Comments Bob B has made

Uncertainty agenda

David, the consensus is only as good as the last good measurement. One data point can turn any "theory" into a falsehood. At first quantum theory was not accepted as consensus. Einstein refused to accept some conclusions from quantum mechanics. Recent measurements using delayed choice experiments with photons show "spooky " action at a distance is verified.
Evolution is still a theory, but the data coming from fossils still point to evolution as being a viable theory. But then again one discovery in the future could possibly negate that? As far as gravitational  waves, string theory etc need to be verified. If a theory can never be verified one could argue it is useless.
One exciting experiment due to be run soon at CERN could verify the theory of cloud formation due to high energy particles. If CRF does indeed change cloud cover, then that would go a long way to prove the reasons for the slight global warming. Cloud cover has a huge effect ~15W/M-sq
Climate models are suppose to be valid over decade time scales. It is only now that Hansen's original 1988 simulations have shown to be wrong. So what are the consequences for that? None he goes around like a loon talking now about tipping points and that we are all going to die. Why should we believe him now?
So for a journalists, the way I see it is to report on real DATA. Keep away from speculation and keep politics out of science and keep activists like Hansen out of positions where he has huge conflicts of interest.
Follow the money. search out who or how people would benifit from public funding. On Journalists need to evaluate strength of scientific consensus posted 1 year, 3 months ago 31 Responses

Uncertainty agenda

Come on David--you can do better then that. Please list all the incontrovertable facts that "PROVE" AGW has caused the recent slight warming over the past ~20yrs.On Journalists need to evaluate strength of scientific consensus posted 1 year, 3 months ago 31 Responses

Uncertainty agenda

David-??

As Lakoff puts it, Progressives keep scratching their heads how someone who is given incontrovertible facts

Please elaborate as to what are the incontrovertable facts for AGW--I would just love to see some warmenista list them for me?? LOLOn Journalists need to evaluate strength of scientific consensus posted 1 year, 3 months ago 31 Responses

Bob B

David, why don;t you do an article on why there is no big fuss among the alarmists that Hansen's 1988 climate modeling has now been proven wrong?

http://icecap.us/images/uploads/HANSEN.JPG

The Earths temps are way below scenario C where CO2 increases stop all together--so much for climate models and the chicken little modelers

The Earth has been cooling and each of the alarmists rants in time will be proven wrong as well.On Journalists need to evaluate strength of scientific consensus posted 1 year, 3 months ago 31 Responses

Consensus

Very good question. Journalists usually already know this answer---follow the money--Read the reason why so many meteorologists are climate skeptics:

http://icecap.us/

Aug 11, 2008
Why Are So Many TV Meteorologists and Weathercasters Climate `Skeptics'?

By Bill Dawson

All three staff meteorologists at KLTV, the ABC affiliate broadcasting to the Tyler-Longview-Jacksonville area of Northeast Texas, joined forces last November to deliver an on-air rebuttal of the idea that humans are changing the earth's climate. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC,

The answer:

Icecap Note: The answer to the writer's question is that they look at real data, know how poorly even short term models perform, tend to be objective and more outspoken and are not being paid
grant money
to think one way. The AMS's actions to try and pressure them to accept the alarmist position and make them evangelists for their main constituency, the academic community where grants pay the bills is a sin against science. It is an abdication of their role as a once great and truly scientific organization. They have become just another advocacy group. It fact advocacy is one of their organization's goals, I guess replacing good science. Good for you TV mets stand up for the truth or at lest for your right to make up your own mind.On Journalists need to evaluate strength of scientific consensus posted 1 year, 3 months ago 31 Responses