4 ms·

Why does someone have to be a climate scientist to analyze climate data? Anyways, the points he makes do not seem loony, or at least not loony enough to requir

by yters 18y ago

Why does someone have to be a climate scientist to analyze climate data? Anyways, the points he makes do not seem loony, or at least not loony enough to require BBC to shun him. Finally, we have to do something about this automatic "controversial = trolling" shutdown. Being rational and levelheaded does not mean avoiding controversy. A good forum does not necessitate that nothing difficult is discussed, but that when difficult subjects are discussed they are handled in a constructive manner.

Tichy 18y ago
He does not make any points, besides saying "in my opinion there is no man-made global warming". It is well known that there are cycles of global temperature, I was even taught so at school, 25 years ago it was already known. What pro-global warming people claim is that even taking those cycles into account, something is amiss. I have no way to judge it, but overall it seems unlikely to me that human activity on the planet has no effect whatsoever.
bootload 18y ago
"... Why does someone have to be a climate scientist to analyze climate data? ..." True. Bellamy is also looking at empirical evidence. Looking at what is happening in the ecosystem is another form of research. He's also a bit of a lefty ratbag and I'm sure this also plays some part in it. Interesting to note how Attenborough, Oxford educated and establishment to the core has been repeating the same message. It is also reported he changed his mind on this topic quite a few times ~ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Bellamy#Views_on_global_warming http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Bellamy#Views_on_global_w... I also know Bellamy was one of those lefty ratbags being arrested demonstrating & not letting a corrupt Tasmanian government (Australias smallest, most southern state) rip up the Franklin River all those years back on December 14th, 1982 for a hydro dam ~ http://www.abc.net.au/local/stories/2008/07/01/2291193.htm http://www.abc.net.au/local/stories/2008/07/01/2291193.htm World needs more Bellamys ~ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Bellamy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Bellamy
alecco 18y ago
Because this isn't peer-reviewed research. There are many reasons for having standard procedures to publish scientific work (theories.) I love discussion, as long it isn't a time waster on basics. You don't peer review on BBC or MSM. It creates a false debate confusing people. And Daily Express is usually full of exaggerations and fallacies. Also, I don't see very well the HN worthy angle. But that's just me.
- yters 18y ago
  I think people upvote it b/c a number of people here consider global warming skepticism to be one of those "things that can't be said" that pg mentioned in an essay, and think this article is evidence supporting that view.

by yters 18y ago

Tichy 18y ago

He does not make any points, besides saying "in my opinion there is no man-made global warming". It is well known that there are cycles of global temperature, I was even taught so at school, 25 years ago it was already known. What pro-global warming people claim is that even taking those cycles into account, something is amiss. I have no way to judge it, but overall it seems unlikely to me that human activity on the planet has no effect whatsoever.

bootload 18y ago

"... Why does someone have to be a climate scientist to analyze climate data? ..." True. Bellamy is also looking at empirical evidence. Looking at what is happening in the ecosystem is another form of research. He's also a bit of a lefty ratbag and I'm sure this also plays some part in it. Interesting to note how Attenborough, Oxford educated and establishment to the core has been repeating the same message. It is also reported he changed his mind on this topic quite a few times ~ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Bellamy#Views_on_global_warming http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Bellamy#Views_on_global_w... I also know Bellamy was one of those lefty ratbags being arrested demonstrating & not letting a corrupt Tasmanian government (Australias smallest, most southern state) rip up the Franklin River all those years back on December 14th, 1982 for a hydro dam ~ http://www.abc.net.au/local/stories/2008/07/01/2291193.htm http://www.abc.net.au/local/stories/2008/07/01/2291193.htm World needs more Bellamys ~ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Bellamy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Bellamy

alecco 18y ago

Because this isn't peer-reviewed research. There are many reasons for having standard procedures to publish scientific work (theories.) I love discussion, as long it isn't a time waster on basics. You don't peer review on BBC or MSM. It creates a false debate confusing people. And Daily Express is usually full of exaggerations and fallacies. Also, I don't see very well the HN worthy angle. But that's just me.

yters 18y ago
I think people upvote it b/c a number of people here consider global warming skepticism to be one of those "things that can't be said" that pg mentioned in an essay, and think this article is evidence supporting that view.