Winnipesaukee Forum - View Single Post

Shedwannabe · 02-04-2010, 11:24 AM

I don't really know how to introduce this...I'm embarrassed for all who jumped on the "skeptic bandwagon" because you wanted climate researchers to be wrong, without any evidence that there was anything wrong...

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/04/sc...imate.html?hpw

So much has been written about the "statistical trick", as if "trick" meant doing something deceitful. The "trick" was combining two previously unrelated databases and seeing they complemented one another.

I admit some of the scientists were crude in their contemptuous comments about skeptics. And I understand the pain and rage felt by those who felt contempt directed at them. But that doesn't have anything to do with whether the science was right or wrong, and EVERY peer-reviewed study supports and continues to support the evidence that climate change is caused by human activity and is making things worse.

Thomas Friedman of the NY Times had an interesting piece a month or so ago. His argument: If there was a 1% chance that Al Qaeda terrorists had discovered a new way to get a nuclear bomb, is that 1% chance enough to treat it as a certainty in terms of our response. By the way, Dick Cheney, then VP of the US was the one who said that we should treat it that way.

Similarly, if there is a 1% chance that the earth will become uninhabitable by humans due to our affecting the climate, shouldn't we respond (for exactly the same reasons as Cheney gave)? Actually, the % is much higher than 1% that if humans do not make major changes in their behaviors affecting the climate that the ensuing climate change will disasterously affect the economy (and lives) of our grandchildren in a very negative way.

Well, enough of this...lets enjoy the sled dog races.

Oh,... in danger of being cancelled again due to lack of snow, for the 9th time in the last few decades, whereas they ran EVERY year earlier in the century (except for the hiatus around WW2)

02-04-2010, 11:24 AM	#6
Shedwannabe Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Laconia Posts: 133 Thanks: 3 Thanked 22 Times in 15 Posts	I don't really know how to introduce this...I'm embarrassed for all who jumped on the "skeptic bandwagon" because you wanted climate researchers to be wrong, without any evidence that there was anything wrong... http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/04/sc...imate.html?hpw So much has been written about the "statistical trick", as if "trick" meant doing something deceitful. The "trick" was combining two previously unrelated databases and seeing they complemented one another. I admit some of the scientists were crude in their contemptuous comments about skeptics. And I understand the pain and rage felt by those who felt contempt directed at them. But that doesn't have anything to do with whether the science was right or wrong, and EVERY peer-reviewed study supports and continues to support the evidence that climate change is caused by human activity and is making things worse. Thomas Friedman of the NY Times had an interesting piece a month or so ago. His argument: If there was a 1% chance that Al Qaeda terrorists had discovered a new way to get a nuclear bomb, is that 1% chance enough to treat it as a certainty in terms of our response. By the way, Dick Cheney, then VP of the US was the one who said that we should treat it that way. Similarly, if there is a 1% chance that the earth will become uninhabitable by humans due to our affecting the climate, shouldn't we respond (for exactly the same reasons as Cheney gave)? Actually, the % is much higher than 1% that if humans do not make major changes in their behaviors affecting the climate that the ensuing climate change will disasterously affect the economy (and lives) of our grandchildren in a very negative way. Well, enough of this...lets enjoy the sled dog races. Oh,... in danger of being cancelled again due to lack of snow, for the 9th time in the last few decades, whereas they ran EVERY year earlier in the century (except for the hiatus around WW2)