Global Warming - Burning Up America!!

[penandpaper]

Wow!

http://blog.taragana.com/n/arctic-up...arctic-203873/

http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=8410123

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/americ...vey/index.html

This is not pseudo-science that you may read on other posts! My exclamations prove this is more real than the others!!

[DeeZire]

If you want to compete with Trysail, you need to post colorful graphs and pie charts. Plus, your science is suspect, because the agenda of scientists is all about grant money. It's sort of a circular thing - propose global warming and then demand more grant money to research it. At least the GW deniers agenda is pure - the survival of capitalism. The survival of capitalism is much more important than the survival of the planet, because without the fruits of capitalism, we wouldn't be able to enjoy the planet we live on. (this smilie is supposed to indicate sarcasm)

[penandpaper]

Originally Posted by DeeZire

If you want to compete with Trysail, you need to post colorful graphs and pie charts. Plus, your science is suspect, because the agenda of scientists is all about grant money. It's sort of a circular thing - propose global warming and then demand more grant money to research it. At least the GW deniers agenda is pure - the survival of capitalism. The survival of capitalism is much more important than the survival of the planet, because without the fruits of capitalism, we wouldn't be able to enjoy the planet we live on. (this smilie is supposed to indicate sarcasm)

I'm not competing, just spreading the truth.

[DeeZire]

Originally Posted by penandpaper

I'm not competing, just spreading the truth.

In Trysail's world, there is no truth, only competition for monetary gain.

[TxRad]

Originally Posted by DeeZire

In Trysail's world, there is no truth, only competition for monetary gain.

And don't forget, cut and paste

Oh and this is the sarcasm smilie get your facts straight.

[dr_mabeuse]

The strongest consensus on the causes of global warming came from climatologists who are active in climate research, with 97 percent agreeing humans play a role.

Petroleum geologists and meteorologists were among the biggest doubters, with only 47 percent and 64 percent, respectively, believing in human involvement.

"The petroleum geologist response is not too surprising, but the meteorologists' is very interesting," said Peter Doran associate professor of earth and environmental sciences at the University of Illinois at Chicago, and one of the survey's authors.

"Most members of the public think meteorologists know climate, but most of them actually study very short-term phenomenon."

However, Doran was not surprised by the near-unanimous agreement by climatologists.

"They're the ones who study and publish on climate science. So I guess the take-home message is, the more you know about the field of climate science, the more you're likely to believe in global warming and humankind's contribution to it."

Unless you're an amateur porn writer or radio talk-show host, whom we all know have a better grasp of what's really going on then those egghead scientists.

"The debate on the authenticity of global warming and the role played by human activity is largely nonexistent among those who understand the nuances and scientific basis of long-term climate processes," said Doran.

Among the uninformed and the scientifically naive, on the other hand, the battle still rages.

[DeeZire]

Originally Posted by TxRad

And don't forget, cut and paste

Oh and this is the sarcasm smilie get your facts straight.

Oh really? Maybe where you come from...

[TxRad]

Originally Posted by DeeZire

Oh really? Maybe where you come from...

[trysail]

Originally Posted by dr_mabeuse

...Unless you're an amateur porn writer or radio talk-show host, whom we all know have a better grasp of what's really going on then those egghead scientists...

Ayup, just like Donella H. Meadows, Dennis L. Meadows, Jørgen Randers, and William W. Behrens III?

Like James Hansen?

In 2001 interview by Salon, Bob Reiss recalled interviewing James Hansen in 1988/89:

Rob Reiss ( speaking of his interview of James Hansen): While doing research 12 or 13 years ago, I met Jim Hansen, the scientist who in 1988 predicted the greenhouse effect before Congress. I went over to the window with him and looked out on Broadway in New York City and said, "If what you're saying about the greenhouse effect is true, is anything going to look different down there in 20 years?" He looked for a while and was quiet and didn't say anything for a couple seconds. Then he said, "Well, there will be more traffic." I, of course, didn't think he heard the question right. Then he explained, "The West Side Highway [which runs along the Hudson River] will be under water. And there will be tape across the windows across the street because of high winds. And the same birds won't be there. The trees in the median strip will change." Then he said, "There will be more police cars." Why? "Well, you know what happens to crime when the heat goes up."

Bob Reiss: He also said that restaurants would have signs in their windows that read, "Water by request only." Hansen said, "Under the greenhouse effect, extreme weather increases. Depending on where you are in terms of the hydrological cycle, you get more of whatever you're prone to get. New York can get droughts, the droughts can get more severe and you'll have signs in restaurants saying 'Water by request only.' "

Salon: When did he say this will happen?

Bob Reiss: Within 20 or 30 years. And remember we had this conversation in 1988 or 1989.

Salon: Does he still believe these things?

Bob Reiss: Yes, he still believes everything. I talked to him a few months ago and he said he wouldn't change anything that he said then.

It’s been more than 20 years since James Hansen first warned America of impending doom. On a hot summer day in June 1988, Hansen, head of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, announced before a Senate committee that “the greenhouse effect has been detected and it is changing our climate now.”

The greenhouse effect would have looked obvious enough to anyone watching on television. The senators conducting the hearing, including Al Gore, had turned the committee room into an oven. That day it was a balmy 98 degrees, and as former Colorado Sen. Timothy Wirth later revealed, the committee members “went in the night before and opened all the windows. And so when the hearing occurred, there was not only bliss, which is television cameras and [high ratings], but it was really hot.”

Holocaust Accusations
... Hansen doesn’t shy away from Holocaust metaphors to make his point. In 2007, Hansen testified before the Iowa Utilities Board not in his capacity as a government employee but “as a private citizen, a resident of Kintnersville, Pennsylvania, on behalf of the planet, of life on Earth, including all species.” Hansen told the board, “if we cannot stop the building of more coal-fired power plants, those coal trains will be death trains - no less gruesome than if they were boxcars headed to crematoria, loaded with uncountable irreplaceable species.”

...As the head of NASA’s Weather and Climate Research Program from 1982 to 1994, John Theon was James Hansen’s supervisor. Theon says Hansen’s testimony in 1988 was “a huge embarrassment” to NASA, and he remains skeptical of Hansen’s predictions. “I don’t have much faith in the models,” Theon says, pointing to the “huge uncertainty in the role clouds play.”

Theon describes Hansen as a “nice, likeable fellow,” but worries, “he’s been overcome by his belief - almost religious - that he’s going to save the world.”

Like the folk claiming that polar bear populations are threatened?

.. It seems, however, that a competing effect has dominated the situation since 1940. This is the reduced transparency of the atmosphere to incoming light as a result of urban air pollution (smoke, aerosols), agricultural air pollution (dust), and volcanic ash. This screening phenomenon is said to be responsible for the present world cooling trend— a total of about 0.2°C in the world mean surface temperature over the past quarter century. This number seems small until it is realized that a decrease of only 4°C would probably be sufficient to start another ice age. Moreover, other effects besides simple screening by air pollution threaten to move us in the same direction. In particular, a mere one per cent increase in low cloud cover would decrease the surface temperature by 0.8°C. We may be in the process of providing just such a cloud increase, and more, by adding man-made condensation nuclei to the atmosphere in the form of jet exhausts and other suitable pollutants. A final push in the cooling direction comes from man-made changes in the direct reflectivity of the earth's surface (albedo) through urbanization, deforestation, and the enlargement of deserts.

The effects of a new ice age on agriculture and the supportability of large human population scarcely need elaboration here. Even more dramatic results are possible, however; for instance, a sudden outward slumping in the Antarctic ice cap, induce by added weight, could generate a tidal wave of proportions unprecedented in recorded history...

-John P. Holdren and Paul Ehrlich
Global Ecology: Readings Toward a Rational Strategy for Man
Chapter 6
1971
http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/?p=873

[JamesSD]

Originally Posted by dr_mabeuse

Unless you're an amateur porn writer or radio talk-show host, whom we all know have a better grasp of what's really going on then those egghead scientists.

But what about Egghead scientists amateur porn writers? Who will speak for us?

[Handley_Page]

One has to wonder why only burn up America ?

If the sea levels rose as much as some say, London would be in real trouble and Doncaster would be on the coast.

[Handley_Page]

I found this of some interest:-
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/10...ist_extremism/

[lance gt]

I thought everyone in here was an amateur porn writer. So it only stands to reason that we'll only get a porn writer's opinion on what's happening. Dabble as much as you want in science and technology, but unless you can show me a list of letters after your name, it's all just opinion of what you've seen and read. They are having troubles working out the bugs from their theories, yet this seems to be the place to come for answers. The world's greatest minds lurk here on Literotica.

[Handley_Page]

Originally Posted by lance gt

The world's greatest minds lurk here on Literotica.

I think I'd rephrase that. Some of the world's most creative minds lurk here.
The fact that we are told by this or that camp (opinion) that such is "so", does not mean we actually believe the blighter; it's just that we'd like to know properly from an unimpeachable source in language we can understand.
Give us the facts and we'll make our own mind up.

[dr_mabeuse]

Trysail--

I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at in your two posts there. Are we supposed to scoff at Hansen because his prediction didn't come true in exactly 20 years? Is that supposed to negate the validity of all the data that's been collected since then?

And Holdren and Ehrlich were writing in 1971 using the science of the times. I remember Ehrlich very well and he was a doom-merchant, predicting a world-wide Malthusian catastrophe by the end of the century, but this was the dawn of the environmental era, and not a hell of a lot was known back then.

There's a Wikipedia article on how the scientific community lines up behind the issue of anthropogenic global warming. Endorsing the belief that AGW is a real phenomenon are 51 of the most prestigious scientific academies and associations in the world, the very top of their field.

Opposing this belief are zero scientific organizations not tied to the fossil fuels industry.

Here's a small excerpt from the article [my emphasis]:

==================

With the release of the revised statement by the American Association of Petroleum Geologists in 2007, no remaining scientific body of national or international standing is known to reject the basic findings of human influence on recent climate change.[71]

Statements by individual scientists opposing the mainstream assessment of global warming do include claims that the observed warming is likely to be attributable to natural causes.

Scientific consensus

A question which frequently arises in popular discussion of climate change is whether there is a scientific consensus. Several scientific organizations have explicitly used the term "consensus" in their statements:

* American Association for the Advancement of Science, 2006: "The conclusions in this statement reflect the scientific consensus represented by, for example, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and the Joint National Academies' statement."[25]
* US National Academy of Sciences: "In the judgment of most climate scientists, Earth’s warming in recent decades has been caused primarily by human activities that have increased the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. ... On climate change, [the National Academies’ reports] have assessed consensus findings on the science..."[78]
* Joint Science Academies' statement, 2005: "We recognise the international scientific consensus of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)."[79]
* Joint Science Academies' statement, 2001: "The work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) represents the consensus of the international scientific community on climate change science. We recognise IPCC as the world’s most reliable source of information on climate change and its causes, and we endorse its method of achieving this consensus."[80]
* American Meteorological Society, 2003: "The nature of science is such that there is rarely total agreement among scientists. Individual scientific statements and papers—the validity of some of which has yet to be assessed adequately—can be exploited in the policy debate and can leave the impression that the scientific community is sharply divided on issues where there is, in reality, a strong scientific consensus.... IPCC assessment reports are prepared at approximately five-year intervals by a large international group of experts who represent the broad range of expertise and perspectives relevant to the issues. The reports strive to reflect a consensus evaluation of the results of the full body of peer-reviewed research.... They provide an analysis of what is known and not known, the degree of consensus, and some indication of the degree of confidence that can be placed on the various statements and conclusions."[81]
* Network of African Science Academies: “A consensus, based on current evidence, now exists within the global scientific community that human activities are the main source of climate change and that the burning of fossil fuels is largely responsible for driving this change.” [21]

* International Union for Quaternary Research, 2008: "INQUA recognizes the international scientific consensus of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)."[82]
* Australian Coral Reef Society, 2006: "There is almost total consensus among experts that the earth’s climate is changing as a result of the build-up of greenhouse gases.... There is broad scientific consensus that coral reefs are heavily affected by the activities of man and there are significant global influences that can make reefs more vulnerable such as global warming...."[83]
==================

See the article for a list of surveys of the scientific literature too.

[Zeb_Carter]

As all the research and all the studies and all the written reports are based on the East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (CRU) collected raw data, how, in light of the following can we believe any of it?

Govt-Funded Research Unit Destroyed Original Climate Data
by Christine Hall
October 5, 2009
CEI Petitions EPA to Reopen Global Warming Rulemaking
Washington, D.C., October 6, 2009―In the wake of a revelation by a key research institution that it destroyed its original climate data, the Competitive Enterprise Institute petitioned EPA to reopen a major global warming proceeding.

In mid-August the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (CRU) disclosed that it had destroyed the raw data for its global surface temperature data set because of an alleged lack of storage space. The CRU data have been the basis for several of the major international studies that claim we face a global warming crisis. CRU’s destruction of data, however, severely undercuts the credibility of those studies.

In a declaration filed with CEI’s petition, Cato Institute scholar and climate scientist Patrick Michaels calls CRU’s revelation “a totally new element” that “violates basic scientific principles, and “throws even more doubt” on the claims of global warming alarmists.

CEI’s petition, filed late Monday with EPA, argues that CRU’s disclosure casts a new cloud of doubt on the science behind EPA’s proposal to regulate carbon dioxide. EPA stopped accepting public comments in late June but has not yet issued its final decision. As CEI’s petition argues, court rulings make it clear that agencies must consider new facts when those facts change the underlying issues.

CEI general counsel Sam Kazman stated, “EPA is resting its case on international studies that in turn relied on CRU data. But CRU’s suspicious destruction of its original data, disclosed at this late date, makes that information totally unreliable. If EPA doesn’t reexamine the implications of this, it’s stumbling blindly into the most important regulatory issue we face.”
Among CRU’s funders are the EPA and the U.S. Department of Energy – U.S. taxpayers.

The Dog Ate Global Warming

Interpreting climate data can be hard enough. What if some key data have been fiddled?

By Patrick J. Michaels

Imagine if there were no reliable records of global surface temperature. Raucous policy debates such as cap-and-trade would have no scientific basis, Al Gore would at this point be little more than a historical footnote, and President Obama would not be spending this U.N. session talking up a (likely unattainable) international climate deal in Copenhagen in December.

Steel yourself for the new reality, because the data needed to verify the gloom-and-doom warming forecasts have disappeared.

Or so it seems. Apparently, they were either lost or purged from some discarded computer. Only a very few people know what really happened, and they aren’t talking much. And what little they are saying makes no sense.

…

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q...I5MGY4ZWI5OWM=

[dr_mabeuse]

Grasping at straws. That's one study, Zeb. Scientific consensus on anthropogenic global warming rests on far more than one study, unlike the "research" that's used to support the opposing point of view.

From Wikipedia, "Scientific Consensus of Global Climate Change"
===================

"Since 2007, no scientific body of national or international standing has maintained a dissenting opinion [that AGW is real]. A few organisations hold non-committal positions."

A 2004 article by geologist and historian of science Naomi Oreskes summarized a study of the scientific literature on climate change.[87] The essay concluded that there is a scientific consensus on the reality of anthropogenic climate change. The author analyzed 928 abstracts of papers from refereed scientific journals between 1993 and 2003, listed with the keywords "global climate change". Oreskes divided the abstracts into six categories: explicit endorsement of the consensus position, evaluation of impacts, mitigation proposals, methods, paleoclimate analysis, and rejection of the consensus position. 75% of the abstracts were placed in the first three categories, thus either explicitly or implicitly accepting the consensus view; 25% dealt with methods or paleoclimate, thus taking no position on current anthropogenic climate change; none of the abstracts disagreed with the consensus position, which the author found to be "remarkable". According to the report, "authors evaluating impacts, developing methods, or studying paleoclimatic change might believe that current climate change is natural. However, none of these papers argued that point."
=================

ALso, for a taste of the breadth of the supporting data, look at the 138 references in the rather short Wikipedia article on Global Warming.

[amicus]

Thank you Zeb...Mabeuse, missing the entire point of doing 'science', fails to even recognize that 'consensus science' isn't science at all, but an accommodation between science and government for political justifications.

Every, and I repeat every major new theory in all the disciplines of science evolve from a postulation of a theory and a dissent process involving peer review and confirmation of basic data and assumptions.

All new theories except the Environmental activist driven furor of Global Warming. It seems not to have followed the traditional scientific procedure, but was presented and foisted upon the public as a full blown, 'settled science' doctrine that involves billions upon billions of dollars and the possible implementation of restrictive regulations and controls that will cripple any industrial society and lower the living standard of every human alive today.

And all for naught as there is no valid scientific evidence that the activities of man have had any effect on the global climate.

Amicus

[Zeb_Carter]

Originally Posted by dr_mabeuse

Grasping at straws. That's one study, Zeb. Scientific consensus on anthropogenic global warming rests on far more than one study, unlike the "research" that's used to support the opposing point of view.

Doc, you miss the point completely...all studies since that study have been based on their smoothed and manipulated data, not the raw data - which no longer exists.

If I can't take the data that they based the first study on and duplicate their results how can I take any study done after theirs as accurate?

[trysail]

Originally Posted by dr_mabeuse

Grasping at straws. That's one study, Zeb. Scientific consensus on anthropogenic global warming rests on far more than one study, unlike the "research" that's used to support the opposing point of view.

From Wikipedia, "Scientific Consensus of Global Climate Change"
===================

"Since 2007, no scientific body of national or international standing has maintained a dissenting opinion [that AGW is real]. A few organisations hold non-committal positions."

A 2004 article by geologist and historian of science Naomi Oreskes summarized a study of the scientific literature on climate change.[87] The essay concluded that there is a scientific consensus on the reality of anthropogenic climate change. The author analyzed 928 abstracts of papers from refereed scientific journals between 1993 and 2003, listed with the keywords "global climate change". Oreskes divided the abstracts into six categories: explicit endorsement of the consensus position, evaluation of impacts, mitigation proposals, methods, paleoclimate analysis, and rejection of the consensus position. 75% of the abstracts were placed in the first three categories, thus either explicitly or implicitly accepting the consensus view; 25% dealt with methods or paleoclimate, thus taking no position on current anthropogenic climate change; none of the abstracts disagreed with the consensus position, which the author found to be "remarkable". According to the report, "authors evaluating impacts, developing methods, or studying paleoclimatic change might believe that current climate change is natural. However, none of these papers argued that point."
=================

ALso, for a taste of the breadth of the supporting data, look at the 138 references in the rather short Wikipedia article on Global Warming.

If there's one place I never go for objective, unbiased information on this topic, it's Wikipedia. That place is ground zero for proselytizers, zanies, evangelicals and zealots of every stripe and variety.

==================================================


http://www.openletter-globalwarming....en_letter.html

Regarding the National Policy Statement on Climate Change of the APS Council: An Open Letter to the Council of the American Physical Society


As physicists who are familiar with the science issues, and as current and past members of the American Physical Society, we the undersigned urge the Council to revise its current statement* on climate change as follows, so as to more accurately represent the current state of the science:


Greenhouse gas emissions, such as carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide, accompany human industrial and agricultural activity. While substantial concern has been expressed that emissions may cause significant climate change, measured or reconstructed temperature records indicate that 20th 21st century changes are neither exceptional nor persistent, and the historical and geological records show many periods warmer than today. In addition, there is an extensive scientific literature that examines beneficial effects of increased levels of carbon dioxide for both plants and animals.


Studies of a variety of natural processes, including ocean cycles and solar variability, indicate that they can account for variations in the Earth’s climate on the time scale of decades and centuries. Current climate models appear insufficiently reliable to properly account for natural and anthropogenic contributions to past climate change, much less project future climate.


The APS supports an objective scientific effort to understand the effects of all processes – natural and human --on the Earth’s climate and the biosphere’s response to climate change, and promotes technological options for meeting challenges of future climate changes, regardless of cause.

http://www.openletter-globalwarming....ignatures.html
<signed>

Harold M. Agnew
President, General Atomics Corporation (1979 -1984)
White House Science Councilor (1982 -1989)
Director, Los Alamos National Laboratory (1970 -1979)
E.O. Lawrence Award 1966, Enrico Fermi Award 1978, Los Alamos Medal (with H.A. Bethe) 2001
Member National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering; Fellow APS, AAAS

Sol Aisenberg
President, International Technology Group
Formerly Staff Member, MIT; Lecturer, Harvard Medical School;
Visiting Research Professor, Boston University

Ralph B. Alexander
Former Associate Professor of Physics
Wayne State University
President, R.B. Alexander & Associates
Technology and market analysis in environmentally friendly materials and coatings
Author, Global Warming False Alarm (Canterbury)

Moorad Alexanian
Professor of Physics and Physical Oceanography
University of North Carolina - Wilmington
Member Mexican Academy of Sciences, American Scientific Affiliation

Louis J. Allamandola
Director, Astrochemistry Laboratory
NASA Ames Research Center
Fellow APS, AAAS
Member ACS, American Astronomical Society, International Astronomical Union

James L. Allen
Engineer/Scientist
International Space Station Program
The Boeing Company (retired)

Eva Andrei
Professor of Physics
Rutgers University
Fellow APS

Robert H. Austin
Professor of Physics
Princeton University
Fellow APS, AAAS; APS Council: 1991-1994, 2007-2010
Member National Academy of Sciences, American Association of Arts and Sciences

Franco Battaglia,
Professor of Chemical Physics and Environmental Chemistry
University of Modena, Italy
Life Member APS

David J. Benard
Retired Aerospace Scientist
Co-Inventor of the Chemical Oxygen-Iodine Laser

Lev I. Berger
President
California Institute of Electronics and Materials Science
Author, Semiconductor Materials; and
Material and Device Characterization Measurements (CRC Press)

Stuart B. Berger
Research Fellow and Divisional Time-to-Market Manager
Xerox Corporation (retired)

Ami E. Berkowitz
Emeritus Professor of Physics
University of California at San Diego
Fellow APS

Barry L. Berman
Columbian Professor and Chair
Physics Department
The George Washington University
Fellow APS

Edwin X. Berry
Atmospheric Physicist, Climate Physics, LLC
Certified Consulting Meteorologist #180
Member American Meteorological Society

Frances M. Berting
Northern New Mexico Citizens Advisory Board and Committee (2000-present)
Los Alamos County Council (2001-2008)
Formerly Materials Scientist, Hanford (DOE), Pacific Northwest National Laboratory,
Westinghouse, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

Vladislav A. Bevc
Associate Professor, Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey (retired);
Formerly Member of the Technical Staff, The Aerospace Corporation;
Physicist, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory;
Visiting Fellow, Hoover Institution (Stanford University)
Senior Member IEEE

Clifford Bruce Bigham
Atomic Energy of Canada, Ltd. (retired)
Senior Member APS, Sustaining Member CAP

Arie Bodek
George E. Pake Professor of Physics
University of Rochester
Wolfgang K. H. Panofsky Prize in Experimental Particle Physics (APS) 2004
Fellow APS

John W. Boring
Professor Emeritus of Engineering Physics
University of Virginia

Lowell S. Brown
Emeritus Professor of Physics
University of Washington
Scientific Staff Member, Los Alamos National Laboratory
Fellow APS, AAAS

Daniel M. Bubb
Associate Professor and Chair
Department of Physics
Rutgers University, Camden

Timothy D. Calvin
President, Bearfoot Corporation (retired)
Fabricated rubber products for the DOD, shoe and automobile industries
Member ACS

Mark L. Campbell
Professor, Department of Chemistry
United States Naval Academy
Life Member APS

Gregory H. Canavan
Senior Fellow and Scientific Advisor,
Los Alamos National Laboratory
Fellow APS

Jack G. Castle
Senior Scientist
Sandia National Laboratories (retired)
Fellow and Life Member APS

Joseph F. Chiang
Professor and Former Chairman
Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry
State University of New York, Oneonta
Life Member APS

Roger W. Cohen
Manager, Strategic Planning and Programs
ExxonMobil Corporation (retired)
Otto Schade Prize (Society for Information Display) 2006
Fellow APS

Barry D. Crane
Project Director
Institute for Defense Analyses
Life Member APS

Steven R. Cranmer
Astrophysicist, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics
Karen Harvey Prize (AAS) 2006
Associate Editor, Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics
Member American Astronomical Society, American Geophysical Union

J. F. Cuderman
Distinguished Member of the Technical Staff
Sandia National Laboratories (retired),
Life Member APS

Jerry M. Cuttler
President, Cuttler and Associates, Inc.
Engineering, consulting, and licensing services for the nuclear power industry
President, Canadian Nuclear Society (1995-1996)
Fellow Canadian Nuclear Society, Member American Nuclear Society

James H. Degnan
Principal Physicist
Directed Energy Directorate
Air Force Research Laboratory
Fellow APS

Joseph G. Depp
Founding President and CEO, Accuray Incorporated (retired)
Stereotactic radiosurgery technology
Founding President and CEO, PsiStar Incorporated
Life Member APS

Riccardo DeSalvo
Senior Scientist
Laser Interferometer Gravitational Wave Observatory (LIGO)
California Institute of Technology
Member ASME

James A. Deye
Nuclear and Medical physicist
Life Member APS

Eugene H. Dirk
APS Division of Astrophysics, and
Division of Computational Physics
Topical Groups on Gravity, and
Precision Measurement and Fundamental Constants

David H. Douglass
Professor of Physics
University of Rochester
Fellow APS

Paul J. Drallos
President and CEO, Plasma Dynamics Corporation (retired)
Kinetic & fluid dynamic computer simulation services

Murray Dryer
Emeritus Scientist
Space Weather Prediction Center (retired), NWS
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Member American Astronomical Society, American Geophysical Union, AIAA

William T. Duffy Jr.
Professor Emeritus of Physics
Santa Clara University

David F. Edwards
Physicist, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (retired)
Formerly Los Alamos National Laboratory;
Professor of Physics and Electrical Engineering, Colorado State University;
Lincoln Laboratory, MIT

Albert G. Engelhardt
President and CEO, Enfitek, Inc.
Environmental control and security systems
Senior Life Member IEEE

James E. Enstrom
Research Professor
Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center
University of California at Los Angeles
Life Member APS

Jens G. Feder
Professor of Physics of Geological Processes
University of Oslo
Fellow APS

Douglas E. Fields
Associate Professor
Department of Physics and Astronomy
University of New Mexico

Michael M. Fitelson
Chief Scientist, Micro-Systems Enablers
Northrop Grumman Electronic Systems

Harold K. Forsen
Senior Vice President, Bechtel Corporation (retired)
Governing Board, National Research Council (1994-2003)
Foreign Secretary, National Academy of Engineering (1995-2003)
Arthur Holly Compton Award (ANS) 1972
Member National Academy of Engineering; Fellow APS, ANS, American Academy of Arts and Sciences

Bruce L. Freeman
Senior Experimental Physicist, Ktech Corporation
Formerly Professor of Nuclear Engineering, Texas A&M
Coauthor Explosively Driven Pulsed Power (Springer);
Explosive Pulsed Power (Imperial College)
Member IEEE Plasma Sciences, Directed Energy Professional Society

Peter D. Friedman
Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering
University of Massachusetts Dartmouth
Member American Geophysical Union, ASME, American Nuclear Society

Michael H. Frese
Designer/Developer of Multiphysics
Simulation Codes and Applications
Founder and Managing Member of NumerEx, LLC
Member SIAM, IEEE

Ian J. Fritz
Research Physicist, Sandia National Laboratories (retired)
R&D 100 Award 1991
Basic Energy Sciences Sustained Outstanding Achievement Award (DOE) 1993
Lockheed Martin NOVA Award 2001

Rodger L. Gamblin
Managing Director
Corona Color, LLC

John C. Garth
Research Physicist
Air Force Research Laboratory (retired)
Member ANS, ASTM, American Association of Physicists in Medicine,
Computational Medical Physics Working Group

G. Roger Gathers
Senior Scientist, M. H. Chew and Associates
Physicist, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (1967-1993)
Author, Selected Topics in Shock Wave Physics and
Equation of State Modeling (World Scientific Publishing)

Gary J. Gerardi
Professor, Department of Chemistry and Physics
William Paterson University

Ivar Giaever
Institute Professor, School of Engineering and School of Science
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
Nobel Prize in Physics 1973
Member National Academy of Science, National Academy of Engineering; Fellow APS

George T. Gillies
Research Professor, School of Engineering and Applied Science; and
Research Professor, Department of Physics
University of Virginia
Clinical Professor, Department of Neurosurgery, Virginia Commonwealth University
Fellow APS

Damon Giovanielli
President, Sumner Associates scientific consultants
Former Division Leader, Physics Division
Los Alamos National Laboratory
LANL staff member, program and line manager (1972-1993)
Fellow AAAS

Albert Gold
Associate Dean of Engineering and Applied Sciences
Harvard University (retired)

Ronald B. Goldfarb
National Institute of Standards and Technology
Life Member APS

Laurence I. Gould
Professor of Physics
University of Hartford
Member Executive Board of the New England Section of the APS
Chairman (2004), New England Section APS

Paul M. Grant
EPRI Science Fellow (retired)
IBM Research Staff Member Emeritus
Senior Life Fellow APS

Howard D. Greyber
University of Pennsylvania (retired)
Formerly Princeton University, LLNL Theory Group, Northeastern University
Member American Astronomical Society, Fellow Royal Astronomical Society

Ronald J. Gripshover
Senior Research Physicist
Naval Surface Weapons Center (retired)

Mike Gruntman
Professor of Astronautics
University of Southern California
Author, Blazing the Trail. The Early History of Spacecraft and Rocketry (AIAA)
Luigi G. Napolitano Book Award (International Academy of Astronautics) 2006
Member American Geophysical Union, Associate Fellow AIAA

George Hacken
Senior Director, Safety-Critical Systems
New York City Transit Authority
Formerly Senior Member of the Technical Staff, GEC-Marconi Aerospace
Chair, New York Chapter, IEEE Computer Society
Member AMS, SIAM, ANS, AIAA, New York Academy of Sciences

David S. Hacker
Senior Staff Research Engineer
Amoco Corporation (retired)
Associate Professor of Chemical Engineering
University of Illinois, Chicago Circle (1965-1981)
Fellow AIChE

Sultan Hameed
Professor of Atmospheric Science
School of Marine and Atmospheric Sciences
Stony Brook University, New York

William Happer
Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics
Princeton University
Fellow APS, AAAS
Member National Academy of Sciences

Howard C. Hayden
Emeritus Professor of Physics
University of Connecticut
Editor, The Energy Advocate
Author, A Primer on CO2 and Climate (Vales Lake)

Dennis B. Hayes
Research Physicist
Los Alamos, Sandia, and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories
President, Lockheed Martin Nevada Technologies, Inc. (retired)
Fellow APS

Jack M. Hollander
Professor Emeritus of Energy and Resources, University of California, Berkeley
Vice-President Emeritus, The Ohio State University
First Head, Energy and Environment Division, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory
Fellow APS, AAAS

David B. Holtkamp
Scientific Staff Member, Physics Division
Los Alamos National Laboratory

John C. Ingraham
Scientific Staff Member
Los Alamos National Laboratory (retired)
Member American Geophysical Union

Helen Jackson
Research Physicist, Air Force Research Laboratory
Wright Laboratory
Member Materials Research Society, IEEE

H. Richard Johnson
Co-Founder and Former CEO
Watkins-Johnson Company (retired)
Life Fellow IEEE, Member National Academy of Engineering

James R. Johnson
3M Company (retired)
Member Carlton Society (3M Hall of Fame)
Member National Academy of Engineering

O’Dean Judd
LANL Fellow
Los Alamos National Laboratory (retired)
Technical Advisor and Consultant
Fellow APS, IEEE, AAAS

Andrew Kaldor
Distinguished Scientific Advisor
Manager of Breakthrough Research
ExxonMobil Corporation (retired)
Fellow AAAS, Member ACS

Alexander E. Kaplan
Professor, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering
The Johns Hopkins University
Max Born Award (Optical Society of America) 2005
Alexander von Humboldt Award (von Humboldt Foundation) 1996
Fellow OSA

Thomas J. Karr
Director in the Advanced Concepts & Technology Division
Northrop Grumman Electronic Systems
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (1984-1996)
Editor, Applied Optics (1991-1994)
Member OSA, AAAS; Senior Member IEEE

Jonathan Katz
Professor of Physics
Washington University

William E. Keller
Leader, Low Temperature Physics Group 1971-1985
Los Alamos National Laboratory (retired)
Fellow APS

John M. Kennel
Autonetics Division,
Boeing North American (retired)
Formerly Electronics Division,
Northrop Grumman Corporation
Member AAAS, AIAA

Paul I. Kingsbury
Manager, Physical Properties Research Department
Corning Inc.(retired)

Robert S. Knox
Professor of Physics Emeritus
University of Rochester
Member APS Council 1985-1988
Fellow APS

M. Kristiansen
C.B.Thornton/P.W.Horn Professor
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering
Texas Tech University
Fellow APS, IEEE

Moyses Kuchnir
Applied Scientist
Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (retired)
Life Member APS, Member IEEE, AAAS

Joseph A. Kunc
Professor, Physics and Astronomy
University of Southern California
Fellow APS

Paul L. La Celle
Professor, Department of Biomedical Engineering
Former Chair, Department of Biophysics
University of Rochester
Alexander von Humboldt Senior Fellow,
Max Planck Institute for Biophysics, Frankfort

Robert E. LeLevier
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (1951-1957)
Physics Department, RAND Corp (1957-1971)
R&D Associates (1971-1983)
Eos Technologies, Inc. (1983-1993)

Robert E. Levine
Industrial and Defense Physics and Engineering (retired)
Member ACM, IEEE

Harold W. Lewis
Professor of Physics Emeritus
University of California at Santa Barbara
Chairman, Defense Science Board Panel on Nuclear Winter
Fellow APS, AAAS; Chairman, APS Reactor Safety Study

John D. Lindl
James Clerk Maxwell Prize for Plasma Physics (APS) 2007
Fellow APS, AAAS

Gabriel G. Lombardi
Senior Scientist, Phase Coherence, Inc.
National Research Council Associate (NIST, 1980-82)
Life Member APS, Member OSA

Michael D. Lubin
Colonel,
United States Air Force (retired)

Alfred U. MacRae
President, MacRae Technologies
Member National Academy of Engineering; Fellow APS, IEEE,

Phillip W. Mange
Associate Superintendent, Space Science Division
Scientific Consultant to the Director of Research,
Naval Research Laboratory (retired)

John E. Mansfield
Vice Chairman
Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board

Joseph Maserjian
Senior Research Scientist,
California Institute of Technology --
Jet Propulsion Laboratory (retired)

John H. McAdoo
Aerospace Physicist
Member IEEE, AAAS

Thomas A. McClelland
Vice President, Commercial Products
Frequency Electronics, Inc.

Harold Mirels
Principal Scientist,
The Aerospace Corporation (retired)
Fellow APS, AIAA
Member National Academy of Engineering

Jim Mitroy
Lecturer in Physics, School of Engineering and Information Technology
Charles Darwin University, Australia

Michael Monce
Professor of Physics, Astronomy, and Geophysics
Connecticut College
Member AAPT, American Geophysical Union

Nasif Nahle
Scientific Research Director
Biology Cabinet, Mexico
Member AAAS, NYAS

Rodney W. Nichols
President and CEO, New York Academy of Sciences (1992-2001)
Vice President and Executive Vice President, The Rockefeller University (1970-1990)
Secretary of Defense Medal for Distinguished Meritorious Civilian Service (1970)
Fellow AAAS, NYAS

Gordon C. Oehler
Senior Fellow, Potomac Institute for Policy Studies
Working Group Chairman, Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States.
Corporate Vice President for Corporate Development, SAIC (1998-2004)
National Intelligence Officer for Science, Technology and Proliferation (1989-1992)

William P. Oliver
Professor of Physics
Tufts University
Life Member APS

Frank R. Paolini
Adjunct Professor of Physics, University of Connecticut at Stamford (retired)
Senior Member APS, Member IEEE

Daniel N. Payton III
Senior Scientist, SAIC (1992-present)
Eos Technologies (1984-1992)
Technical Director of Nuclear Technology
Air Force Weapons Laboratory (1976-1984)

Erik M. Pell
Xerox Corporation (retired)
Author: From Dreams to Riches – The Story of Xerography (Carlson)
Edward Goodrich Acheson Medal (Electrochemical Society) 1986
President, Electrochemical Society (1980-1981)
Fellow APS, Honorary Member ECS, Senior Member IEEE

Thomas E. Phipps, Jr.
Physicist (retired)
Operations Evaluation Group, MIT
US Naval Ordnance Laboratory
Senior Member APS

John X. Przybysz

Donald Rapp
Chief Technologist, Mechanical and Chemical Systems,
Jet Propulsion Laboratory (retired)
Professor of Physics and Environmental Engineering, University of Texas (1973-1979)
Author, Assessing Climate Change and Ice Ages and Interglacials (Springer-Verlag)
Fellow APS

Ned S. Rasor
Consulting Physicist
Formerly President and CEO, Rasor Associates, Inc.
Member IEEE, AIAA

Richard T. Rauch
NASA Stennis Space Center
Life Member APS, Associate Fellow AIAA

John E. Rhoads
Professor of Physics
Midwestern State University (retired)
Member SPE

Harry I. Ringermacher
Sr. Research Physicist
General Electric Global Research Center
AIP "History of Physics in Industry" Participant at GE
Sir William Herschel Medal (American Academy of Thermology)
Copper Black Award (American Mensa) 2003 and 2007

Stanley Robertson
Emeritus Professor of Physics
Southwestern Oklahoma State University

Robert C. Rohr
Reactor Physicist
Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory (retired)
Former Adjunct Professor of Nuclear Engineering,
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

Berol Robinson
Principal Scientific Officer
UNESCO (retired)
Member AAPT, AAAS, Association des Écologistes Pour le Nucléaire

Daniel J. Rogers
Staff Scientist
Applied Information Sciences Department
Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory
Member OSA

Kelly R. Roos
Professor of Physics
Bradley University

Isaac C. Sanchez
William J. Murray, Jr. Chair in Engineering and Associate Chair
Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Texas at Austin
U.S. Department of Commerce Medals 1980, 1983
Edward U. Condon Award (NIST) 1983; SPE International Research Award 1996
Member National Academy of Engineering, Fellow APS

Raymond E. Sarwinski
President, Cryogenic Designs, Inc.
Life Member APS

Nicola Scafetta
Research Scientist, Physics Department, Duke University
Member American Geophysical Union

Mark D. Semon
Professor, Department of Physics and Astronomy
Bates College
Member American Academy of Forensic Scientists, American College of Forensic Examiners

Thomas P. Sheahen
President/ CEO, Western Technology, Inc. (energy sciences consulting)
Member AAAS; APS Congressional Science Fellowship (1977-78)
Author, Introduction to High Temperature Superconductivity (Springer)

Arnold J. Sierk
Technical Staff Member
Theoretical Division
Los Alamos National Laboratory
Fellow APS

Joseph Silverman
Professor Emeritus of Nuclear Engineering,
Department of Materials Science and Engineering
University of Maryland
Fellow APS, ANS

S. Fred Singer
Professor of Environmental Sciences Emeritus
University of Virginia
First Director of the National Weather Satellite Service
Fellow APS, AAAS, American Geophysical Union

Frans W. Sluijter
Professor, Department of Applied Physics
Eindhoven University of Technology
Former Chair, Plasma Physics Division, European Physics Society
Former Vice President, International Union of Pure and Applied Physics
Member Dutch Physical Society, Institute of Physics UK

John R. Smith
Project Physicist, Experimental High Energy Physics
Department of Physics
University of California, Davis
Life Member APS

Hermann Statz
Raytheon Corporation (retired)
Microwave Pioneer Award (IEEE) 2004
Fellow APS

Nick Steph
Chair, Department of Physics
Franklin College
Member AAPT, ACS

Peter Stilbs
Professor of Physical Chemistry
Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), Stockholm, Sweden
Life Member APS

Norman D. Stockwell
Senior Project Engineer, TRW (retired)
Former Member of the Technical Staff, The Aerospace Corporation
Life Member APS, Member AAAS

Thomas F. Stratton
Fellow, Los Alamos National Laboratory (retired)
Fellow APS

William R. Stratton
Scientific Staff Member
Los Alamos National Laboratory (retired)
Member AEC Advisory Committee on Reactor Safety
Chair ANS Nuclear Reactor Accident Study
Fellow ANS

Szymon Suckewer
Professor of School of Engineering & Applied Sciences
Director of Plasma Science & Technology Program
Princeton University
Fellow APS, OSA

Ronald M. Sundelin
Associate Director, DOE Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility (retired)
Commonwealth Professor Emeritus of Physics, Virginia Tech
Fellow APS

Willard L. Talbert
Scientific Consultant (1993-present)
Scientific Staff Member, Los Alamos National Laboratory, 1976-1993 (retired)
Professor of Physics, Iowa State University (1961-1976)
Fellow APS

Lu Ting
Professor Emeritus of Mathematics
Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences, New York University
Lead Author, Vortex Dominated Flows (Applied Mathematical Sciences, Springer)
Member SIAM, AIAA, AAM

Frank J. Tipler
Professor of Mathematical Physics
Tulane University
Coauthor, The Anthropic Cosmological Principle (Oxford University Press)

Salvatore Torquato
Professor of Chemistry and the Princeton Center for Theoretical Science,
Materials Institute and Applied & Computational Mathematics
Princeton University
2009 APS David Alder Lectureship Award in the Field of Material Physics
Fellow APS

Rusty S. Towell
Professor of Physics
Abilene Christian University
Member IEEE

Edward S. Troy
Principal Engineer
Aerospace Consulting
Wireless, RF, microwave, analog/DSP, and GPS circuits and systems
Member IEEE, AAAS

William B. Walters
Professor of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Maryland
John Simon Guggenheim Fellow (1986)
ACS Award in Nuclear Chemistry (2001)
Alexander von Humboldt Senior Fellow, University of Mainz (2002)
Life Member APS, Member ACS

Samuel A. Werner
Curators’ Professor Emeritus
The University of Missouri
Guest Researcher, NIST
Fellow APS, AAAS

Bruce J. West
Adjunct Professor of Physics
Duke University
Fellow APS

Peter J. Wojtowicz
Group Head, Senior Member Technical Staff (retired)
RCA Labs, GE, Sarnoff Corporation
Fellow APS

Ya-Hong Xie
Professor of Materials Science and Engineering
University of California at Los Angeles
Senior Member IEEE, Member Materials Research Society

M. John Yoder
Principal Physicist
The MITRE Corporation
Life Member APS

Claude Zeller
Principal Fellow
Pitney Bowles Inc.
Member IEEE

Martin V. Zombeck
Physicist, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics (retired)
Author, Handbook of Space Astronomy and Astrophysics (Cambridge University Press)
Coauthor, High Resolution X-Ray Spectroscopy of Cosmic Plasmas (Cambridge University Press)

[dr_mabeuse]

That's pretty interesting. Your petition led me the American Physical Society's web page, where it turns out they've opened up debate on AGW because of a lack of consensus and the reservations of a significant number of its members.

The APS itself stands by its statement on 11/18/07, which states quite bluntly:

“Emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are changing the atmosphere in ways that affect the Earth’s climate.”

But they want to foster open scientific debate on the issue in the pages of their journal.

Strangely, though, they let the first anti-AGW argument be authored by a politician, not a scientist. The pro-AGW piece was written by two professor from Cal Poly.

For instance, his [Monckton, the British politican and author of the anti article] claim that cosmic rays are behind warming trends in recent decades has been thoroughly refuted and George Monbiot handily debunked many of Monckton’s other claims. Finally, Tim Lambert dispenses with Monckton’s claims of the IPCC’s overstatement of climate sensitivity, again noting Monckton’s spurious reasoning. ref

So the debate goes on.

Is there dissension and doubt and debate? For sure. That's how science is done. But is there sufficient consensus that something rather than nothing should be done? Yes. unequivocally.

[lance gt]

Originally Posted by dr_mabeuse

That's pretty interesting. Your petition led me the American Physical Society's web page, where it turns out they've opened up debate on AGW because of a lack of consensus and the reservations of a significant number of its members.

The APS itself stands by its statement on 11/18/07, which states quite bluntly:

“Emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are changing the atmosphere in ways that affect the Earth’s climate.”

But they want to foster open scientific debate on the issue in the pages of their journal.

Strangely, though, they let the first anti-AGW argument be authored by a politician, not a scientist. The pro-AGW piece was written by two professor from Cal Poly.

For instance, his [Monckton, the British politican and author of the anti article] claim that cosmic rays are behind warming trends in recent decades has been thoroughly refuted and George Monbiot handily debunked many of Monckton’s other claims. Finally, Tim Lambert dispenses with Monckton’s claims of the IPCC’s overstatement of climate sensitivity, again noting Monckton’s spurious reasoning. ref

So the debate goes on.

Is there dissension and doubt and debate? For sure. That's how science is done. But is there sufficient consensus that something rather than nothing should be done? Yes. unequivocally.

Wouldn't it stand to reason then, that if humanity made a concerted effort to make changes, would those changes be significant enough in the results to warrant a conclusion, that humanity does or doesn't play an intregal part in GW. From there, all the other factors affecting the planet can be taken into consideration as to their cause and effect, thus eliminating a useless debate, with no facts to conclude with.

[Huckleman2000]

Originally Posted by lance gt

Wouldn't it stand to reason then, that if humanity made a concerted effort to make changes, would those changes be significant enough in the results to warrant a conclusion, that humanity does or doesn't play an intregal part in GW. From there, all the other factors affecting the planet can be taken into consideration as to their cause and effect, thus eliminating a useless debate, with no facts to conclude with.

Maybe. Or, the deniers would just claim it was natural cycles all along. That's the problem with preventative measures - if they work, the deniers always claim they weren't needed in the first place.

[trysail]

Originally Posted by Huckleman2000

Maybe. Or, the deniers would just claim it was natural cycles all along. That's the problem with preventative measures - if they work, the deniers always claim they weren't needed in the first place.

Author not known:

The reason I bother to say it is I'm a sensitive soul, sort of, and object to being called a "denier". A denier is someone who dishonestly or irrationally flies in the face of clear evidence. For example, most Holocaust deniers are anti-Semites who exhibit their political "credentials" by pretending something perfectly obvious and ghastly didn't happen. The rest are psychotic or educationally subnormal.

But climate change sceptics are not denying anything obvious such as the Holocaust at all. The point I was trying to make was that there are (at least) three "links in the chain" of taking action against global warming, and each of them is in some way rather dodgy, or at least worth more discussion. First link: "climate change science" seems to involve no testing. (Which is wholly unacceptable as "science". Computer modelling is quite unlike genuine science.) Second link: no one knows whether warming would be good or bad. (So why assume it must be bad?) Third link: no one knows how bad any proposed medicine would be. (So before we administer it, we had better really think about its likely effects.)

There's a fourth link too: we can be reasonably sure that any significant action taken by the West will kill -- i.e. result in the deaths of -- many people in the developing world.

It all adds up to this: the appropriate attitude is scepticism. We should not fall for simplistic slogans such as "I'm for life -- what are you for?" or "I'm in favour of saving the planet" -- as if skeptics are in favour of destroying the planet. Slogans like that are exactly the sort of thing that journalists should be cutting through, to get to the real heart of the position these slogans are meant to express.

Unlike the links in the global warming chain action we can be sure will kill many people in the developing world -- and there are good reasons to be skeptical about each link.

Richard Black, BBC:

...on these pages, we have taken the decision not to use the word "denier" as simple short-hand for any group - because it isn't entirely accurate, and because of the historical connotations it carries.

[lance gt]

Denying or agreeing isn't the case as I see it. It's the lack of empirical evidence that needs to be collected to satisfy the important questions.
1 Is there a significant change in the environment?
2 If there is, what changes are occuring?
3 What are the effects of these changes?
4 What factors are causing these effects?
5 Does humanity play a significant role in these changes?

Those 5 questions should have been answered by now, by the amount of time and money invested into it. The facts will speak for themselves and interpretation will be kept to a minimum of theoretical equations.

The obvious changes are in our face and we have proof of them. No amount of charts and graphs can alter the reality of what is happening. Is what's happening a good or a bad thing? Are we causing it? Do we try to take responsibility for what we can do now, or wait until there are no more debates and the problems are unsurmountable, but totally confirmed by all, that there is a problem.