Burt Rutan and Climate Change. In early , The Wall Street Journal published a letter supposedly from 16 scientists saying there was no need to worry about. Elbert Leander “Burt” Rutan Credentials B.S. Aeronautical Wall Street Journal opinion piece titled “No Need to Panic About Global Warming. the New York Academy of Sciences;; Burt Rutan, aerospace engineer, The first myth in the article is the well-worn “global warming stopped.
|Published (Last):||25 October 2017|
|PDF File Size:||14.4 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||2.18 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
The Latest Denialist Plea for Climate Change Inaction Posted on 31 January by dana As they tend to do from time to time in an effort to distract from the climate science consensusa group of scientists who are also climate “skeptics” have published an waeming op-edtrying to make the case against taking action rufan address climate change. Among the 16 scientists who signed a Wall Street Journal op-ed titled No Need to Panic About Global Warming, only four had published peer-reviewed research related to climate change.
The film showcases scientists, economists, politicians, writers, and others who are sceptical of the scientific consensus on anthropogenic global warming. Adobe pdf version – 6.
Dwyer has a PhD is in Organic Chemistry. German Institute for Economic Research and Watkiss et al. Publicity for the programme states that global warming is ‘a lie’ and ‘the biggest scam of modern times.
Moreover, why should we care what these few self-proclaimed “distinguished scientists and engineers” think we bjrt do about climate change? He also wrote a book titled The Greatest Hoax: Order by newest oldest recommendations.
Its alarmists can use it to destroy US global competitiveness through Cap and Trade taxes. What happens when we shed our pro-science bias and start respecting creativity, flair, hunches and guts as much as knowledge, expertise, data and brains? The second myth is that Kevin Trenberth’s quote-mined comment ” The fact is that we can’t account for glibal lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t ” is an admission that global warming stopped.
In reality, it’s the same sort of Gish Gallop we’ve come to expect from climate denialists. Login via the left margin or if you’re new, register here. To gloss over these complexities with the simplistic “CO2 is plant food” argument is an insult to the readers’ intelligence.
Various global temperature projections vs. I could use the Third Reich, the Big Lie. The Consensus Project Website. If he could have supported them in a factual way he might have come off better,but in the end he appeared to be simply parroting the denier party line.
John Hartz at If I need heart surgery, I’m not going to allow a dentist to perform it, even if it’s the best dentist in the world.
Burt Rutan on Climate Change
In reality, because its emissions endanger public health and welfare through its impacts on climate change, by definition CO2 is a pollutant according to the US Clean Air Act.
The lack of expertise and numerous conflicts of interest aside, let’s evaluate their arguments on their own ruhan or more accurately, lack thereof. My bias is based on fear of Government expansion and the observation of AGW data presentation fraud – and not based on any financial or other personal benefit. Just when we thought the op-ed letter couldn’t get worse, these fake skeptics have wagming gall to suggest that we “follow gobal money,” because climate “alarmism” supposedly brings bountiful research funding, “an excuse for governments to raise taxes”, “big donations” for environmental groups, and other similar tinfoil-hattery.
I was unaware that Rutan held those views. Their informed opinions are the ones we should heed when it comes to climate science, not those of astronauts and physicians. My work has long taken the view that policies to slow global warming would have net economic benefits, in the trillion of dollars of present value.
Positive Feedbacks The denialist op-ed continues to confuse the issue by claiming ” Climate Heroes and Villains of I have advocated a carbon tax for many years as the best way to attack the issue. Use the controls in the far right panel to increase or decrease the number of terms automatically displayed or to completely turn that feature off.
Hobbies • Global Warming
It would not surprise me if it did. Byron Smith at It kind of reminds me It also ignores the other adverse impacts of increasing CO2, like ocean acidification. It also has sections on climate adaptation and scientific consensus. We must keep the debate open and listen to the voices of scientists and non-scientists alike. Aside from continuing to misunderstand that the “missing heat” is about having an inadequate global climate observational network mainly because we don’t have good measurements of deep ocean heatobservational data have demonstrated that water vaporand likely cloudsare indeed positive feedbacks.
Denying the Consensus The op-ed begins with the wholly unsupported assertion that: Lindzen is the only climate scientist of note on the entire list, and is mainly noteworthy for his history of being wrong on climate issues.
CCC is naive, non-scientific, irrelevant, hopeless and oxymoronic. As usual, the article is little more than a regurgitation of a number of climate myths we have debunked at Waring Science.