[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Nuclear Power Des NOT Need Gobal Warming Hoax!
Hi, Fritz,
Thanks for the comments.
Like you, I am not a climitologists. Consequently,
who should I believe?
My impression is that there has been a great deal of
problems with climate data collection, analysis and
model. There have been a number of reports
commissioned on the subject.
http://lab.nap.edu/nap-cgi/discover.cgi?act=dourl&restric=NAP&url=.nap.edu/openbook/0309068916/html/index.html
Can they all be wrong? Could the data be getting
better, and the models more accuarte?
I still question the determination of scientific
issues by signing petitions. What if 34,000 science
sign a petition that global warming exists? Who would
you believe?
--- "Fritz A. Seiler" <faseiler@NMIA.COM> wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> I am one of these 17,000 signatories of the OISM
> petition. I
> am not a climatologist, I am just a scientist.
> Actually, I grew up
> as a nuclear physicist who has now been dabbling in
> risk assessment
> for 25 years. However, what I think that I have in
> common with the
> other signatories of the petition is a certain
> amount of skepticism
> for the loud and brash claims of climatologists
> whose huge computer
> models do not fit what we already know by experience
> and that is how
> El Nino and La Nina affect the winter weather in the
> U.S.
> Some months ago, Jim Dukelow pointed out to me that
> the Global
> Circulation Models now actually show currents such
> as the Southern
> Oscillation that is associated with El Nino or La
> Nina. I read that
> also elsewhere and find it encouraging. But I am
> still waiting for
> the loud shout of "Eureka!" that would have
> announced that they now
> can correlate the winter weather in the U.S. with
> the events in the
> Southern Hemisphere. Right now, I am still willing
> to listen but I
> am not holding my breath!
> At this time, I am still skeptical about scientists
> who make
> claims about effects such as man-made Global Warming
> which are minor
> compared to other well established weather effects.
> Their models do
> not cause the weather effects of El Nino and La Nina
> in the U.S. but
> they claim to "see" man's influence emerging from
> their models! Now
> let's get real here! And maybe let's also remember
> that the study of
> "Man-made Global Warming" is a SEVERAL BILLION
> DOLLAR A YEAR industry
> in the U.S. alone. This 8,000 pound Gorilla will
> react viciously and
> run completely out of control if anybody such as
> Bjorn Lomborg dares
> to question their conclusions. I read Lomborg's
> book and then I also
> read the Gorilla's reaction in Scientific American.
> You don't have to
> be a climatologist to understand what is going on:
> This is the Gorilla
> at the Federal Feeding Trough reacting violently
> when disturbed!
> As I said, I am just a scientist not a
> climatologist, but together
> with my 17,000 colleagues, I recognize shades of
> pathological science in
> the sense of Nobel prize winning physical chemist
> Irving Langmuir when I
> encounter it.
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Fritz
>
>
*****************************************************
> Fritz A. Seiler, Ph.D.
> Sigma Five Consulting: Private:
> P.O. Box 1709 P.O. Box 437
> Los Lunas, NM 87031 Tome', NM 87060
> Tel.: 505-866-5193 Tel. 505-866-6976
> Fax: 505-866-5197 USA
>
*****************************************************
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-radsafe@list.Vanderbilt.Edu
> [mailto:owner-radsafe@list.Vanderbilt.Edu]On Behalf
> Of John Fleck
> Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2004 12:39 PM
> To: radsafe@list.Vanderbilt.Edu
> Subject: Re: Nuclear Power Des NOT Need Gobal
> Warming Hoax!
>
> I think one should be cautious before citing the
> OISM petition.
>
> It was based on what might charitably be called an
> act of academic sleight
> of hand: a "review paper" set in the typographic
> style of the PNAS in a
> transparent attempt to led credibility to it, sent
> to an apparently enormous
> number of scientists - in all fields, not only
> climate - along with a
> petition for them to sign. The "review paper" might
> best be described as a
> brief for the plaintiffs, not a genuine review of
> the evidence. How many
> scientists was it sent to? That would seem a
> relevant fact that would allow
> one to better judge how many scientists declined to
> sign it. Alas, Arthur
> Robinson, its author, won't say. "We're not willing
> to have our opponents
> attack us with that number, and say that the rest of
> the recipients are
> against us," he told a reporter for Nature in 1998.
>
>
>
>
************************************************************************
> You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing
> list. To
> unsubscribe, send an e-mail to
> Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu Put the
> text "unsubscribe radsafe" (no quote marks) in the
> body of the e-mail,
> with no subject line. You can view the Radsafe
> archives at
> http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/
>
=====
+++++++++++++++++++
"We cannot escape danger, or the fear of danger, by crawling into bed and pulling the covers over our heads."
-- Franklin Delano Roosevelt
-- John
John Jacobus, MS
Certified Health Physicist
e-mail: crispy_bird@yahoo.com
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
************************************************************************
You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To
unsubscribe, send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu Put the
text "unsubscribe radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail,
with no subject line. You can view the Radsafe archives at
http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/