tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5941560477618551520.post255130353355234963..comments2023-11-05T05:13:10.901-06:00Comments on Pete'sPlace On Global Warming/Climate Change: Unstoppable Skeptic: Dr. Fred SingerPeterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12792460740514151650noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5941560477618551520.post-87877674958653504262009-10-31T13:45:27.756-05:002009-10-31T13:45:27.756-05:00After all, Pete, you and I cannot interpret the da...After all, Pete, you and I cannot interpret the data, nor to we have access to the devices, full data, and scientific panels that compute this information. So we have to be able to trust our climate scientists just as we trust our auto mechanics and doctors and legal experts, right? And if we worry that our doctor is taking money from the Alexis de Tocqueville Institute to tell us we don’t have lung cancer…well…you see my dilemma.<br /><br />So I went right to the source itself – I found Singer’s Science & Environmental Policy Project which claims that it is involved with numerous scientific subjects (nuclear radiation; DDT, science and regulation at EPA, energy policy, space exploration) but it is very clear after only a few minutes on the site that SEPP is devoted almost entirely to debunking the myth of global warming – and they make no bones about it. Article after article (many published in the mainstream media Pete – sorry!)<br /><br />Okay, so they have their position. I was a little taken aback by the amateur look of the site, not terribly professional, but I guess it could be explained-away because SEPP is non-profit…<br /><br /> Yet then there is the actual site itself and what it had to say. The following is off their main page:<br /><br />“But hidden within the draft treaty is language creating a ‘world government.’ According to Lord Monckton, who has read the draft treaty carefully, ‘the word ‘government’ actually appears as the first of three purposes of the new entity. The second purpose is the transfer of wealth from the countries of the West to third-world countries, in satisfaction of what is called, coyly, ‘climate debt,’ because we’ve been burning CO2 and they haven’t. We’ve been screwing up the climate and they haven’t. And the third purpose of this new entity, this government, is enforcement.’”<br /><br />Does that really say “world government”? Is Singer and his crew honestly trying to convince us that warmists are trying to take over the world? This is always the first step in socialist thought: stir the paranoia up. Orwellian scholars would have a field day here. And is he really quoting Monckton, who has no credibility on global warming and may be a whack-job himself. <br /><br />This was I need to convince me that all was not right here. Sorry Pete, despite his brilliance, Freddy is either on the take or one of the good old boys. And neither spells good science.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5941560477618551520.post-45520243265895032009-10-31T13:44:52.965-05:002009-10-31T13:44:52.965-05:00Oh Pete…this guy is a work in progress…I don’t kno...Oh Pete…this guy is a work in progress…I don’t know what to make of the eminent Siegfried Frederick Singer, Ph.D. I’ve spent a good deal of time looking and thinking about ol’Fred…and he is a problematic figure, to be sure. Or perhaps, to be more specific, I do have a problem personally believing this guy but I am trying to be as objective, as non-judgmental, and as non-paranoid as I can be…still…<br /><br />Fred is an accomplished, frighteningly brilliant man – there’s no sense denying that. All by itself, Singer’s education as an electrical engineer at an excellent school (Ohio State) and then his Ph.D. in physics at an elite school (Princeton) speaks to this. And his record as a scientist – wracking up numerous patents, articles and monographs in a wide spread of scientific topics and then acting as director of several governmental agencies, founder and director of several university departments, and even a university dean – makes this even more apparent.<br /><br />For the early part of his career Freddy combined his two disciplines of electrical engineering and physics and designed a number of instruments for satellites and the like. Apparently he was very successful at design – and it must be noted that many of his devices were used on weather satellites. In fact, he was the first scientist to head the bureau of weather satellites for the U.S. <br /><br />Then abruptly in the late ‘80s he switched gears and become a well-known, outspoken critic of the veracity of global warming theories.<br /><br />Now, that alone is not problematic because many scientists have several careers. Rather, I have two concerns about Singer: 1) allegations of collusion with corporate energy interests, and 2) the man’s own website, a.k.a. his own tone on the internet.<br /><br />It would be pointless and redundant to list the charges (they have a lot to do with Exxon and with the tobacco industry and follow suit with other warming skeptics) but there is evidence that he takes money to give his opinion on things like “second hand smoke,” ozone depletion, and, importantly for our purposes, global warming. Freddy is also involved with a number of very conservative political organizations – the Hudson Institute, the Heartland Institute, the Marshall Institute, and the like.<br /><br />Are these charges about selling ‘expertise’ true? Not sure. There seems to be a lot of hard evidence for them and not a lot of denial – or I should say, some paltry denial that appears to be proven false. <br /><br />Does involvement in a ‘conservative think tank’ automatically suspend one’s scientific credibility? No, not necessarily, but it does indicate a definite political bent…which is problematic if we want to trust the scientist his or herself.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com