Hard News by Russell Brown

Read Post

Hard News: No Friends of Science

185 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 Newer→ Last

  • merc,

    Jesus's dad was going to give him a Zen (over-compensating solo father), but realized that would compromise the franchise.

    Since Dec 2006 • 2468 posts Report Reply

  • Heather Gaye,

    Illegal aliens will be the first to cop it, trust me.

    ...after they've returned to their home countries, presumably.

    Under the western motorwa… • Since Nov 2006 • 522 posts Report Reply

  • Riddley Walker,

    i think you meant iGod

    AKL • Since Feb 2007 • 890 posts Report Reply

  • merc,

    ...after they've returned to their home countries, presumably.

    Doh! Must-do-some-work...

    Since Dec 2006 • 2468 posts Report Reply

  • Ben Austin,

    We have enough nuclear weapons to destroy the world? Wait, you mean 'xplode it up to bits and pieces, or more like one of those boorish post apocalipyse films that get made every couple of months.

    If we can fully make it dust and not just perform ritual ablation then we should be rightly proud of ourselves.

    London • Since Nov 2006 • 861 posts Report Reply

  • merc,

    Well I don't know about you, but I just feel great to be part of the generation of humans who knowingly keep the whole planet on hold pending, um, you know, The Red Button (maybe if we all behave).
    Meanwhile of course, there's global warming to question.

    Since Dec 2006 • 2468 posts Report Reply

  • merc,

    Jebus that was post 444, must stop, oh no, this will be 445...

    Since Dec 2006 • 2468 posts Report Reply

  • Hamboy,

    i think you meant iGod

    I think the important thing, is did he pay for his downloads

    Christchurch • Since Dec 2006 • 162 posts Report Reply

  • merc,

    Being God means not having to carry a wallet.

    Since Dec 2006 • 2468 posts Report Reply

  • Hamboy,

    Being God means not having to carry a wallet.

    Doubt being god would stop the RIAA from sending him a letter.

    Christchurch • Since Dec 2006 • 162 posts Report Reply

  • Andrew Smith,

    I often wonder why the Climate Change debate is such a 'personal' issue. I don't think it's an issue of those who disagree with the science as being 'deniers', it is just that they see other major factors in their science measurements that can cause climate change; not only (oe even) mankind. They say the reasons behind cyclical change over the centuries has not been caused by man, but the activity of say, the sun. The disputes here caused by politics or left/right wing scraps haven't helped. We keep getting good debate and facts shoved aside by people who should know better eg politicians/scientists/christians etc. The science isn't settled. We all know that.

    Let's not attack Garth or Jim or Augie, but do all we can to be better responsible citizens in this planet anyway.

    Since Jan 2007 • 150 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown,

    I think this is an important point. On what grounds does someone like Garth or Leighton discard the findings of the IPCC? It is absurd that some people presume to make authoritative claims about the truth or falsity of scientific theory without a command of the science. Its absurd to invite us to try.

    Yep. So you just try and apply some of the usual gauges of credibility. So it's our two major national climate science organisations, the G8 science academies, NASA, the IPCC, etc, etc versus small, shifty, largely non-expert lobby groups prone to misrepresenting their credentials and their funding sources. I mean, really ...

    I've said this before, but comparisons with the GE panic are instructive. There were plenty of people on "The Left" who seized on the GE issue for political reasons, now it's the other side doing the same thing. You see the same phenomenon of circulating factoids on ropey-looking websites.

    But I think the difference is that that anti-GE lobby has actually informed some decent policy choices, by raising issues like proper crop separation (we know now, for example, that we don't want GE canola here). I'm not seeing that from the CSC.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 17967 posts Report Reply

  • merc,

    Doubt being god would stop the RIAA from sending him a letter.

    Hhehhe, very true.

    Since Dec 2006 • 2468 posts Report Reply

  • merc,

    Climate change is perfect because none of us are going to be around long enough to do a real long term analysis.

    Since Dec 2006 • 2468 posts Report Reply

  • JLM,

    I've registered just to comment on this thread, in particular to ask what was the story behind the Natrad Insight documentary on climate sceptics last Sunday? Do you think they did it because someone was jumping up and down sceaming "balance!"

    Anyway, to recycle what I posted on the frogblog thread:

    What did people think of the National Radio Insight documentary on climate sceptics that played last Sunday? Apparently it was the first of three slots on cc, and the next one is going to be devoted to “What does carbon neutrality mean?” I hope the final insight gives the real climate scientists a chance to respond to some of the more egregious things that were said last weekend.

    The sceptic documentary was very strange - I couldn’t work out if Sue Ingram was just going through the motions because she’d been told to and letting them say whatever they wanted and make fools of themselves, and her voiceover was ironical, or if she was sympathetic to what they were saying. At least she stuck mostly to the so-called “science” without letting more than a hint of the wilder political/conspiracy claims show through. But that “science” was the same old tired, self-referential mis-statements, half-truths and down-right lies I’ve been reading over and over and over on climate blogs for the last few months.

    I veered between being irritated that they were getting a whole programme to speak without being challenged, and pleasure that lame statements like “a rise in temperature of one degree is like walking into another room” was the best they could manage. I’ve decided that deniers/sceptics don’t make a serious attempt to tackle the core issue of the physics of the impact of increased CO2 in the atmosphere, and the fact that this stuff up is the result of pouring in hundreds of thousands of fossilized sunshine into our atmosphere in increasing rates. Because those two facts are indisputable.

    Instead, they attempt a “death of a thousand cuts” by poking round at every uncertainty round the edges, and pretending that that discredits the central premise. Or else they don’t even try to argue and just make outrageous statements.

    Judy Martin's southern sl… • Since Apr 2007 • 221 posts Report Reply

  • Andrew Stevenson,

    The science isn't settled. We all know that.

    I thought the point was the science is settled - G8 science acadamies, NASA, IPCC etc are 90% certain of predictions (and the cause being anthropogenic CO2). That's good enough odds for me, and like an earlier post said a lot of the actions you take to mitigate climate change save you money and make you healthier...

    Let's not attack Garth or Jim or Augie, but do all we can to be better responsible citizens in this planet anyway.

    I'm all for being responsible (in moderation); but if someone is wrong, and their being wrong affects others, isn't it the responsible thing to correct them?

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 194 posts Report Reply

  • 3410,

    The point surely is that, whilst the science is not quite 100% certain (and what is?), this must be weighed against the fact that, if the theory is correct, then we are 100% fucked if we don't start doing something about it, quick smart.

    Auckland • Since Jan 2007 • 2618 posts Report Reply

  • Lyndon Hood,

    Collaboration Between NIWA And Metservice

    In a joint statement MetService Chief Executive Mr Paul Reid and NIWA's Acting Chief Executive Dr Bryce Cooper say: "The relationship issues reported in the media are not those of the current people involved. Both organisations are continuing to work together to ensure that any investments made by either organisation are maximised and coordinated for the benefit of all New Zealanders."

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 1091 posts Report Reply

  • WH,

    Yep. So you just try and apply some of the usual gauges of credibility. So it's our two major national climate science organisations, the G8 science academies, NASA, the IPCC, etc, etc versus small, shifty, largely non-expert lobby groups prone to misrepresenting their credentials and their funding sources. I mean, really ...

    I agree. You don't have to be a scientist to read and undertand the basic conclusions of the IPCC policy maker's guide (which was, after all, written to be acted upon by non-scientists), or make an assessment of where the balance of scientific opinion lies.

    It seems to me that you do need to be a scientist if you are going to dismiss the IPCC's conclusions as some sort of UN inspired hoax. Even if there's a 10% chance that Garth is right, there is a 100% chance that he is talking out of his... um, hat.

    Since Nov 2006 • 528 posts Report Reply

  • Jonty,

    .....and they could have added: "And any comments to the contrary are merely more of Augie Auer's delusions".

    Katikati • Since Mar 2007 • 100 posts Report Reply

  • Linda S,

    Arrived back in Australia this morning after a visit to farming parents and extended family in NZ. Few heated discussions about this topic during that time. Received a gleeful call this afternoon that the Herald has a fantastic article about global warming today - just proving their case that it is all nonsense!

    Our discussions in NZ were more about Kyoto and why NZ is the ONLY country that records the cow fart methane and are then duly taxed immensely for our emissions. Is this true? The financial effect of the kyoto taxes were what they seemed were most upset about - that the farmers in NZ are the ones taking the blame. So they will deny it till the end regardless. Inflamed by the numbers of 4 wheel drives on the road AND travelling the country for weekends away AND flying all over the world for fun - all of which makes a few cow farts quite negligible!

    Personally I don't actually care whether global warming is human induced or cyclical or solar induced or whatever. We are currently trashing our planet and anything that makes people and industry change to a more earth friendly existence is all good by me!

    Victoria, Australia • Since Apr 2007 • 1 posts Report Reply

  • Riddley Walker,

    any comments to the contrary are merely more of Augie Auer's delusions

    yeah, who'd a thunk it wasn't just Augie being all bitter and twisted because nobody can be bothered listening to his drone anymore?

    AKL • Since Feb 2007 • 890 posts Report Reply

  • cindy baxter,

    Check out George Monbiot in yesterday's Guardian

    "The drafting of reports by the world's pre-eminent group of climate scientists is an odd process. For months scientists contributing to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change tussle over the evidence. Nothing gets published unless it achieves consensus. This means that the panel's reports are conservative - even timid. It also means that they are as trustworthy as a scientific document can be.

    Then, when all is settled among the scientists, the politicians sweep in and seek to excise from the summaries anything that threatens their interests."

    His point:

    "This is the opposite of the story endlessly repeated in the rightwing press: that the IPCC, in collusion with governments, is conspiring to exaggerate the science. No one explains why governments should seek to amplify their own failures. In the wacky world of the climate conspiracists no explanations are required. The world's most conservative scientific body has somehow been transformed into a conspiracy of screaming demagogues."

    auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 76 posts Report Reply

  • merc,

    I have been surfing in the sea for 30+ years, all over the world (mea culpa). I watch the weather like most people watch their bank. I can state unequivicably that Niwa and MetService are world class, work together and provide exceptional marine data, including swell forecasting data. Their websites rock and I literally plan my life around them.

    Since Dec 2006 • 2468 posts Report Reply

  • Riddley Walker,

    if i watched the sea like i watch my bank i'd have drowned long ago.
    i do watch for rain though. i love the rain. quack quack.

    AKL • Since Feb 2007 • 890 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.