4 ms·
For a balanced view, this is a must read from Professor of Meteorology Richard S. Lindzen at MIT: https://www.thegwpf.org/content/uploads/2018/10/Lindzen-2018-G
by berkoab 8y ago
For a balanced view, this is a must read from Professor of Meteorology Richard S. Lindzen at MIT:
https://www.thegwpf.org/content/uploads/2018/10/Lindzen-2018-GWPF-Lecture.pdf https://www.thegwpf.org/content/uploads/2018/10/Lindzen-2018...
- UncleMeat 8y agoThat's not balanced. The overwhelming majority of experts in the field disagree with Lindzen, who is largely famous among laypeople because he is one of the few academics that deniers can point to.
- berkoab 8y agoExperts? That's exactly his point. They're far from being experts. What I meant by balanced was as a balance to all the views being expressed here. I probably misused that word.
- UncleMeat 8y agoI'd describe people with PhDs in atmospheric science who have published papers on climate change or other climate modeling as experts. These people largely disagree with Lindzen.
- explainplease 8y agoFrom the paper: > Richard S. Lindzen was Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology until his retirement in 2013. He is the author of over 200 papers on meteorology and climatology and is a member of the US National Academy of Sciences and of the Academic Advisory Council of GWPF. Does meteorology count as "atmospheric science"? Does climatology count as "climate change" or "climate modeling"? Does 200 papers count as "published papers"? Does being a professor at MIT count? By your own criteria, he is an expert. Therefore, by what reasoning do you dismiss him? Religion.
- UncleMeat 8y agoYes. Lindzen is a working scientist. But he is not among the majority of scientists. The fact that his name shows up so goddamn often is because he is one of the very few people with those creds that speaks what deniers want to hear.