Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Climate Change Climate Change: The number of skeptics is swelling

online.wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 28 posts

Re: The Climate Change Climate Change: The number of skeptics is swelling

#11

Post by mighty »

TriinT wrote: post #8
mattmaroon wrote: post #5

Why do these global warming skeptic articles keep popping up here? Global warming is certainly OT, and skeptics' theories are not really any more interesting than any other conspiracy theories.

Freeman Dyson is a skeptic. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTSxubKfTBU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k69HUuyI5Mk Do you have the audacity to call him a conspiracy theorist? He's only one of the greatest scientists of the 20th Century. What kind of track record do you have to belittle Dyson? Seriously. The point I am trying to make: not at skeptics are born equal. Some are ignorant fools. But others are well-educated…

> BTW, they don't call it Global Warming anymore. It's now called Climate Change. You see, since the climate is a dynamical system that is continuously changing, the name "Climate Change" per se has absolutely zero information.

It only has zero information if you give it a massively uncharitable and ignorant reading. A climate per se describes a long term pattern of weather in a region. If that pattern changes, by definition, the climate has changed. Hence, "climate change".

Systems, or "dynamical systems" (whatever that means), are privy to two levels of change: one occurs within the system, the other defines the system. In other words, a system's state may change to another state, or the system may change into another system. Got it?

Re: The Climate Change Climate Change: The number of skeptics is swelling

#12

Post by JeremyBanks »

TriinT wrote: post #8
mattmaroon wrote: post #5

Why do these global warming skeptic articles keep popping up here? Global warming is certainly OT, and skeptics' theories are not really any more interesting than any other conspiracy theories.

Freeman Dyson is a skeptic. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTSxubKfTBU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k69HUuyI5Mk Do you have the audacity to call him a conspiracy theorist? He's only one of the greatest scientists of the 20th Century. What kind of track record do you have to belittle Dyson? Seriously. The point I am trying to make: not at skeptics are born equal. Some are ignorant fools. But others are well-educated…

Appeal to authority. Please try again, I'm curious.

Re: The Climate Change Climate Change: The number of skeptics is swelling

#13

Post by Alex3917 »

TriinT wrote: post #8
mattmaroon wrote: post #5

Why do these global warming skeptic articles keep popping up here? Global warming is certainly OT, and skeptics' theories are not really any more interesting than any other conspiracy theories.

Freeman Dyson is a skeptic. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTSxubKfTBU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k69HUuyI5Mk Do you have the audacity to call him a conspiracy theorist? He's only one of the greatest scientists of the 20th Century. What kind of track record do you have to belittle Dyson? Seriously. The point I am trying to make: not at skeptics are born equal. Some are ignorant fools. But others are well-educated…

From the video you linked to:

"The public thinks you have to wait until global warming is proved before you do something, but that's completely ridiculous."

The only thing from this video that suggests Dyson is a skeptic is the title.

Re: The Climate Change Climate Change: The number of skeptics is swelling

#14

Post by [deleted] »

TriinT wrote: post #8
mattmaroon wrote: post #5

Why do these global warming skeptic articles keep popping up here? Global warming is certainly OT, and skeptics' theories are not really any more interesting than any other conspiracy theories.

Freeman Dyson is a skeptic. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTSxubKfTBU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k69HUuyI5Mk Do you have the audacity to call him a conspiracy theorist? He's only one of the greatest scientists of the 20th Century. What kind of track record do you have to belittle Dyson? Seriously. The point I am trying to make: not at skeptics are born equal. Some are ignorant fools. But others are well-educated…

[deleted]

Re: The Climate Change Climate Change: The number of skeptics is swelling

#15

Post by alexgartrell »

evolve2k wrote: post #3

This article is useless and skewed. Im from Australia and the senator in question is a known skeptic who benefits from promoting those interests who would have most to loose in a carbon constrained economy. "Skeptics" continue to benefit from saying oh its not happening. A senator taking a (likley) free trip to the US for a conference against climate change, big news! You might find this more informative: http://wake…

From the article: "The collapse of the "consensus" has been driven by reality. The inconvenient truth is that the earth's temperatures have flat-lined since 2001, despite growing concentrations of C02."

I'm all for cleaning up emissions, but I'm for it because I like the atmosphere to be clean. Fear tactics are what's been driving "green-[A-Za-z]" for a long time and I think it's important to reexamine and do it for the right reasons.

Re: The Climate Change Climate Change: The number of skeptics is swelling

#16

Post by TriinT »

mighty wrote: post #11
TriinT wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Freeman Dyson is a skeptic. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTSxubKfTBU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k69HUuyI5Mk Do you have the audacity to call him a conspiracy theorist? He's only one of the greatest scientists of the 20th Century. What kind of track record do you have to belittle Dyson? Seriously. The point I am trying to make: not at skeptics are born equal. Some are ignorant fools. But others are well-educated…

> BTW, they don't call it Global Warming anymore. It's now called Climate Change. You see, since the climate is a dynamical system that is continuously changing, the name "Climate Change" per se has absolutely zero information. It only has zero information if you give it a massively uncharitable and ignorant reading. A climate per se describes a long term pattern of weather in a region. If that pattern changes, by de…

For starters, I don't like your tone. This is HN, not reddit. Got it?

I stand by my assertion. "Climate Change" is a redundancy. The climate has always been changing. If you reduce the entire complexity of the global climate system to 1 bit, you're not doing any good Science. It's not whether it's changing or not, it's how it is changing. This makes a world of difference.

The laws of Physics haven't changed. What may change is the inputs: solar radiation, C02 and methane emissions from the biosphere, C02 emissions by humans, etc. Since we don't really know the inputs with good precision, and since we can't measure them reliably either, jumping to conclusions based on computer models is ludicrous.

The problem with computer models is that we lack sufficient knowledge on the initial conditions. We would need a whole lot more measurements to be able to come up with reliable computer simulations. Unfortunately, measuring is expensive, while simulating is cheap. Trying to solve the fluid and heat dynamics PDEs on a global scale with incomplete info on initial conditions is not Science, it's voodoo magic.

I repeat: the rules of the game haven't changed. The laws of Physics are still the same. Focus on measuring the inputs that drive the dynamical system, rather than make apocalyptical predictions based on bad computer models.

Re: The Climate Change Climate Change: The number of skeptics is swelling

#17

Post by Devilboy »

alexgartrell wrote: post #15
evolve2k wrote: post #3

This article is useless and skewed. Im from Australia and the senator in question is a known skeptic who benefits from promoting those interests who would have most to loose in a carbon constrained economy. "Skeptics" continue to benefit from saying oh its not happening. A senator taking a (likley) free trip to the US for a conference against climate change, big news! You might find this more informative: http://wake…

From the article: "The collapse of the "consensus" has been driven by reality. The inconvenient truth is that the earth's temperatures have flat-lined since 2001, despite growing concentrations of C02." I'm all for cleaning up emissions, but I'm for it because I like the atmosphere to be clean. Fear tactics are what's been driving "green-[A-Za-z]" for a long time and I think it's important to reexamine and do it for…

'Since 2001' is just 8 years. Climatologists will generally agree that 30 years is the minimum time to consider when talking about global climate change, because of the natural rhythms and fluctuations year to year.

Saying that the last 8 years disproves climate change is like saying that last week was warmer than the week before and therefore we're heading into summer and not into winter.

However, there's probably not too much harm being done in waiting another 10 years before we take this more seriously. 10 years from now if we're having record heatwaves again everywhere, I expect most skeptics will start coming around.

Re: The Climate Change Climate Change: The number of skeptics is swelling

#18

Post by TriinT »

JeremyBanks wrote: post #12
TriinT wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Freeman Dyson is a skeptic. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTSxubKfTBU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k69HUuyI5Mk Do you have the audacity to call him a conspiracy theorist? He's only one of the greatest scientists of the 20th Century. What kind of track record do you have to belittle Dyson? Seriously. The point I am trying to make: not at skeptics are born equal. Some are ignorant fools. But others are well-educated…

Appeal to authority. Please try again, I'm curious.

It's not an appeal to authority, it's an appeal to good ideas. Dyson's points are valid. If you dismiss them without even thinking deeply about them, you're pretty much doing what the Inquisition did to Galileo.

Moreover, Dyson's points are based on good Science. He focuses on measurements and data, which are hard evidence. Dyson does not appeal to emotion or fear.

Re: The Climate Change Climate Change: The number of skeptics is swelling

#19

Post by DannoHung »

mattmaroon wrote: post #5

Why do these global warming skeptic articles keep popping up here? Global warming is certainly OT, and skeptics' theories are not really any more interesting than any other conspiracy theories.

Because any place that involves technological discussions attracts a number of self-styled "objectivists" and libertarians who can't cotton to the idea that collective selfless behavior is needed to solve any problem.

Re: The Climate Change Climate Change: The number of skeptics is swelling

#20

Post by nazgulnarsil »

alexgartrell wrote: post #15
evolve2k wrote: post #3

This article is useless and skewed. Im from Australia and the senator in question is a known skeptic who benefits from promoting those interests who would have most to loose in a carbon constrained economy. "Skeptics" continue to benefit from saying oh its not happening. A senator taking a (likley) free trip to the US for a conference against climate change, big news! You might find this more informative: http://wake…

From the article: "The collapse of the "consensus" has been driven by reality. The inconvenient truth is that the earth's temperatures have flat-lined since 2001, despite growing concentrations of C02." I'm all for cleaning up emissions, but I'm for it because I like the atmosphere to be clean. Fear tactics are what's been driving "green-[A-Za-z]" for a long time and I think it's important to reexamine and do it for…

and temperature over the short term is a bad reason to change opinions. skepticism SHOULD be growing because the climate change advocates are using cherry picked statistics and bullying.
Post reply on HN