Alex Epstein: "97% Of Climate Scientists Is 100% Wrong"
Anybody know how much of this is true?
posted by Winston Smith at
3:24 PM
Tuesday, February 13, 2018
Previous Posts
- Aaron Blake: 'Anglo-American' and the Liberal Trum...
- Sessions, Sheriffs, and 'Anglo-American'
- Carolina 83 - Irish 66
- Saletan: GOP Excuses For Trump's Alleged Attempt T...
- "Trump Takes 'Shackles' Off ICE, Which Is Slapping...
- Reminder That CNN Was More Hostile To An American ...
- Transgenderism and Privacy Arguments
- Andrew Sullivan: We All Live On Campus Now
- Carolina 96 - State 89
- The Big One
Subscribe to
Posts [Atom]
6 Comments:
quick googling shows the guy runs a for-profit think tank called "the center for industrial progress" and has published a book called "the moral case for fossil fuels," so I'd go with 0%
I am a little dubious of anyone who asserts that the warming trend has "tapered almost to nothing in the last decade and a half." Ice volume continues to shrink,and the last 3 years have been very warm indeed.
He's completely and totally full of shit.
I don't have the space here to go into detail, but all you have to do is look at the evidence. The temperature of the planet is going up (~0.8 - 0.9oC on average...the only thing he gets right), CO2 levels are above 400 ppm, and the planet is beginning to show signs of the warming. 70-80% of all Krill are dead (look it up), ice caps are melting, ocean levels are slowly rising, winters are more mild overall, catastrophic weather events are becoming more common, etc.
This video does an excellent job of dealing with a global warming skeptic, while emphasizing how difficult it is to predict into the future.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOQQI0yFbls
Just look at the evidence at NOAA, NASA, etc., it's overwhelming. One of my most skeptical colleagues, and brightest (we also rarely get along all that well), is now 99% convinced that humans are the major contributor to modern global warming. He went to UC Berkley if pedigree matters
It's actually a great object lesson in prevarication and bullshittery.
Are the twitter statements and quotes from Kerry and things bandied about on social media by non-experts 100% correct (and by "correct" meaning "accurately and exhaustingly communicating the results of peer-reviewed research")?
Hell no, when are they ever? But does that mean that climate change and global warming are not happening? Also hell no. This entire article is one big gish gallop, sprinkled throughout with common sensical statements like "It's likely that 97% of people making the 97% claim have absolutely no idea where that number comes from" -- no shit, sherlock, just like anything else. Ask the average man on the street what makes plutonium dangerous and you'll get mainly gibberish answers, that doesn't mean that it's not dangerous.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home