@wsscherk @realdeepdives @ScottAdamsSays @AtomsksSanakan @geoffmprice @luvkit Peter Hadfield's (potholer54) 2nd resp to contrarian Tony Heller. The better argument is how well the logic fits together and if the person cites evidence you can cross-check.https://youtu.be/weQ-N4iymrQ
-
-
I know that Gavin S (NASA) has had arguments with Judith Curry on things she has said publicly at a high technical level but I found her to be much more informed, honest in her criticisms. People may disagree, but her arguments were more convincing when I was a skeptic.
-
Heller is so transparent in his mistakes, it is a waste of time even considering him as a valid critic. When even the critics criticize a critic like Heller, you know you don't have the best on the critical side.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Sure. But not a really serious debate, as potholer54 pointed out. The models work well, the empirical data is sound, and the physics and chemistry behind GHG is pretty much locked in. What is murky on the critics' side is how high is that ECS value? If it is low, we have time.
End of conversation
-
-
-
On the policy side, I think Bjorn Lomborg is interesting and he has teamed up with Nordhaus to present an economic plan for AGW. Even though potholer54 firmly debunked one of his videos on electric cars, at least Lomborg has presented a solution to the AGW problem.
-
It would be interesting to contrast Nordhaus's plan for AGW with Paul Hawken's plan presented in his book "Drawdown". Hawken's book is extremely specific about AGW solutions as compared with the Green New Deal which is completely unrealistic at this point.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
At the speed of YouTube, potholer54 has responded to the challenge:pic.twitter.com/wSwnR8JlUE
-
My only comment, if we are still debating the science, it is somewhat similar to arguing that Einstein's General Theory of Relativity is wrong. Most people can't comprehend the math behind it, yet it has been empirically confirmed. Same with AGW science. Debate is with policy.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
I would agree with
@JSegor, that Judith Curry would come up with the best rebuttals, at least the technical ones. I find Heller compelling when he points out tide gauges haven't changed, i.e. we still have the Maldives. -
Re: "I find Heller compelling when he points out tide gauges haven't changed, i.e. we still have the Maldives."
Sea level rise in the Maldives:
https://sci-hub.tw/https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/014904101753227851 …
https://sci-hub.tw/10.1080/014904102753516787 …
https://sci-hub.tw/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2005.04.001 …
https://sci-hub.tw/https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921818114000381 …
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/a9e6/0707a00343326956545c51d6cd9879e68cde.pdf …pic.twitter.com/p0Ya7X4W1c
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.