07 Dec 06
David Deming, an associate professor at the University of Oklahoma and an adjunct scholar with the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA), testified this morning at a special hearing of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee:
http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=77195
07 Dec 06
1 edit
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterIt's the NCPA again, which is a right wing think tank. First all the stuff quoted is hearsay, he doesn't have any documentary proof of the allegations he makes which means he's making it up. Second things like the medieval warming period really isn't a problem for the models. It really is as simple as this - if you stuff lots of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere you get a change in the environment. The models show we are in serious trouble unless we get emissions down pretty sharpish. There hasn't been a paper published in a peer reviewed journal claiming anything other than human induced global warming is happenning for years. Arguing against the evidence is like saying trees don't exist when you're in a forest. Going into denial about it really won't help. Anyway, you should be pleased, the overdependence of our economies on oil makes them vulnerable, so gaining energy from other sources can only be beneficial.
David Deming, an associate professor at the University of Oklahoma and an adjunct scholar with the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA), testified this morning at a special hearing of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee:
http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=77195
07 Dec 06
Originally posted by DeepThoughtlol:
Oh and he's a complete misogynist as well. http://www.nature.com/nature/debates/women/women_25.html
'If gender equity is really desirable in the scientific professions, why not in other areas as well? Approximately 94 per cent of all prisoners in the United States are male. Should we increase parole opportunities for male prisoners and pursure the prosecution of females more vigorously?'
07 Dec 06
Originally posted by ElleEffSeeeHere is his original article -- you might need a subscription to access it:
Which articles is he referring to?
Climatic Warming in North America: Analysis of
Borehole Temperatures
David Deming, et al.
Science 268, 1576 (1995);
DOI: 10.1126/science.268.5217.1576
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/reprint/268/5217/1576.pdf
07 Dec 06
Originally posted by DeepThoughtThe only reason you belittle the scholarship of so-called "right wing" think tanks is because the information they produce does nothing to bolster your "left wing" world view. Facts are facts -- they are neither right nor left.
It's the NCPA again, which is a right wing think tank...
07 Dec 06
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterLike the fact global warming is happening?
The only reason you belittle the scholarship of so-called "right wing" think tanks is because the information they produce does nothing to bolster your "left wing" world view. Facts are facts -- they are neither right nor left.
07 Dec 06
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterWell you see, you bring up a subject and use some article by them as an authority. I therefore undermine the authority to weaken your point. You could in principle do the same to me, but I try to choose authorities that are less easy to undermine.
The only reason you belittle the scholarship of so-called "right wing" think tanks is because the information they produce does nothing to bolster your "left wing" world view. Facts are facts -- they are neither right nor left.
You've been known to claim the the entire UN is on a free lunch before because they say things that contradict your right wing world view. Anyway, I don't agree that there's such thing as a "pure" fact, they always come with some kind of value judgement. Therefore I think that it's only fair that I should point out where these people are coming from.
07 Dec 06
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterJeez it seems we can't even get hold of an abstract to see what on earth the paper is about. However judging from its title (Climatic warming in north america) I don't think it will answer my question, which is where is his evidence that there is global hysteria in the media? Which media articles is he referring to?
Here is his original article -- you might need a subscription to access it:
Climatic Warming in North America: Analysis of
Borehole Temperatures
David Deming, et al.
Science 268, 1576 (1995);
DOI: 10.1126/science.268.5217.1576
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/reprint/268/5217/1576.pdf
07 Dec 06
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterA subscription is neccessary to read it. It was written in 1995 although I'll grant you it was peer reviewed, but as far as I can tell from the reading the reference you gave in the initial post does not speculate as to the cause of the warming, it only says that it happenned. Any idea if there have been any subsequent studies?
Here is his original article -- you might need a subscription to access it:
Climatic Warming in North America: Analysis of
Borehole Temperatures
David Deming, et al.
Science 268, 1576 (1995);
DOI: 10.1126/science.268.5217.1576
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/reprint/268/5217/1576.pdf
07 Dec 06
Originally posted by DeepThoughtThis is a shame. I find that the vast majority of scientists have pdfs of their papers published on their homepage so that even if you are not subscribed to a journal, you can still get hold of the paper. However this is David Deming's homepage:
A subscription is neccessary to read it.
http://faculty-staff.ou.edu/D/David.Deming-1/