U.S. Senate Minority Report Questions for Critical Thinking 19

[zdas04]

Yesterday the U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee published Minority Report Critical Thinking on Climate Change. The Senators in the minority party saw the hearings being held in a somewhat different light than the majority. Starting on Page 12, they list 5 "Questions for Critical Thinking".
[ol 1]
[li]If the computer models and predictions have been inaccurate, what strategies are being implemented to correct these errors? Should potentially economically crippling policies be put in place before those errors are resolved?[/li]
[li]If global warming has truly been “worse than predicted,” why won’t the federal government provide the data supporting this claim?[/li]
[li]As it continues to be recognized that the Earth has not warmed for at least the past 15 years, will we see the term “global warming” abandoned and replaced in its entirety by “climate change?”[/li]
[li]Given that many of these models predicted warming trends well before China surpassed the United States as the largest GHG emitter, and given the fact that emissions continue to grow at a pace beyond what was originally incorporated into the models, shouldn’t the warming be far worse than what was predicted in the worst case scenarios rather than well below predictions?[/li]
[li]Given Earth’s long history of a changing climate, why does the public discussion only tend to focus on the last 70 years or so?[/li]
[/ol]

I think that these questions are excellent. Anyone want to take a shot at them?

David Simpson, PE
MuleShoe Engineering

In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual. —Galileo Galilei, Italian Physicist

 

[cranky108]

I agree with 1., 2 is achievable in the long term with increased education in the third world (In the short term is possible, but nobody wants that). 3. is conflected with some bogus numbers. 4. maybe, and maybe not, but this is a slow thing that will take time either way.

I keep asking for new ideas, and I have suggested a few some time ago, with no responce. So with no new ideas offered, which is it agenda, or control?

I see arguments for the easy things, but an expectation that we will slide past the hard things. Give me a reason to think this isen't just a control thing.

 

[rb1957]

"Give me a reason to think this isen't just a control thing."
some here will write you off as an anti-vac paranoid psychotic for suggesting that this is a "control thing" which implies that the underlying "science" is just that ... "science".

i've asked a similar question ... which came first, the science or the politics ?

it does seem odd that in a forum of hard technical numbers types we have such strongly held polar opposite opinions. i've even gotten into yelling matches with friends over this (and boy, did i get from the wife ... in fact i think all three of us did !); fortunately we'll still friends. amongst the responders on this forum i suspect that 80% don't have a strong opinion and 10% are hard line for one side or the other and as we've noticed just about nobody has changed sides (ok, there's at least 1 acknowledged changer).

what on earth is "joe public" to make of this ?

another day in paradise, or is paradise one day closer ?

 

[IRstuff]

"And does not modeling involve human interaction? Human interaction in maping is some how different than humal interaction in modeling?"

Yes, but only in creating the models, and the maps are basically only differentiated by whether it's water or land, and we've got great satellite-based digital elevation maps. The models are expressed as differential equations, etc., and errors tend to be immediately apparent, particularly if the model is compared to history.

Street maps, on the other, have quirks like Crystal Court, Crystal Street, Crystal Avenue, etc., street that stop for a couple of blocks and then resume, streets that change name or change from E to W to N, etc., etc., etc.



"which came first, the science or the politics ?"

The science, of course. To assume otherwise is to assume that all the governments that are portrayed as inept and incompetent were and still are able to stay on track over more than half a century, and that even when the opposing parties got into power, nothing changed. That would require a bigger conspiracy that the faked Moon landings.

TTFN
faq731-376

Need help writing a question or understanding a reply? forum1529

Of course I can. I can do anything. I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

 

[rb1957]

if by "politics" you include the green agenda then that was there first, and co-op'ed climate science as a means to their ends.

another day in paradise, or is paradise one day closer ?

 

[cranky108]

Weather I believe or not is of little importance. I'll go along as long as the changes are reasonable and achievable. But when offered a goverment mandate that you will make changes, then I have reason to question the science, the mandate, and the cost.

Example: recycleing is a good thing, but now that there are no places to do so easly, I not inclined to go out of my way.
No stores buy aluminum cans, or take glass bottles any more (at least here). No one wants paper. But clothes, household items I can give them to Goodwill.

To me it looks like the enviroment thing is going from reasonable to unreasonable, and from I can make a difference to you will comply. It going backwards in my view.

And what will happen in the future when these solar panels are failing? Can they be recycled, of just land filled?

 

[rb1957]

"weather" ... pun intended ?

another day in paradise, or is paradise one day closer ?