Politically Left Scientist Dissents – Calls President Obama ‘delusional’ on global wa

[Revmitchell]

As President Obama attends the UN Summit climate summit in New York City, a fellow member of his Democratic Party, who is also a scientist, is publicity renouncing the Presidents climate change claims as “delusional.” Rossiter reversed his view on man-made climate change and now says belief in a climate catastrophe is “simply not logical.”
Climate Statistics Professor Dr. Caleb Rossiter of American University, is an outspoken anti-war activist, has a flawless progressive record on a range of political issues – and he is a climate skeptic. Rossiter is a former Democratic congressional candidate and he campaigned against U.S. backed wars in Central America and Southern Africa.
In an exclusive interview for the upcoming documentary Climate Hustle, Rossiter, an adjunct professor in American University’s Department of Mathematics and Statistics, explained how he converted his views from accepting to challenging the so-called “consensus” on climate change after examining the scientific evidence. Rossiter has taught courses in climate statistics and holds a PhD in policy analysis and a masters degree in mathematics. (Note: The upcoming climate documentary will reveal how politically progressive scientists and other former warmists are now challenging the “consensus” claims of man-made global warming. See: Watch Now: Morano on TV (humbly) promotes new climate film: ‘We are going to have the greatest climate documentary of al-l-l-l-l ti-i-i-ime!’)


http://www.climatedepot.com/2014/09...president-obama-delusional-on-global-warming/

 

[Crabtownboy]

Put a frog in cold water and slowly heat it and that frog will sit there until he/she is killed by the heat believing, until it is too late, that everything if hunky-dory.

 

[PreachTony]

Put a frog in cold water and slowly heat it and that frog will sit there until he/she is killed by the heat believing, until it is too late, that everything if hunky-dory.

Yeah, but the frog has no control over the heating of its environment, and has no option to escape, other than jumping out of the water. Since we're not ready to build colonies in space, that option is out for us. Or do you mean to posit that man, like the frog, has no effect on its environment?

 

[Crabtownboy]

Yeah, but the frog has no control over the heating of its environment, and has no option to escape, other than jumping out of the water. Since we're not ready to build colonies in space, that option is out for us. Or do you mean to posit that man, like the frog, has no effect on its environment?

Hello Tony, You are right, man does have an effect on his/her environment. But we are ignoring what is happening and this makes us like the frog, here we sit in the stew we are making, ignoring what is happening and one day will wake and find that we are condemned to disastrous consequences for our lack of will to do what was right. We have the option of doing something, but instead of tending the "garden" we are ignoring all the signs and destroying it.

Here is a simple example of doing nothing and making it worse:

And it has just been reported that the carbon dioxide measurement just went over 400 parts per million. It has never been this high.

The concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was recently measured at over 400 parts per million (ppm) on Mount Mauna Loa in Hawaii for the first time.

Though this was a seasonal high, there is little doubt that the average CO2 concentration will surpass 400 ppm in 2015.

http://www.decodedscience.com/climate-change-protests-demonstrations/49549

 

[PreachTony]

Hello Tony, You are right, man does have an effect on his/her environment. But we are ignoring what is happening and this makes us like the frog, here we sit in the stew we are making, ignoring what is happening and one day will wake and find that we are condemned to disastrous consequences for our lack of will to do what was right. We have the option of doing something, but instead of tending the "garden" we are ignoring all the signs and destroying it.

Crabtown - In your earlier example of a frog in continually heating water, the frog is doing nothing to contribute to that environment, other than adding what body heat it produces, which, since frogs are ecothermic, is negligible. Even if you brought in a creature that produces heat instead of consuming it, like a human, cat, or dog, the body heat produced is still not enough to adversely effect the surrounding water to the point of boiling. An outside source, other than anything produced by the subject of your scenario, must act upon the scenario in order for a dangerous situation to arise.

The Frog is not ignoring what is happening. It simply does not have a high enough degree of intelligence to understand what is happening.

I'm trying to avoid delving into the deeply political offshoots of this topic, as I've been around that mountain many times with friends of mine. I'll just say this: There is a way to curtail the human impact on the environment without having to damage the economies of the global powers. There are means of slowing to even stopping the outflow of human-created pollution, but we have to understand that these are not overnight solutions. Time and research are required.

 

[Crabtownboy]

Crabtown - In your earlier example of a frog in continually heating water, the frog is doing nothing to contribute to that environment, other than adding what body heat it produces, which, since frogs are ecothermic, is negligible. Even if you brought in a creature that produces heat instead of consuming it, like a human, cat, or dog, the body heat produced is still not enough to adversely effect the surrounding water to the point of boiling. An outside source, other than anything produced by the subject of your scenario, must act upon the scenario in order for a dangerous situation to arise.

The Frog is not ignoring what is happening. It simply does not have a high enough degree of intelligence to understand what is happening.

I'm trying to avoid delving into the deeply political offshoots of this topic, as I've been around that mountain many times with friends of mine. I'll just say this: There is a way to curtail the human impact on the environment without having to damage the economies of the global powers. There are means of slowing to even stopping the outflow of human-created pollution, but we have to understand that these are not overnight solutions. Time and research are required.

Tony, I have no problem with your reply. I would like to know your ideas on reducing human-created pollution. If it can be done without harming the economy I am all for it. Maybe you could start a new thread on this topic. It could be a very interesting thread if people will respond rationally and not with no thought emotions.

My frog analogy was just that an analogy ... and all analogies breakdown at some point. I was merely trying to show that by doing nothing we will reap disastrous results.

 

[PreachTony]

Tony, I have no problem with your reply. I would like to know your ideas on reducing human-created pollution. If it can be done without harming the economy I am all for it. Maybe you could start a new thread on this topic. It could be a very interesting thread if people will respond rationally and not with no thought emotions.

I'll give it a look later. It's being one of those weird mornings for me...check back later.