[ RadSafe ] Keeping an open mind Are we keeping an open mind?

Jess Addis ajess at clemson.edu
Mon Oct 18 12:36:53 CDT 2010

If you have time to read a little and really care for an explanation of the
lag time and probable cause for the initiation of the warming cycles this
article is one place to start.  It's climate science from people who really
are climate scientist.


The letter at the end of the article is also interesting and succinct.

Of course if one's mind is already made and maybe takes for granted that
hard working ethical scientist are all really just frauds spewing huge loads
of BS from universities, government agencies, and scientific bodies
.....well, it would be a waste of one's time.  

And remember, "chickens do not lay eggs, because they have been observed to
hatch from them".  Love that one.

Jess Addis, RSO
Clemson U.

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
[mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Jim Hardeman
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 11:22 AM
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Keeping an open mind Are we keeping an open mind?

To all --
All of us, whether climate scientists or not (and I assume that most of us
on this list are NOT) should be astute enough scientifically to recognize
that correlation does not imply causation. While it may be true that levels
of CO2 in the atmosphere are rising, and it may also be true that the global
climate is changing (as it has done continually since the formation of the
planet) that doesn't mean that one "causes" the other.
I remember a presentation at Georgia Tech several years ago by a climate
scientist who looked at the available info, including pre-historic info re:
carbon levels and global temperatures -- however derived. As I recall, the
data appear to support the thought that levels of CO2 in the atmosphere
"follow" rises in global temperature by tens to hundreds of years --
although if you plot them on time scales of hundreds of thousands of years,
the curves appear to be coincident.
Jim Hardeman

>>> <garyi at trinityphysics.com> 10/18/2010 10:22 >>>
Three words for you, Parthasarathy, "...hide the decline."

That should be enough to make anyone very sceptical, but it is just the tip
of the melting iceberg.  As far as your comments go, you have commited a
sin, and a pretty serious one
too: the fallacy of appealing to authority.  

You don't need a climate scientist to evaluate charges of fraud.  Again: the
question is NOT how much or why temperatures are changing.  The question is
did Mann et al fake temperatures, suppress conflicting scholarship, and then
destroy their data when they could no longer hide what they were doing.  The
evidence is widely available and overwhelmingly damning.  

Not that it should matter, but the Royal Society has just been forced by its
membership to

Here's a snippet from the article:
    'The Royal Society now also agrees with the GWPF that the warming trend
    the 1980s and 90s has come to a halt in the last 10 years.

    'In their old guide, the Royal Society demanded that governments should
take "urgent 
    steps" to cut CO2 emissions "as much and as fast as possible." This
political activism 
    has now been replaced by a more sober assessment of the scientific
evidence and 
    ongoing climate debates.

    'If this voice of moderation had been the Royal Society's position all
along, its 
    message to Government would have been more restrained and Britain's
    climate policy would not be out of sync with the rest of the world.'

Focus on the evidence of fraud, not on the evidence of warming.  If you find
the evidence of fraud compelling, as I do, then the inescapable corollary is
that a hugh load of BS is spewing from the involved universities, government
agencies, and scientific bodies.  Talk about an environmental problem!

-Gary Isenhower

On 17 Oct 2010 at 1:37, parthasarathy k s wrote:

[ Double-click this line for list subscription options ] 

Dear Dr Gary Isenhower,

More information about the RadSafe mailing list