Former NASA Scientist: Global Warming is Nonsense

"The term 'climate change' is meaningless. The Earth's climate has been changing since time immemorial, that is since the Earth was formed 1,000 million years ago. The theory of 'man-made climate change' is an unsubstantiated hypothesis [about] our climate [which says it] has been adversely affected by the burning of fossil fuels in the last 100 years, causing the average temperature on the earth’s surface to increase very slightly but with disastrous environmental consequences.

Former NASA Scientist: Global Warming is Nonsense

I wonder how the climate change camp will try to spin this one...

After all... this is a former NASA scientist. It amazes me, that they still keep trying to sell this garbage as scientific fact, when so many scientists have stated that it is bunk.

Now, we have a former government scientist coming out of the climate change closet, so to speak...

It will be interesting to see if the sheep can stay together, now that the "sheep dogs" are starting to bail...

Hang the bloke, where was he when he WAS a NASA scientist. Now his statement means less then little.

This is not the way science works. If you tell me that you have a theory there is a teapot in orbit between the earth and the moon, it's not up to me to prove it does not exist, it's up to you to provide the reproducible scientific evidence for your theory.
"Such evidence for the man-made climate change theory has not been forthcoming.


so is he saying it doesn't exist or that he just hasn't seen evidence to prove that it does or is happening. What I mean is, just because he hasn't seen the evidence doesn't mean that it isn't happening, isn't there a saying sorta like 'the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence'. I'm not saying that global warming is happening (although I will point out that it used to be Climate change, then global warming and now global cooling) I'm just wondering what he meant, maybe I read it wrong.

Just because he is a government scientist doesn't mean anything. He got the job because he has friends. Doesn't mean he is intelligent either because he has an army of contractors to do all of the work.

Most US government employees are ex military and have little in the way of skills in the professions that are assigned to.

No offense to ex military because many are very intelligent. I see a different light in many of the US government workers I have been exposed to.

originally posted by: MessageforAll
Hang the bloke, where was he when he WAS a NASA scientist. Now his statement means less then little.

He was probably staying quiet about it all per orders stating that he had to while still an employee of NASA. That's my guess.

My take on the whole thing is that certain people try to say that humans are causing the earth, or it's atmosphere, to do things that aren't natural. As if to say that we have a certain power over nature that can change it's way of doing things. As if to say that we are important and influential beings on this planet in regards to nature and it's workings.

We're not. The people who try to claim otherwise by trying to claim that WE have an impact on nature have delusions of grandeur.

The global temperatures have been rising exponentially in the last 75 to 100 years. This is a cause for concern and is an indication of global warming.

originally posted by: madmac5150

I wonder how the climate change camp will try to spin this one...

Well the guy is entitled to his opinion.

As am I

So will you start a thread on how I think he is wrong?

originally posted by: DeepImpactX

originally posted by: MessageforAll
Hang the bloke, where was he when he WAS a NASA scientist. Now his statement means less then little.

He was probably staying quiet about it all per orders stating that he had to while still an employee of NASA. That's my guess.

My take on the whole thing is that certain people try to say that humans are causing the earth, or it's atmosphere, to do things that aren't natural. As if to say that we have a certain power over nature that can change it's way of doing things. As if to say that we are important and influential beings on this planet in regards to nature and it's workings.

We're not. The people who try to claim otherwise by trying to claim that WE have an impact on nature have delusions of grandeur.

Maybe I should amend that by saying "positive" influence and impact. There are things I don't understand about the impacts of offshore drilling, fracking, etc.... that may be having a negative impact on the earth.

a reply to: eManym

No one will question the fact temperatures are rising, they have been rising on MARS to. The big question is whether or not man made.

Because of this joke, it's costing us average citizen a lot of money.

a reply to: madmac5150

From your source:

The Earth's climate has been changing since time immemorial, that is since the Earth was formed 1,000 million years ago.

??
So not 4.55 billion years old, as most scientist agree on?
Right there my distrust of the man begins.

The theory is that the CO2 emitted by burning fossil fuel is the 'greenhouse gas' causes 'global warming' - in fact, water is a much more powerful greenhouse gas

...

An early and respected pioneer in CO2 levels, C. D. Keeling would disagree, for one.

originally posted by: MessageforAll
a reply to: eManym

No one will question the fact temperatures are rising, they have been rising on MARS to. The big question is whether or not man made.

That is exactly how I feel. I can agree that the temperatures are rising, no worries but whether that is something we are contributing to is another question. It could be the Sun warming up, going through some part of space I don't know, there is to much happening in the universe to simply blame it on our actions and our actions alone.

a reply to: madmac5150

It's an OpEd slam piece written by a retired chemist who happened to work for NASA. If he had any real information or Data to counter things like rising CO2 emissions and their correlation to climate and temperature he would have written a paper and submitted it for peer review. That's how real proponents of science work. One telling quote from him is

Anecdotal evidence doesn’t mean anything in science, its not significant.

. The entire thing is so hilariously ironic because the entire interview is nothing BUT anecdotal. He supplies no data to back up his assertions, its nothing but the personal opinions of a marginalized old man( disclaimer, that last statement is just my opinion, not a statement of fact that I can support). By his own criteria, his statement is not significant.

a reply to: madmac5150

For every scientist that claims man made global warming is a joke, there are 10 other scientists that will strongly disagree with him.

When I drive through places like St. Charles, LA., I don't need either a scientist or a tooth fairy to tell me that what we're putting into the air is bad for this planet.

originally posted by: eManym
The global temperatures have been rising exponentially in the last 75 to 100 years. This is a cause for concern and is an indication of global warming.

Human beings are very adaptable creatures. We have been adapting to the changes nature brings us for far longer than 100 years. If we are responsible for this, assuming that "this" is even real, that doesn't take away from the fact that we will adapt to this as well.

What you're stating is what some people call an insidious change. A change that is happening so slightly and steadily that it isn't really noticed. Like the frog in water pot analogy. Personally, I think it's all bunk.

And finally, you say this is a cause for concern. Why? What makes you think this isn't a part of a cycle that has been going on for thousands of years ? The earth cools, then warms, then cools.....it has probably been doing this for far longer than we have been keeping track of what it does, and there is nothing that we can do about it except adapt. The earth is a self-healing entity. A forest burns down and then re-grows itself in it's own way. Our intervention may speed up the process, but trust me, the earth would get along just fine without us. A plate shifts for whatever reason and changes the land/water landscape. It's not the end of the world.....it's a change. But a case like that would mean the end of the "world" for a great many people because they would have no idea how to acclimate to that kind of change. And they don't know because a great many people just don't pay attention to the earth and how it works anymore.

The earth isn't the problem, we're the problem because we are piss-poor stewards.

When climate scientists can predict weather a week away correctly, Ill pay more attention to what they have to say when they predict what the weather will be 100 years from now.

Science once thought the earth was flat.
Science once thought women could not get higher education because of their wee brains.

But this time, science is somehow infallible.

(roll eyes)

[SNIP]editby]edit on 26-4-2014 by beezzer because: (no reason given)