3 ms·

Some people stand to profit from saying the climate is responding to anthropogenic warming to a worrying (adjust the adjective) degree and others will profit fr

Some people stand to profit from saying the climate is responding to anthropogenic warming to a worrying (adjust the adjective) degree and others will profit from discounting (same adjustment applies) such concerns. It's therefore (knowing human nature) likely that some members of both groups will present 'very selective facts'. It seems you have an agenda so you side with the former group. Alternatively you have good reasons to argue for a high climate sensitivity value rather than a low one. Do you? Discussion totally dissociated from CS consideration is mere rhetoric. Here's a recent summary: http://notrickszone.com/2017/10/16/recent-co2-climate-sensitivity-estimates-continue-trending-towards-zero/#sthash.7BVQeLDP.dpbs http://notrickszone.com/2017/10/16/recent-co2-climate-sensit...

Oletros 9y ago
> It seems you have an agenda so you side with the former group And do you say that after linking to a blog that has a really obvious agenda? Yap, entries like [0] are really unbiased, isn't? [0] http://notrickszone.com/2017/12/20/america-unshackled-emancipating-itself-as-trump-accomplishes/#sthash.p5fl5T6W.dpbs http://notrickszone.com/2017/12/20/america-unshackled-emanci...
1337biz 9y ago
I agree fully with your premise that both sides are driven by interest groups. Personally I am pondering in that context in how far science is really helping the argument on both sides. The suggestion that there are absolute cause and effects in something as complicated as climate is just for most people (including myself) not beliveable. They watch the weather forcast and see every day that all the science in the world is not even able to predict next week's weather. In other areas are confronted every day with conflicting studies and recommendations. I am sure trust in science and scientists' interpretstion of things is going is more and more decreasing.

Oletros 9y ago

> It seems you have an agenda so you side with the former group And do you say that after linking to a blog that has a really obvious agenda? Yap, entries like [0] are really unbiased, isn't? [0] http://notrickszone.com/2017/12/20/america-unshackled-emancipating-itself-as-trump-accomplishes/#sthash.p5fl5T6W.dpbs http://notrickszone.com/2017/12/20/america-unshackled-emanci...

1337biz 9y ago

I agree fully with your premise that both sides are driven by interest groups. Personally I am pondering in that context in how far science is really helping the argument on both sides. The suggestion that there are absolute cause and effects in something as complicated as climate is just for most people (including myself) not beliveable. They watch the weather forcast and see every day that all the science in the world is not even able to predict next week's weather. In other areas are confronted every day with conflicting studies and recommendations. I am sure trust in science and scientists' interpretstion of things is going is more and more decreasing.