Giaever ridiculed Obama for stating that “no challenge poses a greater threat to future generations than climate change.” The physicist called it a “ridiculous statement” and that Obama “gets bad advice” when it comes to global warming.
“I say this to Obama: Excuse me, Mr. President, but you’re wrong. Dead wrong,” Giaever said.
Giaever was a professor at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute’s School of Engineering and School of Science and received the Nobel Prize for physics for his work on quantum tunneling. Giaever said he was “horrified” about the science surrounding global warming when he conducted research on the subject in 2012...
“Global warming really has become a new religion,” Giaever said. “Because you cannot discuss it. It’s not proper. It is like the Catholic Church.”
Giaever argued that there’s been no global warming for the last 17 years or so (based on satellite records), weather hasn’t gotten more extreme and that global temperature has only slightly risen — and that’s based on data being “fiddled” with by scientists, he said.
“When you have a theory and the theory does not agree with the experiment then you have to cut out the theory. You were wrong with the theory,” Giaever said.
Wednesday, July 8, 2015
“I would say that basically global warming is a non-problem”
"Nobel Prize-winning scientist says Obama is ‘dead wrong’ on global warming"
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
26 comments:
The problem is "face-saving" for so many who were wrong. Much like Obama voters who still insist that we are on the right path, the true believers only harden and double down when confronted.
We can't afford to wait for all the true believers to die. Suggest we issue an amnesty and promise never to mention the topic again (unless they bring it up) if they will just abandon ship on this embarrassing government crony science project.
If there was a substantive man caused warming there wouldn't be a warming pause.
If anything, the supposed warming is supposed to be accelerating, on account of more people with more warming causing stuff, like cars and what not.
Not to mention how hooked the warming causing stuff has become to the people that already have it... Just look at Greece. They rather face the economic abyss than even considerer cutting back.
I agree. No amount of counter-evidence, model predictive failure, or exposed data manipulation and corruption will change people's stated opinion. Some will internally change their mind and accept that they were wrong, but they will never openly admit it or change their public position. I even believe that Al Gore suspects he has been wrong, but when lying pays as well as this does, a guy like him keeps that ball rolling.
@bagoh20: OT but I recall a discussion about the "dead" wind turbines at South Point in Hawaii. The rusting hulks all gone now -- only working ones tilting on.
I jumped off the cliff into the sea at South Point -- to set a good example for
my kids who followed thereafter.
Progressive politicians and other aspirational totalitarians needed a crisis to exploit in order to siphon off additional funds and so they just manufactured one. Who sez manufacturing has all been off-shored?
Grift for the turbine.
I wish the heck we were going into global warming instead of another little ice age, which is much more likely.
Chickie, I was just there a few months back. We didn't go all the way down to the point, but could see those huge things from miles away. That is such an amazing drive over the back of Mauna Loa on the way to the active volcano area. Big green epic beauty. We had the top down, music blasting, and feeling just wonderful.
I too support global warming. This has been the coolest summer I've seen in my 34 years in So. Cal.
I'm not saying that I know there is no global warming. I don't know or assume anything. I just want accurate data, not opinion on this. There has been a slight trend of +0.11 deg C per decade since 1978 using corrected data and the corrections are subjective. That's a pretty minor warming, and the period we are using to draw conclusions is so short by climate standards that it's simply guessing. The models have performed miserably at predicting actual temperatures. It seems pretty obvious that a lot of effort is being made to massage the data and the conclusions to fit the theory. Some of that is intentional and corrupt and some is just poor discipline and subconscious bias. The important point is that the trend is far from clear, and it would be irresponsible to make any big sacrifices or moves based on what we have now. It's entirely possible that warming could be exactly backwards to the longer term climate trend. For world leaders in politics or science to be pretending they know what is unknown is incredibly dangerous. Millions of lives can be ruined by the reaction to that. The trend is toward cleaner more efficient energy anyway, and I expect that will outrun any global warming even if it turns out true. Unfortunately, there isn't much money in saying everything is fine, or we just don't know yet. Scammers are making a fortune pushing changes that can't possibly happen, may not be necessary, and very possibly might be disastrous to many and at the least extremely wasteful of economic resources. I can't support that.
And all the commenters here will agree based on, you know, all the extensive groundbreaking research they've done on this.
And could anyone pick a more removed branch of science upon which to base one's specialized knowledge for criticism on this? Quantum mechanics has about as much to do with geophysics as Russian literature has to do with canine archeology.
Well, at least you give him a platform for pretending his achievement is relevant. It sure beats having his mother brag to the ladies in the nursing home about her "son. The doctah! Of philosophy! Here, let him write a prescription for you!"
Somewhere in his grave Linus Pauling has a decomposing stomach full of vitamin C pills.
No amount of counter-evidence, model predictive failure, or exposed data manipulation and corruption will change people's stated opinion.
Of which he provided: None. Zero. Zip. Zilch. Nada.
Opinion vs. Opinion! One informed and one not! Two men enter. One man leaves! Just like assholes, opinions are something everyone's entitled to! Which one will win out! Subject them to the UFC treatment!
If there was a substantive man caused warming there wouldn't be a warming pause.
Ok. Negative feedbacks and buffers aren't allowed, I guess.
If anything, the supposed warming is supposed to be accelerating, on account of more people with more warming causing stuff, like cars and what not.
How's your North Arctic Sea real estate doing?
"Of which he provided: None. Zero. Zip. Zilch. Nada."
Proving Bagoh's point that global warming belief system is religious in nature. How many times must the objective and undisputed evidence of global warming data falsification and hysterically hyped exaggerration be provided? How badly the progressives need this AGW crisis to be true and how obvious that it is not.
The double/triple down on AGW, Climate Change will continue. Can't stop the gravy train now...
Proving Bagoh's point that global warming belief system is religious in nature. How many times must the objective and undisputed evidence of global warming data falsification and hysterically hyped exaggerration be provided?
It's sounds like you're the one proving your own point. There was no falsification that ever impacted any finding of which I'm aware. If you're talking about that ridiculous "hide the decline" meme, the problem was agitators not understanding that experiments are about looking at the question asked, not distractions. To accuse Mann of malfeasance would be like accusing Galileo for looking at Jupiter, rather than at an ant hill on Pluto or something. Those agitators never got around to accepting that studies are about looking at specific questions, not by being distracted by things the study isn't designed to address, or worse, has nothing to do with it.
How badly the progressives need this AGW crisis to be true and how obvious that it is not.
How badly the conservatives need AGW denial to conform to corporate pressures when it is plainly obvious that millions of square miles of glaciers don't care about Exxon Mobil's stock price?
How badly the conservatives need AGW denial to conform to corporate pressures when it is plainly obvious that destroyed forests in the Alaskan tundra and more crops prone to tropical pestilence each year can't be swayed by Exxon Mobil's stock price?
Why can't you buy off the planet?
Why can't you get nature to listen to us? Why do we have to cooperate with nature?
Can't we just send some money to the sun? Pay off the insects?
Proven over and over, yet ignored one more time: Centralized planning and control is incompetent, wasteful, corrupt and oppressive.
Unproven yet accepted as fact:
1) A continuously warming climate caused entirely by human carbon emissions will just keep getting hotter and hotter, regardless of any other factors known or unknown, despite it's 4 billion years of fluctuation.
2) The U.N. can fix something.
3) The world can work together and leave behind it's unbroken history of competition and opportunism.
4) The biggest future emitters will sacrifice their prosperity for the world.
5) Anybody really gives a shit when the sacrifices need made. (Gore stops flying private jets)
Yea, who is really dreaming here?
1) A continuously warming climate caused entirely by human carbon emissions will just keep getting hotter and hotter, regardless of any other factors known or unknown, despite it's 4 billion years of fluctuation.
Because we should rely on "unknowns" (there aren't any known disruptions) rescuing us from the consequences of our actions.
2) The U.N. can fix something.
Not sure who relied on the U.N.
3) The world can work together and leave behind it's unbroken history of competition and opportunism.
A great reason for destroying something.
4) The biggest future emitters will sacrifice their prosperity for the world.
Not proven and not likely, given that prosperity comes from the opportunities that are taken by doing something differently.
5) Anybody really gives a shit when the sacrifices need made. (Gore stops flying private jets)
Confusing one individual's virtue for a collective consequence. This is about as ridiculous as asking why we all shouldn't be able to commit robberies if Nixon committed one.
Yea, who is really dreaming here?
Sounds like you are.
But really. Tell me more about the entrepreneurialism of doing things the same old way. Tell me about the opportunity of stagnancy. Or about the prosperity of denying needed changes. I'd like to hear about all that.
Man, it's like talking to a wall. Truthiness, mathiness, and now Scienciness! Nobel prize winning physicist? WHAT. EVER. Decades of hyped scaremongering projections that never come true? Never heard of them. Institutional falsification of data and the active concealment of inconvenient data? Irrelevant. Personally attacking skeptics because that's all you got? Well they suck and are bad people and probably racists. So there.
No objective truth, all subjective emotion and will to power. Now get out there and double down on all of the above, like a good little zombie foot soldier.
If you want to do something clearly stupid in the face of human nature, history, and facts just because you want to and you believe, then do it on your own dime and leave the rest of us alone, you fanatic. You sound like Mao selling The Great Leap Forward, which is kind of what you're selling in more ways than not.
There is nothing new about big stupid government mandated disasters.
If there's a real problem then what explains the decades of lies and hype? There is only one explanation.
Well geez, Amartel. If you fall flat on your face with the first rebuttal, there's nothing like doubling down on wrong. I suggest you consult this guy (or any other Nobel Prize winner, really), the next time you get sick. Hopefully his credential will be the right one. If not, at least you can be impressed with his credential!
And then we have baggie. Can't rebut a single thing, so he devolves into sputtering insults. Very entrepreneurial. He has the true acumen of the rare businessman who can't learn from his mistakes. A snake oil salesman who's outraged! Outraged, I tell ya, that his poison isn't selling! Stop with these new things and go back… to the future!!!
He must have a business interest at stake in this, I'm concluding.
Lol. Yup. That's the problem with AGW. It just hasn't accounted for the quantum mechanics of the situation! Hahahahahahahaha.
When a progressive theory runs into a wall they just double down on the crazy and keep on shooting random words and insults out their butts. Good to know what's in store.
Post a Comment