US News
By M&C US News Dec 28, 2007, 18:36 GMT
French physicist calls Al Gore a 'crook' over global warming issues
And Also
Latest Headlines in US
- 1. Suspect in US police killing shot dead (1st Lead)
- 2. Suspect in US police killing shot dead
- 3. In Pictures: 'World War II Fighter Recovered'
- 4. Supreme Court overturns decision on detainee abuse photos
- 5. White House gate crashers: Reality TV in the making (News Feature)
Older Talkback
Here is some more food for thought offered to those capable of such a dastardly act. What if someone built a fission reactor next to your house and they told you up front that it would not have any control mechanisms or safety devices. You would be alarmed by that, wouldn't you?
Guess what. The sun is a FUSION reactor completely lacking in engineering controls or safety devices and it is, right next door to us, being only eight minutes away at light speed.
Here is something else to think about. All the energy we have ever used or will ever use has as its ultimate source--nuclear fusion. That's right, nuclear energy. Without sunlight raining down on Earth in the ancient past, there would never have been any coal, crude oil, or natural gas. Without the sunlight that fell on Earth during the last few hundred years, there would not be any wood or even buffalo chips. Without the death of some very large ancient star, there would be no fissile materials in the Earth's crust. We are here discussing a very large source of power. With great power comes great danger.
Despite all this, we go right on living next door to a completely UNCONTROLLED fusion reactor and have so far done nothing, not even to the extent of thinking, about what to do if old Sol decides its time to get hot. Well, guess what. It has decided to get moderately warmer. Maybe, just maybe, it is time for us to start developing a wiser perspective.
I can now skip my science classes after reading (I tried to read part of it) the comments here! I really think global warming is two fold. Part of it is the natural occuring cycle of the world and part of it is man made - so both sides have good points, but they should try to work together and not keep wasting time bashing each other and wanting to be the 'right' one! Is it you old guys who keep stirring the pot of accusations instead of trying to help?
The data being supressed by the MSM is overwhelming. All one has to do is shed ideology and look around. Here is just one I found in less than 20 seconds - from an individual with credentials to satisfy even the most ardent doom & gloom believer. Since web site addresses are prohibited here - Google Dr. Timothy Ball and click on 'Global Warming, climate change facts.'
During the week of Aug. 6, 2007 - NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies -- whose temperature records are a key component of the global-warming claim (quietly) corrected an error in its data set that had made recent temperatures seem warmer than they really were.
In many cases, the changes are statistically minor, but their impact on the rhetoric surrounding global warming is significant.
The hottest year since 1880 becomes 1934 instead of 1998 - now second. 1921 is third.
Four of the 10 hottest years were in the 1930s and three in the past decade.
The 15 hottest years since 1880 are spread over seven decades. Eight occurred before atmospheric carbon dioxide began its recent rise; seven occurred afterwards.
In other words, there is no discernible trend, no obvious warming of late.
Claiming that man-made carbon dioxide has caused the natural disasters of recent years makes as much sense as claiming fossil-fuel burning caused the Great Depression.
Facts are non-patisen!
...to question results. It is sciences fundimental role to question results.
This being the case, to say that a 'majority' of scientists 'agree' on something has no real scientific value. It is their role to question the results and proceed to further study.
It's not that I necessarily disagree with these 'scientists' it's that they've abandoned the scientific method in order to advance a cause.
'.Kind of tells you how stupid the people are that use these arguments...you were saying these were scientists?I guess you mean US scientists,right?'
LOL! such envy.... from going to the moon to the first nuclear reactor to the integrated circuit, the computer and the internet that you whine on... Poor US scientists...
Science is supposed to be collaborative....yes, we built the first nuclear reactor, but a german scientist theorized it, remember?...and, yes, we landed on the moon but it was a german scientist who designed the rocket.
Excellent response to 'turd' - One's use of gutter language diminishes all involved in a legitimate discussion - and relegates that person's thoughts & comments irrelevant - except as a continuing annoyance. But it is a small price to pay in order to have an exchange of thoughts from all sides of an issue. - And yes - I AM an American Patriot!
Oops!
It has taken at least 60 years to link smoking with lung cancer and heart desease. There is always somebody who will deny it right to the very end even when the truth is there staring them in the face.
Global warming is a very similar issue, unfortunately we do not have 60 years to sort it out because it's problems are already here and due to get much worse.
I have lived long enough to hear many scare stories about the Earth's future but this time all the evedence is there and the predictions of global warming are happening yesterday rather than tomorrow.
We can try to adapt to it,try and stop it, or fill up our SUV's and hope all the scientists are wrong.
I go along with soloution No1 because the amount of scepticism on the world proves that nothing will ever be done to combat it.
We are in a similar warming period as was the 1900 to 1940 period. The major difference is that we have satellites (images began in 1979) and 24 hour news. Greenland and the Arctic experienced similar conditions as they experienced during past summers. The debate over a measured temperature rise of 1/10s of a degree is immaterial in scientific terms and the rise is well within the margin of error. AGW is a social and political error aimed at the US, Canada and Western Europe. Unfortunately, the Socialist in these regions are using this issue to their advantage because they know that people feel good if they think they are doing something good for the earth.
One of my favorite stories about science comes from my Aunt who is a renowned Doctor in her field.
In the 1800's, British scientists were going over the Pyramids like ants on a hill. Each discovery produced a new theory of origin, or some other theory.
One day, a scientist walked up to another scientist, who had a hammer and chisle out. He asked why the young scientist was chipping away at the rock, and the man told him 'if this measurement is such, my theory will be proven'.
Scientists are motivated by the same things other people are. We hope they will be honest, but only scientific peer review can offer a possible guarentee of honesty.
The woes of the scientific community become much more pronounced when the guys with the money are demanding a specific kind of result. Politicians have never been above mudslinging at anyone about anything. The first thing any working scientist will remind you of is the Golden Rule. He who has the gold makes the rules. They've been putting up with that kind of nonsense for centuries. Very often, it is the braver ones, the 'fringe members' who have it right and are the ones who get a given field back on course.
One has to only look at science and see the gargantuan mistakes. Eugenics, offered up a 'consensus' of scientists, most out of any medical field, the Spotted Owl, Global Cooling Predictions and the like.
All of these have something in common:
All were pushed as fact by non-scientists through the media
All had politicians using the science to force a political end of their choice.
All had laws to institutionalize the science into fact.
See, Tonny, why we are skeptical?
'SP4: To the turd above'
'Science is supposed to be collaborative....yes, we built the first nuclear reactor, but a german scientist theorized it, remember?'
An Italian born scientist actually, but like so many others with something to contribute he died an American, Remember? No? That is a sign of dementia.
'...and, yes, we landed on the moon but it was a german[sic] scientist who designed the rocket.'
After reading the work of Robert Goddard. Either way, that German died a citizen of the USA.
Hey SP4, you need to get out more. You are not well read enough to shoot people down here and you probably are at the age where every day counts.
...but Fermi and the others could have never done it without Einstein.
That was the point you obviously missed: they all build on each others work.
Again, science is a collaborative enterprise.
By the way, goddard had very little to do with rocketry in America. He hoarded his research, and never really cooperated with anyone. His research never really conributed to anything monumental.
Werner Von Braun was the real father of american rocketry in the USA. After WWII, captured V-2's were brought here, along with ol Wernwer and HE started the show. The Saturn V was HIS baby, as were many of the other milestones.
Schools' out boy. Your mom's cooking breakfast upstairs.
Interesting sidelight, Einstein wrote all three of his best papers during his spare time. He was pretty much outside the rest of the physics community from the git-go.
'..but Fermi and the others could have never done it without Einstein.'
Albert Einstein of Princeton, New Jersey, a citizen of the United States....
'That was the point you obviously missed: they all build on each others work.'
No, the point was to shut up tonny from goddamn Belgium. ('I guess you mean US scientists,right?') You however decided to insert yourself in the middle of it because you wanted some attention.
'By the way, goddard had very little to do with rocketry in America. '
Naaah, he just invented the first practical liquid fuel motor system and the first practical method of gyroscopic stabilization which are the cornerstone, the absolutely most essential contributions to 'rocket science'. Other then that 'very little'...
'Werner Von Braun was the real father of american[sic] rocketry in the USA.'
'At the time, Germany was highly interested in American physicist Robert H. Goddard's research. Before 1939, German scientists occasionally contacted Goddard directly with technical questions. After that, things got rather tense. Wernher von Braun used Goddard's plans from various journals and incorporated them into the building of the Aggregat 4 (A-4) series of rockets, better known as the V-2.[5] In 1963, von Braun reflected on the history of rocketry, and said of Goddard's work: 'His rockets ... may have been rather crude by present-day standards, but they blazed the trail and incorporated many features used in our most modern rockets and space vehicles.' [3] Goddard confirmed his work was used by von Braun when, after the war ended, Goddard inspected captured German V-2s, and recognized many components which he had invented.'
-en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wernher_von_Braun
'Schools' out boy. Your mom's cooking breakfast upstairs.'
Once again, you are demonstrably incorrect yet you swagger about it.
Science is a truely collaborative enterprise.
Von Braun WAS motivated by Goddards work, and even borrowed some of it, but his own hardcore R&D was responsible for most of his successes. Nothing I wrote detracts from Robert Goddards success, but his actual flight achievements pale to Von Braun's.
And yes, AFTER these folks did their pioneering, they emigrated to the USA. There, they were naturalized. Technically, that made them Americans.
Having said that, much of their poineering work was done in their home nations, so I do not think of them as American educated and trained scientists. I think any reasonable person would have to acknoweledge that.
So, no, I would not necessarily agree. You make some very correct points, especially about Goddard's work, but my point was that science is a collaborative enterprise and one builds on the work of others. On that point, I think I'm correct, and from what I read, you seem to think so too.
Robert Goddard didn't develop the Saturn V, Von Braun did, end of story.
Von Braun is, by his own account and history's, a GERMAN scientist, not an american scientist.
End of Story.
'Science is a truely[sic] collaborative enterprise.'
What I was refuting was the idea that American science is something to be ridiculed. Especially by a society whose contribution to the modern world is expensive chocolate.
' Nothing I wrote detracts from Robert Goddards success, but his actual flight achievements pale to Von Braun's.'
Von Braun was a team manager, Goddard was a scientist. Here, read this:
www.thespacereview.com/article/1013/1
'And yes, AFTER these folks did their pioneering, they emigrated to the USA.'
Yes and no. You see, Fermi and Einstein came here to escape a truly European invention called the 'death camp'. Their countries were overtaken by another European invention called 'fascism' whereby their best minds 'collaborated' to come up with inventions like 'the master race' and the 'holocaust'. Even still, Fermi's best work was in the USA, Einstein's work came to fruition in the USA and Von Braun actually hit the moon instead of London as an American, not a Nazi.
It speaks to the society that we have that people can come here and live to the extent of their individual potential. That is why there is an American flag on the moon, not an Italian or German one.
'but my point was that science is a collaborative enterprise and one builds on the work of others. '
Well you see, MY point was that tonny is an ass. You hopped on in and muddied the waters with the 'science is a collaborative effort and you are a turd' proclamation. If you want to follow your point to it's logical ends then no one can take credit for anything because it all started with the ancient Chinese and Sumerians. I am sure tonny would LOVE to endorse that point of view. It is the collective theory of innovation; No one is responsible (especially those Yankee SOB's) because everyone is responsible. I do not buy it.
'Von Braun WAS motivated by Goddards work,'
Goddard and Von Braun were probably motivated by the legend of 'Wan Hu' the Ming dynasty era Chinese 'astronaut' who strapped bottle rockets to his chair and launched himself toward the moon... Unless you can find a scorched Chinaman up there the credit still goes to NASA/The USA. The Anasazi made glow in the dark decorations but the first atomic pile was under the tennis courts at University of Chicago. The abacus may have inspired the integrated circuit but Robert Noyce gets the point...
Yes, human achievement as well as scientific achievement is inherently built on the previous achievements, evolutionary more then collaborative. HOWEVER: In dealing with whiny, indoctrinated, parasitic idiots from Belgium who are furious at being surpassed by these upstart Americans it helps to run down a few contributions to scientific endeavor that have a 'made in America' pedigree.
It also helps to then not have to then go into a long protracted, ad nauseum debate about what precise degree of collaboration these innovations owe to evolution or revolution or collaboration versus inspiration because the original, irrefutable point was that tonny is an a*shole.
Your Talkback on this Story