The Hammond Report

Read the AP article «Study says global warming not worsening hurricanes» published yesterday. The warmers have suffered another big defection, and Al Gore will have to cut 15 minutes from his sci-fi movie for kids.

888

WASHINGTON (AP) — Global warming isn't to blame for the recent jump in hurricanes in the Atlantic, concludes a study by a prominent federal scientist whose position has shifted [switched] on the subject.

Not only that, warmer temperatures will actually reduce the number of hurricanes in the Atlantic and those making landfall, research meteorologist Tom Knutson reported in a study released Sunday.

What makes this study different is Knutson, a meteorologist with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's fluid dynamics lab in Princeton, N.J. He has warned about the harmful effects of climate change and has even complained in the past about being censored by the Bush administration on past studies on the dangers of global warming.

888

So you can see they are starting to bailout!

Oh Butters!

Your blog links to a blog, which in itself references a blog. that's not proof! You need to go to the source. It's like taking a radio talk show host with an extreme checkered past that his ill-informed opinion is fact....or a blog writer with a checkered past, no work experience, and an arrest record that he should be taken seriously.

a. citizen

You need proof?
Well why don't you read up on this a little more before you go around spouting off about ones presumed credibility.

That's the trouble with these environ»mental» guys. They never study anything or ever bother to get their facts straight before they go running off the end of the earth in a tizzy about things that will never happen.

Well Dave, I did look over the page. Not only that I did some research into it, and asked some close friends who are actual scientists. They were more than happy to point out many of the names were fictitous, and in some cases the signers had been dead for hundreds of years!

Let's take a look at an article on the «petition». An article with cross-references that don't involve someone's bog that points to another blog, and so on....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oregon_Petition

And Wikipedia has already done a fine job of shooting itself in the foot.

You cite blogs as not being credible, and yet here you are pointing to Wikipedia ?... Wikipedia is, to the internet, like Art Bell is/was to Astronomy.

Go figure.

Seattle Times
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19980501&slug=2748308

Scientific American
http://www.sciam.com/page.cfm?section=sidebar&articleID=0004F43C-DC1A-1C6E-84A9809EC588EF21

In regards to Wikipedia, you are welcome to view the discussion on the article, and the various debates of the data and the reference notes.

Wikipedia is to knowledge what a comic book is to literature.

But, hey, it's the «people's encyclopedia.» What would you expect?

Bozeman,

I wasn't aware you hated America so much.

After all, this country of ours is By the people, for the people and of the people.

And what is the last piece of literature you read, out of curiosity?

Irony;

Only 18% of the American public looks at Wikipedia.
Highest stats for the rag itself show 12% of the total 18% coming out of California, Oregon & Washington. 3 states hardly constitute a «We The People» argument in this case.

Sooo ... By the Wikipedia, for the Wikipedia, and of the Wikipedia ..

The American people, in so many words, don't have a whole lot to do with it.

Well Dave,

I know this is hard for you to understand, hating America and being from Great Falls and all...

But Wikipedia is not the end-all source. And the data that is provided, is general cross-referenced. And If I reference it, I do check it out. Feel free to verify the article yourself with the references, linked articles, etc.

Again, sorry you hate America so much. This country is a wonderful place. All of it. Even Great Falls....sometimes.

The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (OISM), sponsor of the petitiion, is headed by Arthur Robinson, an eccentric scientist who has a long history of controversial entanglements with figures on the fringe of accepted research. OISM also markets a home-schooling kit for «parents concerned about socialism in the public schools» and publishes books on how to survive nuclear war.

This so called Oregon Petition, was circulated in a bulk mailing to tens of thousands of persons. The only credentials necessary to sign it was that you must have an undergraduate degree in science. In addition to the petition, the mailing included what appeared to be a reprint of a scientific paper titled «Environmental Effects of Increased Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide» and was printed in the same typeface and format as the official Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Robinson's paper claimed to show that pumping carbon dioxide into the atmosphere is actually a good thing. In reality, neither Robinson's paper nor OISM's petition drive had anything to do with the National Academy of Sciences. Robinson was not even a climate scientist, nor had his paper ever been published.

None of the coauthors had any more standing than Robinson himself as a climate change researcher. They included Robinson's 22-year-old son, along with two astrophysicists who worked at the George Marshall Institute, a Washington, D.C., think tank funded by a number of right-wing foundations,

Do you really think the petition is valid? Do you really?

Brewski,
The debate over Global Warming is Over, your side lost.

Cardiac,

Show your work and logic.

a. citizen,
What do you mean? Are you saying the debate is not over? How can that be if you're challenging my scholarship?

Well, let's see, the above article was proven to be false, and yet you are saying that you won the debate.

Prove it.

No, but the problems raised by a. citizen are merritorious of consideration.

The petition includes some subset of false signatures (presumably a greater subset of which are those that are easily identified, i.e. michael j. fox). Why do we only eliminate the obvious and count the rest as reasonable?

Those contesting the petition have shown false information was used. It is now the responsibility of the OISM to confirm the names, credentials, and permissions of those people the OISM is claiming to represent the voices.

Otherise, this does come across as a deceiptful, or at least of damaged reputation.