7 thoughts on “Open for comments”

1. Polite? Welcome to the world of Internet science.

   Looks good. Of course, I tested that by ‘view source’.

   Thanks, and good luck with changing the world, my views on that are already pretty widely known, though, so I won’t repeat them here.

2. Hansen’s claims for ‘tipping points’ don’t really have any scientific basis and he is certainly a world leader in climate alarmism. He over-estimates climate sensitivity to CO2 and considers that nearly all feedbacks are positive – if this was the case during the history of earth’s climate – we wouldn’t be here now. His PNAS paper claiming that the current climate is the warmest for 12,000 or 1,000,000 years is absurd. He has also had to re-adjust the GISS temperature rankings thanks to an error spotted by Steve McIntyre. Hansen lost the essential ‘objectivity’ required for a scientist to produce meaningful results long ago, which is a great shame considering that he seems to be such a talented scientist.

3. That the earth’s climate is “tipping” because of a single driver is an insulting claim to make to any scientist. The complexity of the earth’s atmosphere is almost unimaginable, having literally dozens or more parameters that “drive” climate. Of course some will have stronger effects than others, but nowhere have I seen anyone analyze the system from the point of view of sensitivity to every one of the potential drivers. And no where do I read any skepticism about humanity’s influence on global climate, the deal is done. Where are the comparisons of humanity’s effect relative to the natural production of greenhouse gases which dominate? Where are the comparisons with solar output? It is absurd and it scares me that the world’s governments want to make sweeping changes in the face of serious doubt, and uncertain outcome.

4. Will be regular reader of your blog. Good to have you online this way. Wonder if ever you have space or time, if you might blog on my “wild and crazy” concept of “polar cities” for survivors of global warming in year 2500 or so? There is good news story about them here, both pro and con. Do you think it might come to that, and should we start ”planning” them now?

   http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=40663

5. Welcome to the blogosphere.
   I can see already that your new pages will give voice to the controversy!
   I’m looking forward to Terry Gross’ interview this afternoon.
   Atkinsopht

6. I picked up your first book ‘Thin Ice’ two weeks ago at the library noticing it in a display with a climate theme. I was interested in tips on mountaineering I might get from the climbing on equatorial mountain glaciers by Lonnie Thompson’s group and the climate topics. The climate science with the ice cores was very interesting and the stories and people they met on their trips to the mountains that were climbed. Then I saw your second book, ‘Censoring Science’ just came out, which I just finished today. I was aware to some degree from news reports about NASA, global warming and the issues with the new moon/mars program, but no way close to the details of censorship in your book from Dr. Hansen’s and other NASA employee’s perspective. Also, the climate science, and proving process in the scientific community, was more detained than other books I have read. One part of the solution is electric cars with solar/wind charging, or if you get hydroelectric, nuclear, or wind grid charging. The Think electric cars just started production again in Norway recently and should be available in the UK in the comming year or so. In the US Telsa has a sport electric car that is taking orders and should be supplying soon. Think cars used to be in the US until their provisional status ended and many if not all were destroyed! Hopefully we can get them approved permanently soon.

7. I look forward to your biography of Trofim Lysenko and the terrible struggle he had establishing his genetic theory when faced with the biased opposition of the corrupt Mendelian geneticists.

Comments are closed.