their must be a God?
TaxPayer
October 24th, 2011
3:04 pm
I loves science and I wish others did too.
Bruno
October 24th, 2011
3:04 pm
Bruno
Tell you what I see?
Someone who won’t answer questions to clarify an earlier post?
Paul–Just making sure you caught my 2:23. Wouldn’t want you to think I was dodging your questions. Let me know if anything is unclear.
Libertarian
October 24th, 2011
3:05 pm
Eh, the world will probably end due to nuclear war in the middle east WAY before climate change gets us. Might as well enjoy your muscle cars and old school light bulbs in the mean time.
Mick
October 24th, 2011
3:06 pm
md
No. Just like they don’t know all the methods the egyptians used for preservation, so it goes with the shroud…