BrianValentine’s Recent Comments

• Click here to view comment in original post

  additional

  Thanks to Max and the wonderful Wallaby - two very good scientists and seekers of truth.

  Remember, all character assaulters out there, that people who seek the truth are NOT your enemy - they are your friends,

  - for the truth is, something that CANNOT escape you (or conversely)  On Today: George Waldenberger posted 1 year, 9 months ago 52 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Salutations to Dr A Dessler, PhD

  I don't think Dr Dessler has any interest in my invitation, and I guess that ends that.  

  Unless I heard incorrectly, I learned that Dr Dessler said that CO2 caused climate change over the past 100 million years.  

  I was speechless:  one of my principle arguments against AGW has been, there is no observable evidence in the geologic record of GHG influence on climate change in 4 billion years of Earth history.  

  When I went to school, I learned that over epochs of Earth history, the observable causes of climate change have been related to the advance of perihelion of the Earth's orbit around the Sun and the elongation of the node.  The geological record was the astronomical record, and conversely - in addition to any random variation due to tectonic activity and the temporary influences of volcanoes.  (there are other known astronomical influences on the eccentricity of orbit and declination of apparent ecliptic, and these are observable, sometimes periodically, within epochs).  

  If CO2 "caused" climatic changes, the following would have events would have also occurred:  1) the partial pressure of CO2 in the atm. would exceed the concentration for equilibrium with of CO2 in the ocean at some point, and 2) the partial pressure of CO2 in the atmosphere would exceed the equilibrium partial pressure of fixed carbonate on the Earth at the average temperature and local barometric pressure (everywhere, which is what we mean by "global").  

  These events would have occurred, as the Earth responds to CO2 influence to global warming.  

  Unless I am too tired this moment to think straight, I think that if those events occurred, the geological record would look (more than) a little bit different.  

  I don't have any additional comments and I don't think I'm going to revisit this particular location in cyberspace any more.  

  bgvalentine@verizon.net On Today: George Waldenberger posted 1 year, 9 months ago 52 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Kick people who are trying to dispel fear

  To correct, possibly some choice of words used in the discussion here note that the Burger "study" is referred to as "scientific analysis."

  "A June 29, 2007 scientific analysis by Gerd Burger of Berlin's Institute of Meteorology"

  There are organisations I suppose, that have an interest in trying to help the public not to be afraid of one thing or another: the good that something brings is often overlooked when people are trying to make people afraid.  

  On the other hand, there are organisations out there that see a capital advantage to promoting fear about a lot things.  (Think there's any truth to that statement, Dr Romm?)

  Think about the staterment: "refuses to use peer reviewed physical science which hasn't already been falsified."  Now strictly speaking, "peer review" refers to that otiose process of professors being evaluated for tenure. But in all honesty, I don't know of one scrap of "physical science" that has been published in a journal that others capable of evaluating have found to be wrong that anybody continues to use.  Why would they?  If you are referring to Dr Singer himself, then if somebody found errors in his work and others agree and write about (and that disagreement is collaborated), I not aware of it.  Just because Dr Singer writes something and somebody else writes that they don't like it, that doesn't mean it is "falsified."  

  Falcon you seem like a nice guy, I would guess, maybe 23-33 years of age.  When I was your age I was even more sceptical than I am now:  everything was wrong until somebody proved to me otherwise.  Now I'm not so critical, but if I see things just promoted to scare people, I can't help but say that's wrong.  The environmentalists seem to be trying to find what is wrong with everything, to make their own ideas about renewables and so on look appealing (or the only legitimate alternative) - and that doesn't really help anybody.  Maybe scepticism comes only with the individual psyche, and it is kind of lonely but there is a lot of room and need over on the other side
  On Climate denier contradicts self, facts, remains famous posted 1 year, 9 months ago 23 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  If DrSinger has such poor values then I must also

  Take the two "evils" from your list, and for "publishes papers" substitute "produces feature films" - and what name comes immediately to mind?  

  [Be honest now!  How much does that Academy Award Winner charge even rinky-dink little colleges for that 45 minute Power Point presentation of his?  The thing is so filled with untruth I couldn't give that speech for twice that amount, in all honesty.  I have never taken eight cents for trying to move people away from fear and I get vile letters about being "devious".  Talk about a rewarding job!]

  As this shows, I'm not the only one interested in ensuring an informed public sees the truth
  On Climate denier contradicts self, facts, remains famous posted 1 year, 9 months ago 23 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Skeptics see the world differently I guess

  For some reason, Dr Singer is absolutely rejected by the environmentalists, and people like Dr Hansen are highly regarded.  

  One wants to give people visions of doom and despair, the other finds more basis for common sense and moving away from fear.  

  Why is it that some people find a message of despair to be far more satisfactory than a message that seems more balanced?  It is beyond me because negative people usually turn other people off.  

  Slightly off topic but I really wonder - if the tobacco, pollution, damage, danger message that people are constantly bombarded with by the environmentalists was true, I wonder how anybody living in the year 1920 ever made it past the age of 15?  On Climate denier contradicts self, facts, remains famous posted 1 year, 9 months ago 23 Responses