That sounds like denier talk to me. Should he be tried for crimes against humanity?
A true scientist, make that eminent scientist, who is willing to stand up and say the truth. there are some others though like Richard Lindzen and Garth Paltridge.
Richard Feynam is another who believes strongly in skepticism.
90 yrs old, yes sets them apart, the old school who believe science means something, not just another rung on the ladder to success
I am a long-time admirer of Dyson and I completely agree that scientists should be skeptical, however, that does not mean that one should ignore evidence, theory, and modeling. While it is true that cloud parameterization is one of the weak points of the computer models, that is improving every year and as computing power grows we grow closer to cloud-resolving models. Techniques are being used now that are partially cloud-resolving. However I don't think anyone should buy into this argument that we don't know what's going to happen with clouds so we shouldn't be concerned about AGW. In fact Lindzen has a theory that increased cloudiness will limit temperature rise--well great, except that means that the climate of the Earth is STILL being radically changed by greenhouse gas emissions.
The hyperbole this article starts off with is embarrassing. Saying "When Einstein died in 1955, there was an opening for the title of 'most brilliant physicist on the planet.' Dyson has filled it." is something that virtually no physicist would agree with. In fact, Dyson's big contribution was putting that of a more brilliant physicist, Richard Feynman, on more solid theoretical footing.
EDIT for Ian: Nice quote from Feynman, but so what? I have yet to see anyone running an experiment that shows that CO2 is not a greenhouse gas, overturning the Clausius-Clapeyron relation, showing that CO2 is not rapidly increasing, etc. The stuff I see you coming up with is that in the short term the temperature is increasing slightly slower than what a 25 year old model predicted, big deal.
EDIT for Climate Realist: It's not "Dr." Dyson, he does not have a doctorate (and he's proud of that).
Good scientists should be skeptics. But not just skeptical of the IPCC, but of Faux News and the DailyMail.
In his critique of climatology, Dr. Dyson puts an excessive emphasis on models. The science of global warming proceeds computer models by a large margin. He criticizes them for using fudge factors. But what do you call it when the skeptics bring up PDO? Or the supposed1500 year cycle. Besides current warming is 500 years too early for both it and the Mediaeval Warm Period to have been caused by the same 1500 cycle.
You should read the Wiki article on Dyson. Maybe it will teach you the difference between a skeptic and deniers like yourself. If you don't like Wiki (Dyson does) then read what Dyson says, not some spin doctor's "interpretation".
I admire Dyson and am not about to disagree with him on the science. I find it ironic that deniers of global warming think he agrees with them. I also feel that's pretty good proof that deniers don't bother to research anything to do with their opinions - they just look for talking points.
Of course Climate Scientists accept the theory then get numbers to prove it .
But they don't test out other causes and the trillions of variations and probability's .
They get on the money gravy train and prove nothing . Computer Models don't predict
the future or they could win Power ball .
Yes, you must be skeptical of everything. Even sometimes established facts and methodology. That way you can learn to understand a fact or theory properly and sometimes you find quirks which are wrong. People who are to na?ve or lazy to think, are easily taken for a ride.
The High Priest, Al Gore and his many minions on this site, would certainly charge a person like that with heresy.
"I believe! I believe!" is for religion, not science.
Quote by John Dewey: “Scepticism: the mark and even the pose of the educated mind.”
Quote by Gerrit van der Lingen, scientist: “Being a scientist means being a skeptic.”
Good quote:
"The essence of science is that it is always willing to abandon a given idea, however fundamental it may seem to be, for a better one; the essence of theology is that it holds its truths to be eternal and immutable."
~ H.L. Mencken
It is interesting that every climate denier is almost 90 years old and resentful that their students have advanced beyond them. In 10 years, all climate deniers will be dead.
http://blog.nj.com/njv_paul_mulshine/2013/04/climatologists_are_no_einstein.html
That sounds like denier talk to me. Should he be tried for crimes against humanity?
