Still Waiting for Some SBC Climate Change Facts.

Steven Frisch has replied to my blog post here on the Sierra Foothills Report, rather than engage in a discussion on this blog. He is not comfortable addressing the more conservative readers on this blog instead prefers the liberal echo chamber at the Sierra Foothills Report.

My comments are in red behind the brackets embedded in the text.

Steven Frisch:

I am not always following the varieties of circle of stupid that pass themselves off as relevant in bogland regularly, and most readers here have dropped this post by now, but I did want to provide an update. [Great opening for someone that has no intention of engaging in a scientific discussion of the facts. If I read Steven correctly, those of us who support the facts of climate change (global warming) are just too stupid to understand SBC’s high level values.]

Russ Steele recently posted this response to my post above on his blog.

“The validity of the climate change argument is not about seeking “common ground on values” it is about the facts. The point I was making is that all the talk around the table seeking common ground will not change the data upon which facts are based on.”

Any intelligent reader will see that he really is still densely sticking to his “I am right and you are wrong” mind set. [ I am not claiming to be right and the other side wrong, the scientific facts speak far more powerfully than I could.] Of course Russ is also ignoring my statement that, “….battling scientific research is really not the point of this post, we could go back and forth on that forever, and that is what Russ wants us to do.” [ If Steven has some facts to support his anthropogenic global warming case that are compelling, there would be no back and forth. The case would be settled, not back and forth required.]

The point of Ms. Todd’s original post was that in world where some contend there is competing or conflicting ‘science’ the path forward requires a higher level engagement and sharing of values to understand WHY people think what they do. [ What do higher levels of engagement and shared values have to do with the facts?]

But we will never find that out, or understand each other positions, as long as people like Russ are this fuc#ing stubborn. Which is why we have to just leave the involved in the dust and let natural selection take its course 🙂 [ Yes, I am stubbornly dedicated to the scientific facts, and if Steven Frisch and the AGW folks could present some scientifically proven facts for their case humans are responsible for climate change, I am willing to reconsider. But, so far the global warmers are stuck with their dodgy climate models and very little proven science, so they want to focus on higher level values of engagement at dinner time, to change our minds about the value of the facts. ]

Advertisements

About Russ Steele

Freelance writer and climate change blogger. Russ spent twenty years in the Air Force as a navigator specializing in electronics warfare and digital systems. After his service he was employed for sixteen years as concept developer for TRW, an aerospace and automotive company, and then was CEO of a non-profit Internet provider for 18 months. Russ's articles have appeared in Comstock's Business, Capitol Journal, Trailer Life, Monitoring Times, and Idaho Magazine.
This entry was posted in California, Climate, Climate Change, Jobs and Economy, Local. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Still Waiting for Some SBC Climate Change Facts.

  1. gjrebane says:

    Good post Russ. I would consider this an extremely relevant exemplar of how progressives’ muddy thinking tackles science driven issues.

    Like

  2. Michael Anderson says:

    Russ, here is a link to a column by Jon Carroll that was in the San Francisco Chronicle today. After reading it I’d be interested to read your thoughts on its content. Thanks.

    http://www.sfgate.com/entertainment/carroll/article/A-thought-experiment-about-energy-extraction-5899521.php

    Like

    • Why does Michael Anderson think a college dropout (he apparently left UC Berkeley without a degree) turned newspaper columnist like Carroll has a handle on the science involved? He writes “If there’s anything the scientific community is united on, it’s the human contribution to the warming trend”, but the professional membership (the one with real degrees in related sciences, like meteorology and atmospheric physics) of the American Meteorological Society were polled recently (what a concept), and only half thought that as much as one half of the warming of the last century was primarily man made, from all causes, from land use, “black carbon”, to fossil fuel use. Meaning half of the premier weather experts in the world are “deniers”.

      Virtually all reputable scientists agree there’s been a pause in warming for the last 17 or 18 years, predicted by, at last count, precisely *none* of the general circulation models relied upon by the IPCC which have all predicted warming that ain’t happening.

      Now, what does that say about Jon Carroll’s pronouncements about what scientists think?

      Like

Comments are closed.