louploup2 Your own blog suggests the google search to point at your Fields of professional endeavour and political
Hello world!
October 7, 2009
“My web presence is extensive, consisting largely of blog entries, newspaper coverage of matters I’ve been involved in, minutes and news of various organizations I’m part of, and legal cases where I’ve been counsel. You will find my basic resume at LinkedIn (but you have to dig up my name first). Try looking for lawyer 8318 in Washington State”.
I have of course taken a look.
Regarding your characterisation of my own positions, these are superficial.
I suggest that your own reasoning is akin to “Sham” reasoning as given in Pierce’s quote.
CHARLES SANDERS PEIRCE: ´´In order to reason well …. it is absolutely necessary to possess … such virtues as intellectual honesty and sincerity and a real love of truth (2.82). The cause [of the success of scientificinquirers] has been that the motive which has carried them to the laboratory and the field has been a craving to know how things really were … (1-34).[Genuine inquiry consists I in diligent inquiry into truth for truth’s sake(1.44), … in actually drawing the bow upon truth with intentness in the eye, with energy in the arm (1.235). [When] it is no longer the reasoning which determines what the conclusion shall be, but … the conclusion which determines what the reasoning shall be … this is sham reasoning…. The effect of this shamming is that men come to look upon reasoning as mainly decorative…´´.
http://web.ncf.ca/ag659/308/Peirce-Rorty-Haack.pdf
Pierces seminal essay How to make our ideas clear is also a great starting off point for embracing such truth as we might be fortunate enough to encounter in our allotted time on this blue marble suspended in eternity.
http://www.peirce.org/writings/p119.html
Take a look at these two debates 10 years apart.
regarding the scientific ins and outs, I rest mainly at the feet of my Tutor Claes Johnson Professor of Applied Maths at KIT.
https://claesjohnson.blogspot.com/
And recommend Dr Geoffrey Glassmans Rocket Scientists journal. as a good introduction to Climate Science and the IPCC
http://www.rocketscientistsjournal.com/
You will find the PDF I put together including the various contexts missing from most Alarmist and Neo-Liberal/Neo-Con Narratives.
https://notthegrubstreetjournal.com/2016/11/21/climate-change-agw-and-all-points-from-activism-to-skepticism/
Regarding Michael Mann and Admiral Titley here’s my Analysis of Titley’s whopper.
There are others this one for instance which helps the maths challenged feely squad with funny greek squiggles.
More than happy to discuss these matters live on a Skype Livestream.
Heres my Dialogue with a Monetarist.
And a Long Discussion with David Malone who is a friend and who I supported in his Bid for the Leadership of the Green Party of England and Wales.
0.00 Introduction.
00.15 Chapter 1. Biography Question.
00.41Chapter 2. Education Grammar School, Move to USA, Private School, Swarthmore College, BioAnthropology.
04.59 Chapter 3. Leaving University, Teaching East Orange, Newark New Jersey, Alpine Tunnelling France, Researcher BBC Antenna.
10.50 Chapter 4. The Documentary Years 1995- now, Icon Earth, Sneaking Politics into Science, The Horizon at 30, The Far Side.
20.31 Chapter 5. The Financial Crisis 2008, Lehmans Collapses, Comments BTL on the Guardian, The Debt Generation, Meet the Golem XIV Blog.
34.02 Chapter 6. The Golem XIV Community, MMT and Positive money, More on BLT Comments.
38.04 Chapter 7. The Green Party, Leadership, Election 2017 Campaign, Manifesto, Binary Discussion, Climate Mc Carthyism.
39.54 7.1 Policy EC661 Money Creation (Magic Money Tree)
41.18 7.2 Should the Snap 2017 Election have been a surprise to GPEX.
42.23 7.3 Bartley/Lucas Focus. Anti Brexit, Pro-Immigration, Anti-Racist, Identity Politics.
43.05 7.4 Labour and Corbyn, Austerity owned by Labour 2017, Banks, Solvency and the 2008 Crash.
48.13 7.5 Brexit and the 2015 Green Manifesto Promise.
54.36 7.6 Righteous Intolerance, Political Discourse, Burning the deniers, Binary Climate Mc Carthyism.
1.02.46 Chapter 8. Does the Pope wear a funny hat, That’s enough about Climate What about the Environment? Can the Greens Count and do Economic Policy?
1.04.18 8.1. Fracking
1.07.43 Chapter 9. What is the Green Party For, Proportional Representation, Low turn out in its own Leadership Elections at Green Party?
1.22.56 Chapter 10, Proportional Representation and Fringe Views. UKIP´s 66 seats under PR 2015 and is Nigel Farage a Racist, Tommy Robinson, The EDL and Dishonest Media manipulated legends. Geo-Politics Syria, Israel, Saudi, Qatar and All that.
https://surplusenergyeconomics.wordpress.com/2019/09/02/155-the-art-of-dark-sky-thinking/
rogerlewis: While you were able to figure out my identity (calling me by first name), your knowledge of my level of technical proficiency in the areas of climate science and political-economics (and history) is superficial. You’ll understand my scientific and political-economic orientation more if you look at my linkedin page (which I basically use an my on-line resume).
As an environmental advocate and policy analyst since the late 1970s I have been reading and applying the “best available science” to natural resource management issues for decades. Initially I was focused primarily on forestry and related issues—water quality, land use, fisheries. I have been studying AGW since it came to my attention as a crucial aspect of sustainability some time in the 1980s.
I initially pointed out that your initial reference to a video that relied on The Heartland Institute and Richard Lindzen indicated fealty to the world of fossil fuel industry funded climate change denial. You might be offended by that term (“denial”) but it applies. E.g.: https://insideclimatenews.org/news/06032017/climate-change-denial-scientists-richard-lindzen-mit-donald-trump The same holds true, and more so, for the Heartland Institute: https://www.desmogblog.com/2019/08/11/heartland-deniers-deflated-climate-reality (line in opening paragraph: “most people with basic education, common sense, and a lack of financial interest in the fossil fuel industry accept what scientists worldwide have proven through decades of research…”)
Your posts (and web pages) are evidence of an incredible lack of knowledge and insight about climate science. Getting into a lengthy exchange with you on this blog—focused on economics, not science—would be huge waste of my time and Dr. Morgan’s patience. Cheers and carry on; this is my last post in this exchange.