Snarling Cyclones; Goofy Journalism
The Washington Indpendent reports that a new study suggests climate change may generate fewer, but wetter and more devastating hurricanes. The Independent also notes that this contradicts earlier studies suggesting that global warming may generate more hurricanes that would, again, be wetter and more intense.
The author, Suemedha Sood, then arrives at this stunning conclusion:
"The takeaway point is that we shouldn't be so quick to point fingers at global warming. The science isn't [all] in yet."
So, the smartest scientists in the world are arguing about whether there will be more hurricanes or fewer, but they agree that, either way, they're going to be stronger and more dangerous, and the Washington Independent decides that means we should ignore climate change until "all" the science is in.
For the record, the Independent is a creature of the Centre for Independent Media, which purportedly has a "progressive" bent. So we can't blame this silliness on oily self-interest or on ideological blindness - which leaves me, frankly, at a loss ...
If you can get past the lame job of the journalists in presenting this story, the work that is going on is very interesting. I have been wondering what has been done subsequent to the research that Chris Mooney wrote about in Storm World.
What the reporters fail to notice is the overlapping conclusion about the intensity of storms, as you point out. For a scientific review of the state of research, RealClimate has an excellent post on the subject.
Fern Mackenzie
Here's the fox news report
"Study : Hurricane Spike Not Caused By Global Warming"
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,356549,00.html
to a blog on town hall
"Major Scientist Changes View on Global Warming"
http://dennisprager.townhall.com/blog/g/#871aed0e-14fc-4f36-ba06-30c9619a9a8d
Silly scientists!
Off Topic I know, but I had to ask.
Are 31 THOUSAND signatures enough to make you think?
http://www.petitionproject.org/index.html
If anyone here [Gary, the resident trolls] has any doubts that the OISM Petition 'review' is anything but rubbish, then look at the links below.
Just a small point, the latest version Robinson, Soon & Robinson RS&R has not a single climate scientist among the authors. The Original Robinson, Soon, Baliunas & Robinson hadn't either.
But the first was funded by the ExxonMobil funded George C Marshall Institute and probably therefore by Exxon.
Presumably Robinson, Soon and Baliunas with their Exxon stained cash explain the cherry-picked evidence, flawed logic, etc. etc. Let's face it they have form.
If it were so good, why not submit it for peer-review and publication in Nature or any other respected relevant ISI scientific journal.
Instead the recent RS&R was published in the extreme right-wing 'Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons', http://tinyurl.com/5zah9t
[Thanks to Eli Rabett]
http://tinyurl.com/385nmc
http://tinyurl.com/6ajth7
So the question is why the fossil-fuel lobby rely upon such miserable drivel as 'evidence'.
There are quite a few phoney signatories. Because it's impossible to check the list in detail, the list is effectively worthless. The 'review' certainly is.
There's so much more about this pseudo-science, but I just couldn't be bothered!
Predictable........
So predictable.
LOL
Given the number of AGW-deniers/trolls, seen even just here at Desmog, who use sock-puppets (multiple names) and fake identities, it's completely predictable that 31,000 does not = 31,000. Would 100,000,000 signatures be enough? Given the repetitive and highly replicated (plagiarized) efforts of AGW-deniers/trolls on the internet, I wouldn't be surprised if you jokers got that signature count up to 10 billion. You can do it Paul S/G, Rob('canada')/Rob(North Dakota), Gary/Troll, etc!
For balance, here's a list of the top 100 climatologists that believe in anthropogenic global warming (Lubos Motl).
Celebrities
Al Gore, B.A. Government (no science degree)
Alanis Morissette, High School Diploma
Bill Maher, B.A. English (no science degree)
Bono (Paul Hewson), High School Diploma
Daryl Hanna, B.F.A. Theater (no science degree)
Ed Begley Jr., High School Diploma
Jackson Browne, High School Diploma
Jon Bon Jovi (John Bongiovi), High School Diploma
Oprah Winfrey, B.A. Speech and Drama (no science degree)
Prince Charles of Whales, B.A. (no science degree)
Sheryl Crow, B.A. Music Education (no science degree)
Sienna Miller, High School Diploma
ABC - Sam Champion, B.A. Broadcast News (no science degree, not a meteorologist)
CBS - Harry Smith, B.A. Communications and Theater (no science degree)
CBS - Katie Couric, B.A. English (no science degree)
CBS - Scott Pelley, College Dropout
NBC - Ann Curry, B.A. Journalism (no science degree)
NBC - Anne Thompson, B.A. American studies (no science degree)
NBC - Matt Lauer. B.A. Communications (no science degree)
NBC - Meredith Vieira, B.A. English (no science degree)
Al Sharpton, College Dropout
Alicia Keys, College Dropout
Alicia Silverstone, High School Dropout
Art Bell, College Dropout
Ben Affleck, College Dropout
Ben Stiller, College Dropout
Billy Jean King, College Dropout
Brad Pitt, College Dropout
Britney Spears, High School Dropout
Bruce Springsteen, College Dropout
Cameron Diaz, High School Dropout
Cindy Crawford, College Dropout
Diane Keaton, College Dropout
Drew Barrymore, High School Dropout
George Clooney, College Dropout
Gwyneth Paltrow, College Dropout
Jason Biggs, College Dropout
Jennifer Connelly, College Dropout
Jessica Simpson, High School Dropout
John Travolta, High School Dropout
Joshua Jackson, High School Dropout
Julia Louis-Dreyfus, College Dropout
Julia Roberts, College Dropout
Kanye West, College Dropout
Keanu Reeves, High School Dropout
Kevin Bacon, High School Dropout
Kiefer Sutherland, High School Dropout
Leonardo DiCaprio, High School Dropout
Lindsay Lohan, High School Dropout
Ludacris (Christopher Bridges), College Dropout
Madonna (Madonna Ciccone), College Dropout
Matt Damon, College Dropout
Matthew Modine, College Dropout
Michael Moore, College Dropout
Nicole Richie, College Dropout
Neve Campbell, High School Dropout
Olivia Newton-John, High School Dropout
Orlando Bloom, High School Dropout
Paris Hilton, High School Dropout
Pierce Brosnan. High School Dropout
Queen Latifah (Dana Elaine Owens), College Dropout
Richard Branson, High School Dropout
Robert Redford, College Dropout
Rosie O'Donnell, College Dropout
Sarah Silverman, College Dropout
Sean Penn, College Dropout
Ted Turner, College Dropout
Tommy Lee (Thomas Lee Bass), High School Dropout
Uma Thurman, High School Dropout
Willie Nelson, High School Dropout
Politicians:
John McCain, B.S. (Graduated 894th out of 899 in his class)
Newt Gingrich, Ph.D. Modern European History (no science degree) (Hypocrite)
Pat Robertson, B.A., J.D., M.A. Divinity (no science degree)
Robert F. Kennedy Jr, B.A. Government, J.D. Law (no science degree, 'recovered' Heroin addict)
Scientists:
Bill Nye, B.S. Mechanical Engineering (Bill Nye the Science Guy)
Gavin Schmidt, B.A. Ph.D. Applied Mathematics (RealClimate.org)
James Hansen, B.A. Physics and Mathematics, M.S. Astronomy, Ph.D. Physics (NASA, Gavin Schmidt's Boss)
James Lovelock, Ph.D. Medicine, D.Sc. Biophysics
Lonnie Thompson, Ph.D. Geological Sciences
Michael Mann, A.B. Applied Math, Physics, M.S. Physics, Ph.D. Geology & Geophysics (RealClimate.org)
Michael Oppenheimer, S.B. Chemistry, Ph.D. Chemical Physics
Richard C. J. Somerville, Ph.D. Meteorology
Steven Schneider, Ph.D. Mechanical Engineering and Plasma Physics
Social Scientists:
Ronald Bailey, B.A. Philosophy and Economics (Science Correspondent, Reason Magazine)
and you still have no arguments, which is why you resort to regurgitating claptrap like this.
Did I mention that those 31000 were only the ones in the US and doesn't even account for any of the thousands in other countries?
Seems there is a concensus after all.
If you start now, you could have about half of them smeared by August.
And the house of cards crumbles.........
Bla bla, bla bla, bla....
That crumbling sound you hear is just your grip on reality slipping away, troll.
I wonder who did the work to put it together - to document for example that Ben Affleck, Ben Stiller and Billy Jean King are all college dropouts.
But I have to say that Ben Stiller's endorsement is not going to sway my own opinion on climate science. Neither, for that matter, is Al Gore's - and he's made a clear and legitimate effort to become pretty knowledgeable on the subject.
I prefer the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change or the American Academies of Science or NASA or the Royal Society or the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration or the science academies of all the developed nations in the world - you know, people who are actually studying the issue.
You can deny climate change 31,072 times. You can find 31,072 people to say so, as well. Or you can just make up 1,000s of names.
But seriously, when your spiritual leader (Fed Seitz) ended an otherwise impressive career as the senior scientist for a tobacco company - when his last "scientific" pronouncement was that any baby who objected to breathing in second-hand smoke was just a big sissy - well, face it Gary, your credibility is in shreds.
Got it from Reference Frame.
And the 31000? You can check them out one at a time on the site. Each name is verified and documented along with their credentials.
They did this because the of the Alarmists that lied about the last list in a feeble attempt to discredit it.
This list is rock solid.
I challenge anyone of you to find falsified listings in it.
By the Way...... does the comment:
“You can deny climate change 31,072 times. You can find 31,072 people to say so, as well. Or you can just make up 1,000s of names.”...
Sound just a little bit religious to anyone?
People just love them, as if quantity somehow trumps quality. Oh well.
Gary might try actually reading the paper here: http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/[space inserted]ncurrent/full/ngeo202.html#B1
and he might learn something. While it's quite technical, I did manage to grasp that Knutson et al (a) accept AGW as given, (b) accept that AGW is having an impact on cyclonic activity.
Fern Mackenzie
Hi Fern.
Actually, lists mean very little to me.
It is generally the AGW believers that like to use them.
IE: The "Overwhelming Concensus" of a mere 2500 scientists blah blah blah. (a few of whom are climate researchers)
I have always maintained that it only takes one person with the truth in hand to completely overturn a missguided concensus.
Wrong is wrong no matter how many believe it.
Making lists keeps simple minds busy.
Reading lists does, too.
To be serious for a moment.
Read the replies above to my first post.
Then read them again.
Do you see a pattern?
Do you see frustrated resentment?
Does it tell you anything?
Perhaps that all is not as it seemed back when the world was warming.
Okay, so Gary's original comment was completely off-topic, pushing a tired old talking point, and based on a largely fraudulent estimate of support. At the end, Gary says that the vehicle for his crappy talking point is flawed, anyway, because the weight of expert opinion doesn't matter -- one person who 'knows' the truth matters more. Even Gary puts no weight in the comment he first made. In the middle you see Gary focus on the weakest support for AGW (in this case, he tries to discredit the theory by pointing to celebrities who believe AGW but who never completed high school). As usual, he wants to distract the conversation from anything constructive.
"Do you see a pattern? Do you see frustrated resentment?"
I see a pattern. It's the behaviour of a troll. People find it frustrating -- that's why some blogs are moderated to eliminate it. Read it a frickin' million times if you like (you will because that's how many times the same crap will be posted by these guys), it's still trolling.