• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Former astronaut scoffs at global warming

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Harrison Schmitt among 70 skeptics to speak at international conference

Tom Sharpe | The New Mexican

2/14/2009 - 2/14/09
Harrison "Jack" Schmitt, one of the last men to walk on the moon and a former U.S. senator from New Mexico, doesn't buy the idea that humans are causing global warming.

"I don't think the human effect is significant compared to the natural effect," he said.

Schmitt, who is among 70 skeptics scheduled speak at an international conference next month, admitted his beliefs fly in the face of the political consensus that burning fossil fuels has increased carbon-dioxide levels, temperatures and sea levels.

Scientists who disagree with this scenario "are being intimidated," Schmitt said. "They've seen too many of their colleagues lose grant funding when they haven't gone along with the so-called political consensus that we're in a human-caused global warming."

The 74-year-old geologist recently resigned from The Planetary Society, a nonprofit dedicated to space exploration, after the group blamed global warming on human activity.

http://www.santafenewmexican.com/SantaFeNorthernNM/Former-astronaut-scoffs-at-global-warming
 

MsSage

Well-known member
Or were you thinking that having been an astronaut, he has special insight into climatology?

While his education is a good one, I hardly think a geology degree makes him an expert in climatology.

So your saying that unless you have a doctorate in climatology you can not understand or even use your intellegence to figure out about global warming?
 

TexasBred

Well-known member
reader (the Second) said:
EDUCATION: Graduated from Western High School, Silver City, New Mexico; received a bachelor of science degree in science from the California Institute of Technology in 1957; studied at the University of Oslo in Norway during 1957-1958; received doctorate in geology from Harvard University in 1964.

While his education is a good one, I hardly think a geology degree makes him an expert in climatology.

Doesn't geology give you a good view into past climates, changes, and effects???
 

Mike

Well-known member
reader (the Second) said:
EDUCATION: Graduated from Western High School, Silver City, New Mexico; received a bachelor of science degree in science from the California Institute of Technology in 1957; studied at the University of Oslo in Norway during 1957-1958; received doctorate in geology from Harvard University in 1964.

While his education is a good one, I hardly think a geology degree makes him an expert in climatology.

Hansen, the champion of Gore & climatologists (plus liberals) is an Astronomer......... so what makes him such an expert?
 

per

Well-known member
Mike said:
reader (the Second) said:
EDUCATION: Graduated from Western High School, Silver City, New Mexico; received a bachelor of science degree in science from the California Institute of Technology in 1957; studied at the University of Oslo in Norway during 1957-1958; received doctorate in geology from Harvard University in 1964.

While his education is a good one, I hardly think a geology degree makes him an expert in climatology.

Hansen, the champion of Gore & climatologists (plus liberals) is an Astronomer......... so what makes him such an expert?

Tim Ball has a PhD in Climatology but in the other thread he was discredited for just being a Climatologist.
 

Larrry

Well-known member
I think the point he is making and after being in and seeing the gov at work it is the POLOTICS of global warming
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Scientists who disagree with this scenario "are being intimidated," Schmitt said. "They've seen too many of their colleagues lose grant funding when they haven't gone along with the so-called political consensus that we're in a human-caused global warming."

To observe a Holocene environment, simply look around you! The Holocene is the name given to the last ~10,000 years of the Earth's history -- the time since the end of the last major glacial epoch, or "ice age." Since then, there have been small-scale climate shifts -- notably the "Little Ice Age" between about 1200 and 1700 A.D. -- but in general, the Holocene has been a relatively warm period in between ice ages.
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
reader (the Second) said:
EDUCATION: Graduated from Western High School, Silver City, New Mexico; received a bachelor of science degree in science from the California Institute of Technology in 1957; studied at the University of Oslo in Norway during 1957-1958; received doctorate in geology from Harvard University in 1964.

While his education is a good one, I hardly think a geology degree makes him an expert in climatology.

And your education does make you expert on it? He obviously is more qualified than me or you! And don't forget he was a senator also so I guess that makes him about as qualified as Al Gore!
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
reader (the Second) said:
aplusmnt said:
reader (the Second) said:
While his education is a good one, I hardly think a geology degree makes him an expert in climatology.

And your education does make you expert on it? He obviously is more qualified than me or you! And don't forget he was a senator also so I guess that makes him about as qualified as Al Gore!

No, I am not an expert in climatology but I do know which research centers are in leadership positions and do know two PhD physicists / meterologists who work specifically on El Nino and La Nina who I have discussed this with over 30 years. They are senior researchers, one in a major research university and one working for NOAA. I know which peer reviewed journals and forums are most respected.

Just because there are people exploiting the Green issue and there are wingnuts in this as in ALL issues, does not mean that there is not scientific evidence for it.

Yea there is scientific evidence of it, just that they do not use all the facts to form an accurate solution. I will give you an example of this!

Stations that report temperature change around the world have recorded a warming trend, this is a scientific evidence. But now here is the rest of the story, over the past 40 years or so 1,000's of reporting stations have been closed down. And many others have had location changes, reporting stations that use to be in a hay meadow 40 years ago are now at airports with hot asphalt. Now do we believe the reporting stations and believe there is a warming trend..................OR do we now look at a second source to confirm these findings seeing how the reporting stations of today are not completely the same as those say 40 years ago..........So now does a scientist look at weather balloon reporting over the years to see no significant change in temperatures in atmosphere, yes some do and some just choose to avoid that evidence in their studies.

Scientist and that would include your friends (you sure have lots of friends in important positions) many times look for evidence to support their theory instead of looking at evidence that would prove it wrong. A good scientist develops a theory based on facts and then tries to discredit that theory, if he can not prove his theory wrong then it has legs to stand on.


Many of today's scientist do not do this, they look for all evidence that proves their theory and throw away the stuff that would discredit it. So many scientist today are no better than politicians, it is all about power, prestige and money.
 
Top