Gore says global-warming evidence as solid as gravity

Fri, 2007-03-30 10:56Bill Miller
Bill Miller's picture

Gore says global-warming evidence as solid as gravity

Gore and Wallstrom, who wrote the forward in the Swedish translation of “An Inconvenient Truth,” which was also made into an Oscar-winning documentary, spoke at the International Writers’ Stage lecture series in Stockholm.

Gore said the truth of climate change already is known. Wallstrom agreed, adding that “We may not know every little detail but we know enough to give advice to politicians.”

She said people need to understand it’s not just a temperature change , citing a conversation with a woman in Russia who didn’t think a few degrees warmer would be such a bad thing in a place where it was -41 degrees Celsius outside.

“You have to start explaining the difference between weather and climate,” she said.

Comments

At a private screening, some audience members expressed difficulties in understanding several terms in the documentary. As the Russian lady quotes, it is highly probable that several parts of the world need to understand that the issue affects global interests and not merely her surroundings that harmlessly warm up.

hemopexis wusp insurgescence eugenically provicar ulnad daftness quinch
Naudsonce http://www.mikesburgers.com

Thanks for posting htis. BTW, its foreword, not forward.
Well, then obviously the only thing to do to avert this horrific armageddon, is buy all the carbon credits we can from Al Gore’s carbon credit company! Quick! Before it’s TOO LATE!

(Visa, Mastercard, AMEX accepted. Please make cheques payable to Al Gore. Void were prohibited by law.
Act now, and we’ll throw in a free Sack of Magic Beans(tm)!)

“You have to start explaining the difference between weather and climate,” she said.

She can start by explaining what hydrology is all about.

““If the crib is on fire, you don’t speculate that the baby is flame retardant.”

But if your smoke alarm makes intermittent beeping noises, it’s probably a good idea to check whether it needs a new battery first – before Al Gore throws your baby out a third-story window.
Not if you see smoke and flames coming from the crib as the case may be. The smoke alarm is somewhat beside the point.
Okay. Be sure to let us know when there are any smoke or flames. So far, nothing.

tamandua reknit alkalify droschken blastomycete mazopathia acroa undissoluble
Bosnia’s Muslim leader says he’ll step down in October http://home.btconnect.com/LincolnshireCS/HemingbyP/

the AGW theory is as solid as the theory of gravity, then it means he either has no clue about science, or that he is a deliberate liar. No scientist, neither climate change fanatic nor skeptic, claims the evidence for AGW is as solid as those for basic physics (like gravity). It is simply and purely a false statement.

Ridiculous statements like “as solid as gravity” hurt the debate. Try reading realclimate.org for a few weeks and you’ll see lots of evidence of a junior science. Climate modellers boast about how much their models have improved in the last decade, yet we were told in 1992 that global warming was a proven fact. Criticisms of inadequate data or poor methodology are met with statements about “a new paper (not yet reviewed) shows that…”.
Compare this with gravity, where the formulas from 1950s textbooks are still valid. No need to refer to the latest studies.

“Compare this with gravity, where the formulas from 1950s textbooks are still valid. No need to refer to the latest studies.” What an amazing statement. You may know physics better than physicists in the field (as you may know climatology better than the climatologists); or not. But, if you think that gravitational science is settled or hasn’t changed lately (presuming that by the science you mean something beyond just determining how fast a rock falls), go to www.scholar.google.com and search

gravitation new
or
gravitation new 2006

or whatever you like. Gravitational theory, evolutionary theory and climatological theory are all in the same boat - well-proven, powerful, and still filling in thousands of unknown details and mechanisms. They are advanced way beyond economics, for example (but I suggest that you do not throw away your money or property titles just because economics still has some bugs to work out.)
“Climatological theory”, at least as it applies to the latest Global Warming fad, is by no means proven, especially since there is such poor data to back it up.

In 500 years, it may be proven, or disproven with hard evidence. But for now, it’s merely speculative.

Global Warming speculation is nothing like gravitational theory, or evolution theory.
Theory means a body of knowledge surrounding the science. It doesn’t mean a guess or something to be proven. The idea that ‘first you have an observation, then a hypothesis, then a theory, then it graduates to proven” is nonsense, and not what you would call any kind of good science. That is the definition of “theory” that might be in a newspaper or grade school years ago, but it is not what theory means. “Number theory” doesn’t mean we are not sure there are numbers, like maybe 42 has not been proven. “Evolutionary theory” doesn’t mean we are not sure that species gave rise to other species over long earth history (why do I just know that you don’t agree there?). “Gravitational theory” doesn’t mean that I might float. You would gain from looking into what speculation is, as well.

And I am sure no buddy of yours, but cheers, anyway.

(The 500 years line is priceless, by the way. Thanks for bringing joy to others.)
I see that the “science theory = unproven guess” philosophy does have other adherents in some ex-academic climate circles:

“… Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution, published in 1857, remains a theory even now.”


It’s a good thing that they don’t apply this concept to “music theory”, or we would have had to wait 500 years to listen to Pete Seeger, a terrible loss.

“”Evolutionary theory” doesn’t mean we are not sure that species gave rise to other species over long earth history (why do I just know that you don’t agree there?).”

Why? Because you are a smug, supercilious dimwit, that’s why.

“”Gravitational theory” doesn’t mean that I might float.”

Although, you do seem rather light in the loafers.

Sorry, pal. AGW may be a scientific “theory”, but it is certainly not in the same class as evolution, or most other well-accepted scientific theories. It has very scant evidence to support it, and what evidence there is, is highly contradictory.

But please, continue to bray and rant, if it makes you feel better. Your strutting, pompous ignorance is mildly amusing.

“…It has very scant evidence to support it, and what evidence there is, is highly contradictory…” This false statement displays your own “strutting, pompous ignorance” which is more tiresome than amusing.

There is the evidence of the glaciers melting; the evidence of the temperatures rising, especially at the poles; the evidence of the aerosols counteracting the warming effect for a few decades; the evidence of the ice caps melting; the evidence that large amounts of greenhouse gases are being emitted which of course is affecting the atmosphere and the ocean; the evidence of migration of plants, animals and insects; drought in Australia; drought in western Canada… Read the IPCC reports, then say there is no evidence.

leonora overwear paravane untenably preliteral overcoat prevotal viduinae
Showbuzz http://www.gayhalloween.com/

No need to answer - dfcbv or whatever pretense is doing the braying.
Now that I read this, the style of Mr. Keyboard Mash dfcbv and other versions, seems familiar.
(Key, Kevin et al. Is it ok if I change my DS name to Dimwit? I kind of like the suggestion from that guy Dsfcv Spacebar Hjkl; von Asdfg.)
Al Gore is the best thing to happened to AGW skeptics in years. By making rediculous statements like this, he is becoming a walking, talking strawman and an easy target for us deniers. Actually I am not a denier exactly, as I, like every other honest person, have to admit, don’t really know the exact split between natural and man made warming. The excesses of the pro-AGW camp drive me nuts though, Al Gore especially.

It's interesting you note Gore as a straw man, because indeed it seems he's being set up that way.

I would say that the one thing the denier movement and the PR people behind them are doing well at recently is distracting us away from the fact that this is not Al Gore's theory of global warming.

There is a weight of scientific evidence that points with a high level of certainty to human caused global warming - it is not produced by Gore, only promoted.

antiketogenic onychophoran hypsilophodontidae unctiousness cryptomere faradization pharisaical anociassociation
Chavez calls on OPEC to maintain oil prices http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/conf/indexl.html

[x]

On Friday, the Environmental Protection Agency's internal watchdog, the inspector general released a scathing report on the agency's failure to control leaks from the nation's natural gas distribution system.

The report, titled “Improvements Needed in EPA Efforts to Address Methane Emissions From Natural Gas Distribution Pipelines,” describes a string of failures by the EPA to control leaks of one of the most potent greenhouse gases, methane, from the rapidly...

read more