Climate scientists, in their own words

[brenthutch 444]

"It is no secret that a lot of climate-change research is subject to opinion, that climate models sometimes disagree even on the signs of the future changes (e.g. drier vs. wetter future climate). The problem is, only sensational exaggeration makes the kind of story that will get politicians’ — and readers’ — attention.”

“So, yes, climate scientists might exaggerate, but in today’s world, this is the only way to assure any political action and thus more federal financing to reduce the scientific uncertainty.”
Monika Kopacz, NOAA Program Manager 2009 – letter to The New York Times, Apr. 12 2009

And

“On one hand, as scientists we are ethically bound to the scientific method, in effect promising to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but—which means that we must include all the doubts, the caveats, the ifs, ands, and buts.”

“On the other hand, we are not just scientists but human beings as well. And like most people we’d like to see the world a better place, which in this context translates into our working to reduce the risk of potentially disastrous climatic change. To do that we need to get some broad-based support, to capture the public’s imagination. That, of course, entails getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. This ‘double ethical bind’ we frequently find ourselves in cannot be solved by any formula.”

“Each of us has to decide what is the right balance between being effective and being honest. I hope that means being both.” Dr. Stephen Schneider, former IPCC Coordinating Lead Author, APS Online, Aug./Sep. 1996

[gowlerk 2,277]

I could take the time to search for ridiculous statements made by Wattsup types, there are plenty. But it does not change the sea level or lower the temp.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-10-dumbest-things-ever-said-about-global-warming-20130619

my fav:

"I'm no scientist but CO's what make plants grow and what make you breathe, so they're trying to choke us all out by stopping the burning of coal."

or this gem:

Limbaugh: “If you believe in God, then intellectually you cannot believe in manmade global warming.”

Rush Limbaugh advised his religious listeners to choose between God and science on his Aug. 12 radio show, saying, “if you believe in God, then intellectually you cannot believe in manmade global warming … You must be either agnostic or atheistic to believe that man controls something he can’t create.”

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[billvon 3,120]

>Limbaugh: “If you believe in God, then intellectually you cannot believe in
>manmade global warming.”

Same guy who thinks the discovery of water on Mars is a leftist/Muslim plot.

[turtlespeed 226]

billvon

>Limbaugh: “If you believe in God, then intellectually you cannot believe in
>manmade global warming.”

Same guy who thinks the discovery of water on Mars is a leftist/Muslim plot.

I noticed you didn't disagree with the OP.
You must think it is OK to lie, or at least super exaggerate, to the people so they will believe you.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[brenthutch 444]

My favorite line,

“So, yes, climate scientists might exaggerate, but in today’s world, this is the only way to assure any political action and thus more federal financing"

And this comes from a climate scientist so it must be true.

[turtlespeed 226]

brenthutch

My favorite line,

“So, yes, climate scientists might exaggerate, but in today’s world, this is the only way to assure any political action and thus more federal financing"

And this comes from a climate scientist so it must be true.

Right - That's my take on it - Make it seem 1000 times worse than it really is so you can get bigger budgets to then make it seem like it's 10000 times worse so that you get even BIGGER budgets so you can claim it is 1M times worse and get even BIGGER budgets . . . . ASO

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[brenthutch 444]

Another one

“Some colleagues who share some of my doubts argue that the only way to get our society to change is to frighten people with the possibility of a catastrophe, and that therefore it is all right and even necessary for scientists to exaggerate. They tell me that my belief in open and honest assessment is naïve.”

” ‘Wolves deceive their prey, don’t they?’ one said to me recently. Therefore, biologically, he said, we are justified in exaggerating to get society to change.”
emeritus professor Daniel Botkin, president of the Center for the Study of the Environment and professor emeritus in the Department of Ecology, Evolution and Marine Biology at the University of California, Wall St Journal 17 Oct 2007

The problem with warmists is that they lack the intelect to think critically. They depend on on technocrats to think for them. That is why you will hear them parrot the lines "97% of climate scientists say" and "the science is settled." That makes me sad.

[turtlespeed 226]

brenthutch

Another one

“Some colleagues who share some of my doubts argue that the only way to get our society to change is to frighten people with the possibility of a catastrophe, and that therefore it is all right and even necessary for scientists to exaggerate. They tell me that my belief in open and honest assessment is naïve.”

” ‘Wolves deceive their prey, don’t they?’ one said to me recently. Therefore, biologically, he said, we are justified in exaggerating to get society to change.”
emeritus professor Daniel Botkin, president of the Center for the Study of the Environment and professor emeritus in the Department of Ecology, Evolution and Marine Biology at the University of California, Wall St Journal 17 Oct 2007

The problem with warmists is that they lack the intelect to think critically. They depend on on technocrats to think for them. That is why you will hear them parrot the lines "97% of climate scientists say" and "the science is settled." That makes me sad.

Fits with what I just typed.

Notice no one is arguing or contradicting you?

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[Coreeece 2]

brenthutch

My favorite line,

“So, yes, climate scientists might exaggerate, but in today’s world, this is the only way to assure any political action..."

Sad but true - exaggeration is the only language the public understands anymore. It's pretty much the case with every issue on both sides of the isle.

The latest example of this is with the Apple backdoor situation. Nobody cares that it's simply about our privacy and limiting an overreaching government - so they have to start making shit up about how the Chinese are going to attack our water supply and kill the power - it'll cost trillions of dollars and untold deaths! We need to build a firewall and make America safe again!

Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

[billvon 3,120]

>I noticed you didn't disagree with the OP.

Nope. To paraphrase Pauli, the OP wasn't right - it wasn't even coherent enough to be wrong.

[brenthutch 444]

billvon

>I noticed you didn't disagree with the OP.

Nope. To paraphrase Pauli, the OP wasn't right - it wasn't even coherent enough to be wrong.

Speaking of incoherent.......Obviously Bill's mind has been blown, making it impossible for him to get his head around the fact that that climate scientists routinely engage in exaggeration, fear mongering and hyperbole.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

brenthutch

***>I noticed you didn't disagree with the OP.

Nope. To paraphrase Pauli, the OP wasn't right - it wasn't even coherent enough to be wrong.

Speaking of incoherent.......Obviously Bill's mind has been blown, making it impossible for him to get his head around the fact that that climate scientists routinely engage in exaggeration, fear mongering and hyperbole.

Agreed. Doctors do it all the time too. They say stuff like, smoking can kill you. We all know that smoking itself doesn't kill anybody. Cancer kills, but no scientist has ever shown that smoking guarantees you getting cancer.

If they are exaggerating about that, how can I possibly ever believe those doctors about anything else. There are even some doctors who say smoking is just fine. I mean my cousin has terminal cancer, and the doctor didn't even ask him to quit smoking. Obviously it can't be that bad.

[hackish 8]

brenthutch

Speaking of incoherent.......Obviously Bill's mind has been blown, making it impossible for him to get his head around the fact that that climate scientists routinely engage in exaggeration, fear mongering and hyperbole.

A small minority of scientists have been caught falsifying data but that's rare. For anyone who has ever tried to have a scientific paper published they can attest to how critical and picky academic peers (reviewers) can be. It's not at all easy to cover all the "what if's" and most studies are the product or months or years of work. It took an entire year for my wife to get her PhD studies published in a journal and I helped edit the revisions.

Most people don't say "hey I want to do a bad job at work today". People generally try to do a good job and with a doctorate degree, academia doesn't pay that well! With a system as complex as the world don't expect everything figured out to milimeter precision but we are starting to see the effects of climate change. What I worry about is how far the train will roll even if we put all the brakes on right now.

-Michael

[kallend 2,150]

SkyDekker

******>I noticed you didn't disagree with the OP.

Nope. To paraphrase Pauli, the OP wasn't right - it wasn't even coherent enough to be wrong.

Speaking of incoherent.......Obviously Bill's mind has been blown, making it impossible for him to get his head around the fact that that climate scientists routinely engage in exaggeration, fear mongering and hyperbole.

Agreed. Doctors do it all the time too. They say stuff like, smoking can kill you. We all know that smoking itself doesn't kill anybody. Cancer kills, but no scientist has ever shown that smoking guarantees you getting cancer.

If they are exaggerating about that, how can I possibly ever believe those doctors about anything else. There are even some doctors who say smoking is just fine. I mean my cousin has terminal cancer, and the doctor didn't even ask him to quit smoking. Obviously it can't be that bad.

Hey, Scalia smoked, and he was a Supreme Court Justice. How can it be bad?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[brenthutch 444]

Red herring

[billvon 3,120]

>.Obviously Bill's mind has been blown, making it impossible for him to get his
>head around the fact that that climate scientists routinely engage in
>exaggeration, fear mongering and hyperbole.

Yep. And local S+TA's are even worse! Their hyperbole and fearmongering over using the 45 degree rule, flying standard patterns and not pulling low indicate how much their minds have been blown. Why, just the other day an S+TA related a story in which two people collided due to flying nonstandard patterns, resulting in their deaths. Can you believe that? They are saying that if you deviate so much as an inch from a standard pattern you will DIE!

And the no pulling low thing. I have, on occasion, pulled as low as 400 feet and I didn't die. So clearly they have no idea what they are talking about.

Let's hope you are not such a clueless, hyperbolic fearmonger in your role as S+TA, and that you do not do such idiotic things as warning people of the possible negative outcomes of their actions. The only politically correct thing an S+TA can do is to point out all the good things that people do.

[brenthutch 444]

That is quite a jump....from climate scientists to S&TAs. I'm not sure what your point is.

I post "climate scientists admit to exaggeration" and you respond with "Rush Limbaugh, Mars, God and landing patterns."


As far as my role as a S&TA, my approach is informed by a parable of a little boy and a wolf.

[gowlerk 2,277]

Quote

That is quite a jump....from climate scientists to S&TAs. I'm not sure what your point is.

And I'm not sure the point of your OP. The human failings of a few scientists are somewhat amusing. But prove nothing.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[turtlespeed 226]

gowlerk

Quote

That is quite a jump....from climate scientists to S&TAs. I'm not sure what your point is.

And I'm not sure the point of your OP. The human failings of a few scientists are somewhat amusing. But prove nothing.

You mean their failure to keep their mouths shut about what the truth is, and that they exaggerate to cause alarm?

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[gowlerk 2,277]

turtlespeed

***

Quote

That is quite a jump....from climate scientists to S&TAs. I'm not sure what your point is.

And I'm not sure the point of your OP. The human failings of a few scientists are somewhat amusing. But prove nothing.

You mean their failure to keep their mouths shut about what the truth is, and that they exaggerate to cause alarm?


Yes

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[billvon 3,120]

> I'm not sure what your point is.

I have no doubt that you really do and are just trying to get people going. You're not an idiot.

>I post "climate scientists admit to exaggeration" and you respond with "Rush
>Limbaugh, Mars, God and landing patterns."

No, that was answering another poster who commented on Rush Limbaugh's opinions on the topic. It's important to read the post you reply to.

>As far as my role as a S&TA, my approach is informed by a parable of a little boy
>and a wolf.

Ah, so you are one of those politically correct S+TA's who never tells people they could be harmed (or could harm others) through their actions! Kudos; that way no one ever gets upset.

[brenthutch 444]

I am pretty sure that is the first time anyone accused me of being politically correct, though it is true that I am not a fire and brimstone type. Most of our jumpers are home grown and I have had their ears since their FJC