On Dec 5, 1:50*pm, Dawlish wrote:
On Dec 5, 11:45*am, Last Post wrote:



On Dec 5, 4:12*am, Earl Evleth wrote:

On 4/12/10 23:14, in article
, "Last

Post" wrote:
Harold Lewis is Emeritus Professor of Physics

Lewis is not a climate scientist now, nor was he ever.

ø Neither were you

He is, in the vernacular, an old fart.

ø You are an old fart without Prof Lewis'
* *distinguished CV

* * — —
| In real science the burden of proof is always
| on the proposer, never on the skeptics. So far
| neither IPCC nor anyone else has provided one
| iota of valid data for global warming nor have
| they provided data that climate change is being
| effected by commerce and industry, and not by
| natural causes.

Worth actually reading about Prof Lewis and his CV, before you
comment.

http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/20...ts-climate-com...

"What strikes me as irrational is that an intelligent person like Dr.
Lewis, who has devoted his professional life to science, would either
pay no heed to, or dismiss, the mountains of scientific evidence, from
neuroscience and psychology and economics and sociology, that
demonstrates beyond any serious question that the way we perceive risk
is affective… Our fears are a combination of the facts and how those
facts feel.

Our brains are hard wired to do it this way. It seems Dr. Lewis is
demonstrating the very phenomenon he laments, letting his affect and
worldviews interfere with taking all the reliable evidence into
account in order to make a truly informed and fair judgment."

Seems from the posts on this group that Lewis is not the only one to
suffer this way.

It's been dealt with months ago. Everone is entitled to an opinion and
everyone is entitled to change their mind, as Lewis has done from his
beliefs of 20 years ago, when he was a working scientist (not in
climate science - he worked in defence). I could direct you to placess
like Eli Rabbett's blog, but it will be a waste of time as you won't
read it and you'll continue think that one person't opinion is greater
than almost all the rest of climate scientists put together.

That's what you deniers do. You deny all attempt at showing you sense
and balance and you deny science.

On Dec 5, 8:39*am, JohnM wrote:
On Dec 5, 1:50*pm, Dawlish wrote:





On Dec 5, 11:45*am, Last Post wrote:

On Dec 5, 4:12*am, Earl Evleth wrote:

On 4/12/10 23:14, in article
, "Last

Post" wrote:
Harold Lewis is Emeritus Professor of Physics

Lewis is not a climate scientist now, nor was he ever.

ø Neither were you

He is, in the vernacular, an old fart.

ø You are an old fart without Prof Lewis'
* *distinguished CV

* * — —
| In real science the burden of proof is always
| on the proposer, never on the skeptics. So far
| neither IPCC nor anyone else has provided one
| iota of valid data for global warming nor have
| they provided data that climate change is being
| effected by commerce and industry, and not by
| natural causes.

Worth actually reading about Prof Lewis and his CV, before you
comment.

http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/20...ts-climate-com...

"What strikes me as irrational is that an intelligent person like Dr.
Lewis, who has devoted his professional life to science, would either
pay no heed to, or dismiss, the mountains of scientific evidence, from
neuroscience and psychology and economics and sociology, that
demonstrates beyond any serious question that the way we perceive risk
is affective… Our fears are a combination of the facts and how those
facts feel.

Our brains are hard wired to do it this way. It seems Dr. Lewis is
demonstrating the very phenomenon he laments, letting his affect and
worldviews interfere with taking all the reliable evidence into
account in order to make a truly informed and fair judgment."

Seems from the posts on this group that Lewis is not the only one to
suffer this way.



It's been dealt with months ago. Everone is entitled to an opinion and
everyone is entitled to change their mind, as Lewis has done from his
beliefs of 20 years ago, when he was a working scientist (not in
climate science - he worked in defence). I could direct you to placess
like Eli Rabbett's blog, but it will be a waste of time as you won't
read it and you'll continue think that one person't opinion is greater
than almost all the rest of climate scientists put together.

That's what you deniers do. You deny all attempt at showing you sense
and balance and you deny science.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Nah.... your fears are because you haven't grown up. You still think
there is a boogeyman in the closet or under your bed, and you want
your mommy to leave the light on... but now it is the boogeyman of
catastrophic nightmarish end-of-the-world man-made global warming.

Take a valium and calm down.

On Dec 5, 2:17*pm, Catoni wrote:
On Dec 5, 8:39*am, JohnM wrote:





On Dec 5, 1:50*pm, Dawlish wrote:

On Dec 5, 11:45*am, Last Post wrote:

On Dec 5, 4:12*am, Earl Evleth wrote:

On 4/12/10 23:14, in article
, "Last

Post" wrote:
Harold Lewis is Emeritus Professor of Physics

Lewis is not a climate scientist now, nor was he ever.

ø Neither were you

He is, in the vernacular, an old fart.

ø You are an old fart without Prof Lewis'
* *distinguished CV

* * — —
| In real science the burden of proof is always
| on the proposer, never on the skeptics. So far
| neither IPCC nor anyone else has provided one
| iota of valid data for global warming nor have
| they provided data that climate change is being
| effected by commerce and industry, and not by
| natural causes.

Worth actually reading about Prof Lewis and his CV, before you
comment.

http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/20...ts-climate-com....

"What strikes me as irrational is that an intelligent person like Dr.
Lewis, who has devoted his professional life to science, would either
pay no heed to, or dismiss, the mountains of scientific evidence, from
neuroscience and psychology and economics and sociology, that
demonstrates beyond any serious question that the way we perceive risk
is affective… Our fears are a combination of the facts and how those
facts feel.

Our brains are hard wired to do it this way. It seems Dr. Lewis is
demonstrating the very phenomenon he laments, letting his affect and
worldviews interfere with taking all the reliable evidence into
account in order to make a truly informed and fair judgment."

Seems from the posts on this group that Lewis is not the only one to
suffer this way.

It's been dealt with months ago. Everone is entitled to an opinion and
everyone is entitled to change their mind, as Lewis has done from his
beliefs of 20 years ago, when he was a working scientist (not in
climate science - he worked in defence). I could direct you to placess
like Eli Rabbett's blog, but it will be a waste of time as you won't
read it and you'll continue think that one person't opinion is greater
than almost all the rest of climate scientists put together.

That's what you deniers do. You deny all attempt at showing you sense
and balance and you deny science.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Nah.... *your fears are because you haven't grown up. You still think
there is a boogeyman in the closet or under your bed, and you want
your mommy to leave the light on... but now it is the boogeyman of
catastrophic nightmarish end-of-the-world man-made global warming.

* *Take a valium and calm down.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Did you think at all before writing that, or is it a kind of, stream-
of-denier's-unconsciousness thing?

On 5/12/10 14:39, in article
, "JohnM"
wrote:

Our brains are hard wired to do it this way. It seems Dr. Lewis is
demonstrating the very phenomenon he laments, letting his affect and
worldviews interfere with taking all the reliable evidence into
account in order to make a truly informed and fair judgment."


As people get older their thinking changes. We are not, in particular,
as competent as we were younger. I sometimes reread the papers I have
published and find that I don't understand them fully. My decline is
evident, I am not the same person, I appeared more "brilliant" then
than now. In fact I asked myself, "did I write that"? I know I did but
it is confusing, the difference between then and now.

Old professionals have to be careful. It is better to appear wise
than attempt to act wise. Einstein did that, he did nothing important
later in life except appearing wise.

"Earl Evleth" wrote in message

On 5/12/10 14:39, in article
,
"JohnM" wrote:

Our brains are hard wired to do it this way. It seems Dr. Lewis is
demonstrating the very phenomenon he laments, letting his affect and
worldviews interfere with taking all the reliable evidence into
account in order to make a truly informed and fair judgment."


As people get older their thinking changes. We are not, in particular,
as competent as we were younger. I sometimes reread the papers I have
published and find that I don't understand them fully. My decline is
evident, I am not the same person, I appeared more "brilliant" then
than now. In fact I asked myself, "did I write that"? I know I did
but it is confusing, the difference between then and now.

Old professionals have to be careful. It is better to appear wise
than attempt to act wise. Einstein did that, he did nothing important
later in life except appearing wise.

It's been pointed out that people do their best in their 20s and early
30s. After that, you are over the hill and have to rest on any laurels
you may have accumulated

On 6/12/10 2:06, in article , "James"
wrote:

It's been pointed out that people do their best in their 20s and early
30s.


When I was a teenager I venture into Einstein's theory of relatively,
equations and all and thought I understood it. I went back couple
of years ago and the math escaped me. As a college student I
had the chance of discussing aspects of the theory with Feynman,
and he cleared up one error I had.

The problem is clocks moving slower as one velocity increases.
The dilemna is that velocity is relative, so the observer's clock
at rest would appear to run slower as viewed by the speeding
vehicle. I asked Feynman the solution and he explained
that the faster moving vehicle had accelerated to that speed.

The idea of energy converting o mass was specific in Einstein's
equations, but it was kinetic energy converting. I still find
photons confusing, no mass but they have momentum, both linear
and angular. If absorbed they become matter.

Anyway old age brings some reflections and loss of understanding.
I think I have a better integrated understanding of some things,
which I call wisdom. One's analytical abilities decrease, one's
synthetic abilities may improve.