Comments on: The Myth of the 1970s Global Cooling Consensus http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/2008/09/the-myth-of-the-1970s-global-cooling-consensus/ a forum for the discussion of issues concerning the natural environment Sun, 21 Mar 2010 16:04:41 +1000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8 hourly 1 By: geo http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/2008/09/the-myth-of-the-1970s-global-cooling-consensus/comment-page-3/#comment-65110 geo Tue, 07 Oct 2008 17:38:57 +0000 http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/?p=2480#comment-65110 Btw, since you mention Connelley, he contacted me last week and asked for a scan of the Compton Yearbook entry I reference upstream. He said he would blog on it at some point, but I haven't seen it yet. But then we're all busy people. Btw, since you mention Connelley, he contacted me last week and asked for a scan of the Compton Yearbook entry I reference upstream. He said he would blog on it at some point, but I haven’t seen it yet. But then we’re all busy people.

]]> By: TrueSceptic http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/2008/09/the-myth-of-the-1970s-global-cooling-consensus/comment-page-2/#comment-65098 TrueSceptic Tue, 07 Oct 2008 14:14:06 +0000 http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/?p=2480#comment-65098 So, PaulM has failed to show that the Hughes paper belongs in the cooling/ice age pile. Where are all the others he thinks are out there? So, PaulM has failed to show that the Hughes paper belongs in the cooling/ice age pile.

Where are all the others he thinks are out there?

]]> By: TrueSceptic http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/2008/09/the-myth-of-the-1970s-global-cooling-consensus/comment-page-2/#comment-64788 TrueSceptic Sun, 05 Oct 2008 12:20:43 +0000 http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/?p=2480#comment-64788 PaulM, You mentioned the Hughes paper at Stoat in February. `http://scienceblogs.com/stoat/2008/02/study_debunks_global_cooling_c.php#comment-767763` "William, I don't have access to the rest of the paper by Moran. But the statement 'supports the notion that the ice age is returning' indicates that this view was indeed current at the time. Here is another one, by a polar scientist - do they count in your book? :) Again I don't have the whole paper yet. Convection in the Antarctic Ice Sheet Leading to a Surge of the Ice Sheet and Possibly to a New Ice Age T. Hughes Science 170, no. 3958, 630 - 633 (1970) [I've seen that one. It wins a prize for most misleading abstract ever. Read the paper - its nothing to do with a new ice age -W]" You didn't reply to Connelley's comment then. Do you have something now? PaulM,

You mentioned the Hughes paper at Stoat in February.
`http://scienceblogs.com/stoat/2008/02/study_debunks_global_cooling_c.php#comment-767763`
“William,
I don’t have access to the rest of the paper by Moran. But the statement ’supports the notion that the ice age is returning’ indicates that this view was indeed current at the time.
Here is another one, by a polar scientist – do they count in your book? :)
Again I don’t have the whole paper yet.
Convection in the Antarctic Ice Sheet Leading to a Surge of the Ice Sheet and Possibly to a New Ice Age
T. Hughes
Science 170, no. 3958, 630 – 633 (1970)

[I've seen that one. It wins a prize for most misleading abstract ever. Read the paper - its nothing to do with a new ice age -W]”

You didn’t reply to Connelley’s comment then. Do you have something now?

]]> By: TrueSceptic http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/2008/09/the-myth-of-the-1970s-global-cooling-consensus/comment-page-2/#comment-64672 TrueSceptic Sun, 05 Oct 2008 00:17:05 +0000 http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/?p=2480#comment-64672 G Bird said "See you are just a liar SJT. You cannot even name ONE of these computer-models that is not a CO2-model. Let me save you some time you afterbirth! THE PEODOPHILE SJT’S LIKELY RESPONSE: “See you are just a liar SJT.” lol “See you are just a liar SJT.” Not only are you stupid and dishonest. You are fundamentally boring." Can I suggest that this patient be kept away from any electrical equipment unless closely supervised? Moderate sedation might be sufficient at other times but physical restraint cannot be ruled out and must available at all times. The possibility of self-harm is an ongoing concern. G Bird said
“See you are just a liar SJT. You cannot even name ONE of these computer-models that is not a CO2-model.

Let me save you some time you afterbirth!

THE PEODOPHILE SJT’S LIKELY RESPONSE:

“See you are just a liar SJT.” lol

“See you are just a liar SJT.”

Not only are you stupid and dishonest. You are fundamentally boring.”

Can I suggest that this patient be kept away from any electrical equipment unless closely supervised? Moderate sedation might be sufficient at other times but physical restraint cannot be ruled out and must available at all times. The possibility of self-harm is an ongoing concern.

]]> By: SJT http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/2008/09/the-myth-of-the-1970s-global-cooling-consensus/comment-page-2/#comment-64216 SJT Thu, 02 Oct 2008 08:42:35 +0000 http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/?p=2480#comment-64216 "THE PEODOPHILE SJT’S LIKELY RESPONSE:" LOL “THE PEODOPHILE SJT’S LIKELY RESPONSE:”

LOL

]]> By: Eli Rabett http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/2008/09/the-myth-of-the-1970s-global-cooling-consensus/comment-page-2/#comment-64102 Eli Rabett Wed, 01 Oct 2008 22:36:25 +0000 http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/?p=2480#comment-64102 The fact that no one knows who Peterson is reminds me of the Tshirt from Star Trek: Beam me out Scotty, there is no intelligent life on this planet. The fact that no one knows who Peterson is reminds me of the Tshirt from Star Trek: Beam me out Scotty, there is no intelligent life on this planet.

]]> By: PaulM http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/2008/09/the-myth-of-the-1970s-global-cooling-consensus/comment-page-2/#comment-64074 PaulM Wed, 01 Oct 2008 17:09:19 +0000 http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/?p=2480#comment-64074 SJT and TrueSceptic, You are right, it is too easy to refute this ridiculous attempt to re-write history. You can find plenty more 'cooling' papers that they seem to have missed in their 'rigorous literature review' in a few minutes with google scholar. Here's one: Convection in the Antarctic Ice Sheet Leading to a Surge of the Ice Sheet and Possibly to a New Ice Age T. Hughes, Science 6 November 1970: Vol. 170. no. 3958, pp. 630 - 633 Why has no one else bothered to do this? Go on, someone else find some more examples! SJT and TrueSceptic,
You are right, it is too easy to refute this ridiculous attempt to re-write history.
You can find plenty more ‘cooling’ papers that they seem to have missed in their ‘rigorous literature review’ in a few minutes with google scholar. Here’s one:

Convection in the Antarctic Ice Sheet Leading to a Surge of the Ice Sheet and Possibly to a New Ice Age
T. Hughes,
Science 6 November 1970:
Vol. 170. no. 3958, pp. 630 – 633

Why has no one else bothered to do this?
Go on, someone else find some more examples!

]]> By: Graeme Bird http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/2008/09/the-myth-of-the-1970s-global-cooling-consensus/comment-page-2/#comment-64022 Graeme Bird Wed, 01 Oct 2008 08:37:27 +0000 http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/?p=2480#comment-64022 The scientific consensus is that we are in for cooling. Thats just a fact. Anybody who actually dives into the scientific evidence will find that the consensus leads to DEFINITE SEVERE COOLING. "Definite" in that this is definately where the evidence points us. Yet we can still be wrong. Thats what the scientific consensus is because that is what the evidence tells us. But the sentiment of stolen-money-funded science-workers might say something else. It doesn't say something else. But it MIGHT do. It might as well do. Because we don't get our science from the UN or from polls amongst scientists. We get our science from the evidence and not from a great deal else than the evidence. The scientific consensus is that we are in for cooling. Thats just a fact. Anybody who actually dives into the scientific evidence will find that the consensus leads to DEFINITE SEVERE COOLING.

“Definite” in that this is definately where the evidence points us. Yet we can still be wrong.

Thats what the scientific consensus is because that is what the evidence tells us.

But the sentiment of stolen-money-funded science-workers might say something else.

It doesn’t say something else. But it MIGHT do. It might as well do. Because we don’t get our science from the UN or from polls amongst scientists. We get our science from the evidence and not from a great deal else than the evidence.

]]> By: Graeme Bird http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/2008/09/the-myth-of-the-1970s-global-cooling-consensus/comment-page-2/#comment-64019 Graeme Bird Wed, 01 Oct 2008 08:31:54 +0000 http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/?p=2480#comment-64019 "I have no idea if he did or he didn’t, but a “Cooling program” doesn’t exist any more than a “CO2 model” does." See you are just a liar SJT. You cannot even name ONE of these computer-models that is not a CO2-model. Let me save you some time you afterbirth! THE PEODOPHILE SJT'S LIKELY RESPONSE: "See you are just a liar SJT." lol "See you are just a liar SJT." Not only are you stupid and dishonest. You are fundamentally boring. “I have no idea if he did or he didn’t, but a “Cooling program” doesn’t exist any more than a “CO2 model” does.”

See you are just a liar SJT. You cannot even name ONE of these computer-models that is not a CO2-model.

Let me save you some time you afterbirth!

THE PEODOPHILE SJT’S LIKELY RESPONSE:

“See you are just a liar SJT.” lol

“See you are just a liar SJT.”

Not only are you stupid and dishonest. You are fundamentally boring.

]]> By: peterd http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/2008/09/the-myth-of-the-1970s-global-cooling-consensus/comment-page-2/#comment-64012 peterd Wed, 01 Oct 2008 07:46:50 +0000 http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/?p=2480#comment-64012 Kuhnkat: Luke, “In their survey of the scientific literature from 1965 to 1983 Peterson et al found …” Having been a young man during this period, I believe the SCARE only existed between about ‘70 and ‘78. Looking for papers outside of this period is a Red Herring." As I indicate above, Bryson's own views pre-date 1970 somewhat. His original article (revised for the 1970s book) appeared in 1968, so his thinking must have been developing in the mid 1960s. Kuhnkat: Luke, “In their survey of the scientific literature from 1965 to 1983 Peterson et al found …”
Having been a young man during this period, I believe the SCARE only existed between about ‘70 and ‘78. Looking for papers outside of this period is a Red Herring.”
As I indicate above, Bryson’s own views pre-date 1970 somewhat. His original article (revised for the 1970s book) appeared in 1968, so his thinking must have been developing in the mid 1960s.

]]>