Difference between revisions of "Ivar Giaever/climate"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m (Reverted edits by 80.176.84.61 (Talk); changed back to last version by Woozle) |
m (Reverted edits by 216.45.58.187 (Talk) to last revision by Woozle) |
||
| (5 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
But the number is not important: only whether they are correct is important. We don't really know what the actual effect on the global temperature is. There are better ways to spend the money... | But the number is not important: only whether they are correct is important. We don't really know what the actual effect on the global temperature is. There are better ways to spend the money... | ||
</blockquote> | </blockquote> | ||
| − | This quote is from a [[2008-12-10 More Than 650 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims|2008 minority report]] of the [[US Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works]], which cites as sources only the following links: | + | This quote is excerpted from a panel discussion on global warming at the [[Lindau Nobel Laureate Meeting/58|58th Lindau meeting of Nobel laureates]] in 2008; a video of Dr. Giaever's comments is [[2008-07-01 58th Nobel Laureate Treffen Lindau 2008 Giaever Schellnhuber|here]], with some transcription. |
| + | |||
| + | This particular excerpt is from a [[2008-12-10 More Than 650 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims|2008 minority report]] of the [[US Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works]], which cites as sources only the following links: | ||
* http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/3784 | * http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/3784 | ||
| − | ** The strongly [[US conservatism|US-style conservative]] [[Canada Free Press]], which gives a longer version of the quote (see below) and which appears to refer back to the Senate EPW Committee [ | + | ** The strongly [[US conservatism|US-style conservative]] [[Canada Free Press]], which gives a longer version of the quote (see below) and which appears to refer back to the Senate EPW Committee [[2007-12-20 U.S. Senate Report: Over 400 Prominent Scientists Disputed Man-Made Global Warming Claims in 2007|previous year's Minority Report]] as its source |
* http://motls.blogspot.com/2008/07/lindau-half-of-nobel-prize-winners-are.html | * http://motls.blogspot.com/2008/07/lindau-half-of-nobel-prize-winners-are.html | ||
| − | ** This blog entry is much closer to the source | + | ** This blog entry is much closer to the source; it includes links to German-language transcriptions of the comments and a link to a video which is apparently of the actual comments but which is now unfortunately password-protected. (Giaever presented during the Monday session, but I don't know if the panel was on the same day. Highlights from the Monday session are shown [[youtube:R-1szOSVI2Y|here]], but this does not include any footage of or mention of Giaever.) |
* http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1973/giaever-bio.html | * http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1973/giaever-bio.html | ||
** Giaever's [[Nobel Prize]] biography page, which includes no statements at all about climate, and from which it seems clear that he has had absolutely no known involvement in the field of climate research | ** Giaever's [[Nobel Prize]] biography page, which includes no statements at all about climate, and from which it seems clear that he has had absolutely no known involvement in the field of climate research | ||
| Line 15: | Line 17: | ||
The Canada Free Press's version of the quote: | The Canada Free Press's version of the quote: | ||
<blockquote> | <blockquote> | ||
| − | <p>First of all, I | + | <p>First of all, I didn't want to be on this panel. Second of all, I am a skeptic. Third of all, if I am Norwegian, should I really worry about a little bit of warming? I am unfortunately becoming an old man. We have heard many similar warnings about the acid rain 30 years ago and the ozone hole 10 years ago or deforestation but the humanity is still around. The ozone hole width has peaked in 1993.</p> |
<p>Moreover, global warming has become a new religion. We frequently hear about the number of scientists who support it. But the number is not important: only whether they are correct is important. We don’t really know what the actual effect on the global temperature is. There are better ways to spend the money.</p> | <p>Moreover, global warming has become a new religion. We frequently hear about the number of scientists who support it. But the number is not important: only whether they are correct is important. We don’t really know what the actual effect on the global temperature is. There are better ways to spend the money.</p> | ||
</blockquote> | </blockquote> | ||
| − | + | * http://www.scienceblogs.de/lindaunobel/2008/07/ganz-viel-heisse-luft.php (German language) | |
| + | ** This is one of the links that Motl above offers as references regarding Dr. Giaever's comments on [[global warming]], delivered on a panel at the Nobel Laureate Meeting at Lindau of 2008. Blog author Beatrice Lugger quotes Dr. Giaever from the panel discussion as follows:<blockquote>I did a little research on google to prepare for this panel</blockquote> | ||
| + | |||
| + | Just based on these excerpts, a few counterpoints seem obvious: | ||
* He didn't want to be on the panel, so presumably he is uninterested in the subject or does not feel qualified to comment on it. | * He didn't want to be on the panel, so presumably he is uninterested in the subject or does not feel qualified to comment on it. | ||
* The comment about the ozone hole reveals his ignorance. The hole began shrinking only ''after'' measures were taken to reduce ozone-depleting substances in the earth's atmosphere, exactly the sort of action being proposed in response to the [[global warming]] crisis. The shrinking and disappearance of the ozone hole is a testament to the ''success'' of such techniques and evidence in ''favor'' of the methodology which recommended them and which recommends similar actions with regard to GW. | * The comment about the ozone hole reveals his ignorance. The hole began shrinking only ''after'' measures were taken to reduce ozone-depleting substances in the earth's atmosphere, exactly the sort of action being proposed in response to the [[global warming]] crisis. The shrinking and disappearance of the ozone hole is a testament to the ''success'' of such techniques and evidence in ''favor'' of the methodology which recommended them and which recommends similar actions with regard to GW. | ||
| + | * Although research using only Google can certainly reveal useful information, a quick search done in an afternoon is likely to uncover mainly the most widely-promoted, well-funded point of view in a situation where a [[manufactroversy]] has clearly been [[global warming denial|staged]]. | ||
| + | |||
| + | See the [[2008-07-01 58th Nobel Laureate Treffen Lindau 2008 Giaever Schellnhuber|full comments]] for further discussion. | ||
Latest revision as of 10:41, 6 April 2010
2008 quote
A quote attributed to Dr. Giaever has been widely circulated in anti-global warming circles:
I am a skeptic ... Global warming has become a new religion ... I am Norwegian, should I really worry about a little bit of warming? I am unfortunately becoming an old man. We have heard many similar warnings about the acid rain 30 years ago and the ozone hole 10 years ago or deforestation but the humanity is still around. The ozone hole width has peaked in 1993 ... Moreover, global warming has become a new religion. We frequently hear about the number of scientists who support it. But the number is not important: only whether they are correct is important. We don't really know what the actual effect on the global temperature is. There are better ways to spend the money...
This quote is excerpted from a panel discussion on global warming at the 58th Lindau meeting of Nobel laureates in 2008; a video of Dr. Giaever's comments is here, with some transcription.
This particular excerpt is from a 2008 minority report of the US Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, which cites as sources only the following links:
- http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/3784
- The strongly US-style conservative Canada Free Press, which gives a longer version of the quote (see below) and which appears to refer back to the Senate EPW Committee previous year's Minority Report as its source
- http://motls.blogspot.com/2008/07/lindau-half-of-nobel-prize-winners-are.html
- This blog entry is much closer to the source; it includes links to German-language transcriptions of the comments and a link to a video which is apparently of the actual comments but which is now unfortunately password-protected. (Giaever presented during the Monday session, but I don't know if the panel was on the same day. Highlights from the Monday session are shown here, but this does not include any footage of or mention of Giaever.)
- http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1973/giaever-bio.html
- Giaever's Nobel Prize biography page, which includes no statements at all about climate, and from which it seems clear that he has had absolutely no known involvement in the field of climate research
The Canada Free Press's version of the quote:
First of all, I didn't want to be on this panel. Second of all, I am a skeptic. Third of all, if I am Norwegian, should I really worry about a little bit of warming? I am unfortunately becoming an old man. We have heard many similar warnings about the acid rain 30 years ago and the ozone hole 10 years ago or deforestation but the humanity is still around. The ozone hole width has peaked in 1993.
Moreover, global warming has become a new religion. We frequently hear about the number of scientists who support it. But the number is not important: only whether they are correct is important. We don’t really know what the actual effect on the global temperature is. There are better ways to spend the money.
- http://www.scienceblogs.de/lindaunobel/2008/07/ganz-viel-heisse-luft.php (German language)
- This is one of the links that Motl above offers as references regarding Dr. Giaever's comments on global warming, delivered on a panel at the Nobel Laureate Meeting at Lindau of 2008. Blog author Beatrice Lugger quotes Dr. Giaever from the panel discussion as follows:
I did a little research on google to prepare for this panel
- This is one of the links that Motl above offers as references regarding Dr. Giaever's comments on global warming, delivered on a panel at the Nobel Laureate Meeting at Lindau of 2008. Blog author Beatrice Lugger quotes Dr. Giaever from the panel discussion as follows:
Just based on these excerpts, a few counterpoints seem obvious:
- He didn't want to be on the panel, so presumably he is uninterested in the subject or does not feel qualified to comment on it.
- The comment about the ozone hole reveals his ignorance. The hole began shrinking only after measures were taken to reduce ozone-depleting substances in the earth's atmosphere, exactly the sort of action being proposed in response to the global warming crisis. The shrinking and disappearance of the ozone hole is a testament to the success of such techniques and evidence in favor of the methodology which recommended them and which recommends similar actions with regard to GW.
- Although research using only Google can certainly reveal useful information, a quick search done in an afternoon is likely to uncover mainly the most widely-promoted, well-funded point of view in a situation where a manufactroversy has clearly been staged.
See the full comments for further discussion.