What Are You Going To Do Today?
- NoEnzLefttoSplit - Feb 10, 2025 - 10:29pm
Republican Party
- haresfur - Feb 10, 2025 - 10:11pm
February 2025 Photo Theme - Wet
- KurtfromLaQuinta - Feb 10, 2025 - 8:45pm
If not RP, what are you listening to right now?
- Red_Dragon - Feb 10, 2025 - 6:17pm
Dialing 1-800-Manbird
- Red_Dragon - Feb 10, 2025 - 6:12pm
Name My Band
- Isabeau - Feb 10, 2025 - 5:48pm
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •
- oldviolin - Feb 10, 2025 - 5:39pm
Google Inc.
- Steely_D - Feb 10, 2025 - 5:05pm
Other Medical Stuff
- Steely_D - Feb 10, 2025 - 4:30pm
Musky Mythology
- R_P - Feb 10, 2025 - 1:50pm
New York Dolls
- Steely_D - Feb 10, 2025 - 12:25pm
Live Music
- oldviolin - Feb 10, 2025 - 12:19pm
Bug Reports & Feature Requests
- islander - Feb 10, 2025 - 11:39am
Israel
- R_P - Feb 10, 2025 - 11:36am
Test
- Red_Dragon - Feb 10, 2025 - 11:30am
RP dropouts on BlueNode
- frankfrench - Feb 10, 2025 - 10:53am
Peanut Butter Recall
- Proclivities - Feb 10, 2025 - 10:32am
USA! USA! USA!
- R_P - Feb 10, 2025 - 10:11am
NY Times Strands
- geoff_morphini - Feb 10, 2025 - 9:48am
Wordle - daily game
- marko86 - Feb 10, 2025 - 9:46am
NYTimes Connections
- geoff_morphini - Feb 10, 2025 - 9:44am
Trump
- Steely_D - Feb 10, 2025 - 9:12am
Radio Paradise NFL Pick'em Group
- Coaxial - Feb 10, 2025 - 8:25am
DIY
- ScottFromWyoming - Feb 10, 2025 - 8:22am
Are you ready for some football?
- miamizsun - Feb 10, 2025 - 8:20am
Fires
- miamizsun - Feb 10, 2025 - 7:38am
Today in History
- Red_Dragon - Feb 10, 2025 - 7:10am
Radio Paradise Comments
- GeneP59 - Feb 10, 2025 - 7:03am
Food
- Isabeau - Feb 10, 2025 - 6:59am
Strange & Cool Music
- miamizsun - Feb 10, 2025 - 5:13am
Love & Hate
- miamizsun - Feb 10, 2025 - 4:40am
Banksters
- R_P - Feb 9, 2025 - 1:51pm
Bluesky - instead of Twitter
- ScottFromWyoming - Feb 9, 2025 - 8:49am
Concert Reviews
- miamizsun - Feb 9, 2025 - 7:48am
New Music
- R_P - Feb 8, 2025 - 6:27pm
Why do the Monkees never get played on R.P?
- KurtfromLaQuinta - Feb 8, 2025 - 3:28pm
Immigration
- R_P - Feb 8, 2025 - 3:23pm
Birthday wishes
- oldviolin - Feb 8, 2025 - 3:18pm
Talk Behind Their Backs Forum
- islander - Feb 8, 2025 - 2:50pm
Happy Birthday!!!
- Red_Dragon - Feb 8, 2025 - 1:09pm
Friends of Bill W?
- miamizsun - Feb 8, 2025 - 1:05pm
New Yorker Magazine (Feb10, 2025) "The Mail"
- Isabeau - Feb 8, 2025 - 6:26am
The Obituary Page
- islander - Feb 7, 2025 - 8:40pm
Mini Meetups - Post Here!
- buddy - Feb 7, 2025 - 5:27pm
Breaking News
- Steely_D - Feb 7, 2025 - 4:54pm
What Makes You Laugh?
- black321 - Feb 7, 2025 - 10:56am
Solar / Wind / Geothermal / Efficiency Energy
- R_P - Feb 7, 2025 - 10:20am
Environment
- Isabeau - Feb 7, 2025 - 9:10am
Photography Forum - Your Own Photos
- Alchemist - Feb 6, 2025 - 11:02pm
I'm Thankful For..
- haresfur - Feb 6, 2025 - 10:51pm
Main Mix Playlist
- buddy - Feb 6, 2025 - 5:48pm
Trump Lies™
- Proclivities - Feb 6, 2025 - 12:18pm
Play counts for songs?
- basepi - Feb 6, 2025 - 11:53am
Climate Change
- R_P - Feb 6, 2025 - 11:28am
The Grateful Dead
- black321 - Feb 6, 2025 - 7:19am
Things You Thought Today
- Steely_D - Feb 5, 2025 - 8:56pm
Surfing!
- kurtster - Feb 5, 2025 - 8:01pm
Canada
- R_P - Feb 5, 2025 - 7:57pm
RADIO 2050
- GeneP59 - Feb 5, 2025 - 3:32pm
Democratic Party
- haresfur - Feb 5, 2025 - 11:35am
Lyrics That Remind You of Someone
- buddy - Feb 4, 2025 - 8:34pm
Pernicious Pious Proclivities Particularized Prodigiously
- Red_Dragon - Feb 4, 2025 - 6:55pm
kurtster's quiet vinyl
- black321 - Feb 4, 2025 - 6:22pm
The Dragons' Roost
- triskele - Feb 4, 2025 - 2:17pm
China
- R_P - Feb 4, 2025 - 11:31am
Strips, cartoons, illustrations
- ColdMiser - Feb 4, 2025 - 8:09am
New music and ratings
- William - Feb 3, 2025 - 6:43pm
Race in America
- R_P - Feb 3, 2025 - 5:34pm
Anti-War
- R_P - Feb 3, 2025 - 4:46pm
The Secret
- ScottFromWyoming - Feb 3, 2025 - 4:41pm
How's the weather?
- Isabeau - Feb 3, 2025 - 2:09pm
Mixtape Culture Club
- miamizsun - Feb 3, 2025 - 1:54pm
Tweaking My Favorites Mix
- Zep - Feb 2, 2025 - 12:30pm
Derplahoma!
- Red_Dragon - Feb 2, 2025 - 8:59am
Advertising on RP
- mpforce - Feb 2, 2025 - 8:49am
|
Index »
Radio Paradise/General »
General Discussion »
Climate Change
|
Page: Previous 1, 2, 3 ... 131, 132, 133 |
Zep

Location: Funkytown 
|
Posted:
Nov 23, 2009 - 11:51am |
|
HazzeSwede wrote:On my TV morning show this morning;The Norwegians has come up with a new way to make electricity. It will be on full scale in a year.I have been watching BBC and CNN for something in english,nothing yet but I am sure there will be. To complex for me to even try to relay but the working prototype uses sweet water and salt water only. Some way in the gizmo they got it driving a turbine,but hey,he was prolly just trollin for money for his experiment now takin place only in the Caymans.  Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion?I did a master's thesis on it.
|
|
HazzeSwede

Location: Hammerdal Gender:  
|
Posted:
Nov 23, 2009 - 10:28am |
|
On my TV morning show this morning;The Norwegians has come up with a new way to make electricity. It will be on full scale in a year.I have been watching BBC and CNN for something in english,nothing yet but I am sure there will be. To complex for me to even try to relay but the working prototype uses sweet water and salt water only. Some way in the gizmo they got it driving a turbine,but hey,he was prolly just trollin for money for his experiment now takin place only in the Caymans.
|
|
rosedraws

Location: close to the edge Gender:  
|
Posted:
Nov 23, 2009 - 10:03am |
|
|
|
Welly

Location: Lotusland Gender:  
|
Posted:
Nov 23, 2009 - 9:52am |
|
|
|
Lazy8

Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana Gender:  
|
Posted:
Nov 23, 2009 - 9:18am |
|
dionysius wrote:Good piece, Zep. Now, let's hear the "refutations" (of course there won't be; this will simply be ignored).
I'm seeing a lot of things being ignored, mostly the reprehensible behavior exhibited in the emails. I make my living with applied science. The whole architecture of science requires skepticism, challenge, and honest response. A scientist is expected to respond to a challenge with evidence, not authority. What the hacked information shows is a group of people so committed to their conclusions that they will say anything to convince people they're right—hide contradictory data, refuse to talk to anyone challenging their methods or conclusion, and to simply make things up. If you live and work outside the sciences it may be hard to imagine how deeply offensive that is. This is despicable behavior for a scientist. In my world that kind of behavior would wreck my credibility—no one would take anything I said seriously again. Of course, that doesn't make the conclusions they so badly want us to share wrong, but if you want to argue with the authority of science you have to use the rigor of science. If they're right the evidence, honestly presented, will show it. If they're wrong no amount of celebrity endorsements will make them right. The hand-wringing about this is misplaced, and the response of circling the wagons and attacking opponents is counterproductive. Maybe that helps the authors of these emails preserve their positions, but it isn't helping the cause of understanding climate change. The folks at UEA need to decide what their role is here: are they scientists, committed to a process of discovery of the truth, or are they political agitators pressing for a cause? They've shown they can't be both.
|
|
dionysius

Location: The People's Republic of Austin Gender:  
|
Posted:
Nov 23, 2009 - 8:21am |
|
Good piece, Zep. Now, let's hear the "refutations" (of course there won't be; this will simply be ignored).
|
|
HazzeSwede

Location: Hammerdal Gender:  
|
Posted:
Nov 23, 2009 - 8:01am |
|
Bravo,,Zep !!!!
|
|
Zep

Location: Funkytown 
|
Posted:
Nov 23, 2009 - 7:56am |
|
Leaked email climate smear was a PR disaster for UEASource. There was no evidence of conspiracy among climate scientists in the leaked emails – so why was the University of East Anglia's response so pathetic? The leaked emails from the University of East Anglia contained no evidence of conspiracy. The lay public, when presented with confusing data and competing arguments about climate change, deploy the mental shortcut of believing the people they most trust. Trust in the communicator is therefore crucial. Unfortunately the three main climate change communicators: politicians, journalists and environmental campaigners, are among the least trusted people in society – fighting it out for bottom place in the ranking with lawyers and car salesmen. No one would pay any attention to them at all if they were not drawing on the aquifer of public trust in scientists. But climate scientists have always misunderstood the dynamic of public belief and trust. They assume that belief will be built on their data and that public trust is merited by their authority. With the exception of a few outstanding communicators, they often make no attempt to speak to deeper values or make an emotional connection with the public – indeed they see that as contrary to their professional independence. Climate change deniers have always understood this. They use language that is designed to appeal to deeper values (such as freedom, independence, progress). The narrative they tell of being determined (and even persecuted) free-thinkers, standing against the tide of oppressive and self-interested conformity is designed to create an aura of integrity and trustworthiness. The recent hacking of the servers of the University of East Anglia can only be understood within this landscape of competing appeals to public trust. The denial industry (and hordes of climate nerds) has trawled through these emails and found sentences which, when removed from context, support their storyline that climate science is being deliberately distorted and exaggerated for a mixed bag of self-interested and politicised ends. But you could find anything in here. I looked and found lots of references to lunch and fun, 94 to hate, 31 to love. Generally, though, the emails are extremely focused, technical, and, dare I say it, really dull. As noted on realclimate.org, the emails contain "no evidence of any worldwide conspiracy, no mention of George Soros nefariously funding climate research, no grand plan to 'get rid of the MWP', no admission that global warming is a hoax, no evidence of the falsifying of data, and no 'marching orders' from our socialist/communist/vegetarian overlords." But this is hardly the point. This is an orchestrated smear campaign and does not require balance or context. The speed with which the emails have been cut apart and fed into existing storylines is remarkable. At the very least the UEA email campaign is an application of dirty political tactics to climate change campaigning. I suspect it goes further than that. The storyline is too clever, the timing on the brink of Copenhagen and the US climate bill too convenient. I wait with interest to find out how these emails were obtained. The UEA response has been frankly pathetic. It was informed by Real Climate of the hack on 17 November but only reacted two days later when journalists caught on to the story. It refused to confirm whether the emails were accurate or not and, for a long time, refused to comment at all. Now, in typical scientist fashion, it seeks to argue the data rationally. The UEA website states that "the selective publication of some stolen emails and other papers taken out of context is mischievous and cannot be considered a genuine attempt to engage with this issue in a responsible way". Mischievous? Irresponsible? What naughty pixies. Then the Climate Research Unit director, Prof Phil Jones, focuses on one of quotes: "I've just completed Mike's Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years and from 1961 for Keith's to hide the decline." For the smear campaign it is only those key words "trick" and "hide" that count – the rest can be made into anything it wants. Jones ignores this and responds with a detailed technical explanation of the passage with reference to the original graphs. It's like responding to someone calling you a bastard by showing them your birth certificate. One can only imagine that the UEA's communications team is totally out of its depth. A less charitable conclusion is that they are defending the interests of UEA and are not concerned about (or have not understood) the damage to climate science. I believe that Jones should speak to every journalist who calls, go on the offensive and defend his science. He ought to clearly state that he is not prepared to have his hard-working and committed colleagues around the world defamed or slandered by the kinds of people who illegally hack into computers. This is a desperate, last-ditch tactic by fanatics who have lost the rational debate. Sadly, due in part to the lacklustre response, I am sure that these wretched emails have now entered permanently into the mythology of climate denial. Scientists are going to have to be a lot more savvy and on the ball in future. • George Marshall is the founder and director of projects at the Climate Outreach and Information Network. He posts regularly to the blog climatedenial.org.
|
|
|