Aliens Cause Global Warming?
By debrakcarey
@debrakcarey (19887)
United States
October 27, 2009 8:27pm CST
I'm in the process of reading a lecture by Michael Crichton on global warming. He gave this lecture at CalTech and it is well worth the read. Here's some quotes.
"Rather, I want to discuss the history of several widely-publicized beliefs and to point to what I consider an emerging crisis in the whole enterprise of science-namely the increasingly uneasy relationship between hard science and public policy."
AND....
"I also expected science to banish the evils of human thought---prejudice and superstition, irrational beliefs and false fears. I expected science to be, in Carl Sagan's memorable phrase, "a candle in a demon haunted world." And here, I am not so pleased with the impact of science. Rather than serving as a cleansing force, science has in some instances been seduced by the more ancient lures of politics and publicity."
And this....
I want to pause here and talk about this notion of consensus, and the rise of what has been called consensus science. I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you're being had.
Let's be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world.
In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus. There is no such thing as consensus science. If it's consensus, it isn't science. If it's science, it isn't consensus. Period.
Now for the infamous link, so you can see how he ties this in with global warming: http://www.s8int.com/crichton.html
1 person likes this
3 responses
@redyellowblackdog (10629)
• United States
28 Oct 09
Michael Crichton was practically a genius. Even still, people with almost 1/2 half his IQ declared him an idoit or a moron for his views concerning man made global warming. That sort of behavior always amazes me, but without surprising me. Little men do belittle the great men.
@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
28 Oct 09
Both responses obviously did not read the article. OH well....if you care to try again, you would see that he is NOT in agreement with the current politically driven consensus.
1 person likes this
@redyellowblackdog (10629)
• United States
28 Oct 09
I did read the article. I am very much already aware of the late Michael Crichton's views on man made global warming. Michael Crichton very much disagreed with the notion that man caused global warming. Michael Crichton was very much disappointed with the behavior of today's scientists in their treatment of dissenters such as himself.
What in my response makes you think I misunderstood the article or did not read it?
@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
28 Oct 09
To quote:
"The 1995 IPCC draft report said, "Any claims of positive detection of significant climate change are likely to remain controversial until uncertainties in the total natural variability of the climate system are reduced." It also said, "No study to date has positively attributed all or part of observed climate changes to anthropogenic causes."
Those statements were removed, and in their place appeared: "The balance of evidence suggests a discernable human influence on climate." What is clear, however, is that on this issue, science and policy have become inextricably mixed to the point where it will be difficult, if not impossible, to separate them out. It is possible for an outside observer to ask serious questions about the conduct of investigations into global warming, such as whether we are taking appropriate steps to improve the quality of our observational data records, whether we are systematically obtaining the information that will clarify existing uncertainties, whether we have any organized disinterested mechanism to direct research in this contentious area."
1 person likes this
@Destiny007 (5805)
• United States
28 Oct 09
Global warming and Climate Change is caused by the Sun, not by man.
Even the Russians now think so...
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=114261
@Destiny007 (5805)
• United States
29 Oct 09
Everything I have read indicates that they won't..... however we will just have to wait and see...
@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
28 Oct 09
So, are THEY going to sign the Climate Treaty in December?
@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
30 Oct 09
It would sure take a load of worry off me, if they didn't.