"There is an overwhelming consensus among scientists working in the field of climate that the planet is warming and that the human-generated increase in concentration of C02 and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere is contributing to that warming. There is no major national scientific body which dissents from that view. All major scientific bodies - the CSIRO here, Britain's Royal Society, the AAAS in the United States and others - share the view.
Dissent comes from a small minority of scientists working on climate..."
I don't know of a single scientist, not one, who would argue against the statement: "...the planet is warming and that the human-generated increase in concentration of C02 and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere is contributing to that warming."The loose statement Benson uses to define the consensus for climate change includes all the scientists I know of that are often derided on the ABC as "sceptics" or "deniers". The debate on the science is much more sophisticated than this. Marius may have interviewed a lot of PM's but it is clear from this cliche ridden article he knows little of the current scientific debate in climate science.
So here's a challenge to Marius Benson. Name one of those scientists (and provide a link to the evidence). Just one!
Further into his piece Marius quotes the great Richard Feynman: "In general we look for a new law by the following process. First we guess it. Then we compute the consequences of the guess to see what would be implied if this law that we guessed is right. Then we compare the result of the computation to nature, with experiment or experience, compare it directly with observation, to see if it works. If it disagrees with experiment it is wrong... That's all there is to it."
As an exercise in science we suggest Marius compare IPCC model projections for global temperature with current measured temperature trends and put the result to the Feynman test. He might be surprised at the outcome.
Further into his piece Marius quotes the great Richard Feynman: "In general we look for a new law by the following process. First we guess it. Then we compute the consequences of the guess to see what would be implied if this law that we guessed is right. Then we compare the result of the computation to nature, with experiment or experience, compare it directly with observation, to see if it works. If it disagrees with experiment it is wrong... That's all there is to it."
As an exercise in science we suggest Marius compare IPCC model projections for global temperature with current measured temperature trends and put the result to the Feynman test. He might be surprised at the outcome.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please keep to the topic. Abusive comments and bad language are simply not tolerated. Note that your comment may take a little while to appear.
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.