| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ian
Experienced User
Joined: 02 Sep 2008
Posts: 125
Location: Stirling, South Australia
|
 Posted: 27 Jan 2009 01:09 am Post subject: |
 |
|
hey lucy, yep know all about 'mr doomsday nuclear power is our only hope'. Good idea to add the caveat.
best wishes, ian |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Richard111
Experienced User
Joined: 19 Sep 2008
Posts: 433
|
| Posted: 27 Jan 2009 08:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
It was Lovelock who discovered the effects of DMS gas (which is always ignored by the AGW crowd) and he also offered to store the nuclear waste from one power station in his garden in a small concrete bunker and let his children play above it.
Lovelock also believes the world population should be no more than about 500,000 to 1 billion.
I personaly suspect this is what the real greenie agenda is and I think Lovelock does not approve greenie methods. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lucy Skywalker
Site Admin
Joined: 09 May 2006
Posts: 544
Location: Somerset, UK
|
| Posted: 27 Jan 2009 11:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I think Lovelock has lost the plot somewhat. It seems to me, going on several past observations, that when basically naive or materialistic scientists hit on some of the great holistic/spiritual truths of the Universe, they often cannot handle it. Strange. But perhaps that too is the fairness and economy of the Universe, so that nobody gets too big a slice of the pie. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lucy Skywalker
Site Admin
Joined: 09 May 2006
Posts: 544
Location: Somerset, UK
|
| Posted: 06 Feb 2009 08:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Did we ought to have some of Gavin Schmidt's quotes, or some of Eric Steig's? or is that being too unkind (I don't think so!) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ian
Experienced User
Joined: 02 Sep 2008
Posts: 125
Location: Stirling, South Australia
|
| Posted: 07 Feb 2009 12:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I'm not so sure Lucy. I'm not altogether comfortable following the Real Climate line of attack. I would luv to simply stick, as much as possible, to the scientific endeavour. I just read Lomborg's latest 'Cool It', and was very impressed by his very positive approach in discussing alarmists arguments, no ad homs (always been a bit of a Lomborg critic, but I must say it was a very interesting book and an alarmist website dispousing it has already popped up). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lucy Skywalker
Site Admin
Joined: 09 May 2006
Posts: 544
Location: Somerset, UK
|
| Posted: 07 Feb 2009 09:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
yes I agree after a night's sleep.  
But what I do want to note, soberly, is that
(1) the science now seems to be one step further towards being open and transparent, which is good; and that, in a back-to-front way, Gavin's and Eric's antics may have helped this move on, in the end.
(2) real openness will not be there until courteous intelligent critics of RealClimate can post there and get courteous intelligent replies.
I've decided to explore this topic further on Improving the Climate of Debate - keep this thread for quotes! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Richard111
Experienced User
Joined: 19 Sep 2008
Posts: 433
|
| Posted: 16 Mar 2009 02:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | I would like to stress emphatically how extraordinary the standard model really is, even though it contains twenty numbers for which we do not know why they have the values they have, so that we also do not know how to calculate them from first principles. But once these numbers are given, we can, "in principle", calculate any other physical phenomenon. All the properties of the fundamental particles, the hadrons, the atomic nuclei, atoms, molecules, substances, tissues, plants, animals, people, planets, solar systems, galaxies, and perhaps even the entire universe, are direct consequences of the standard model... I should hasten to add that all these statements are of not much more than philosophical significance and they mean quite little in practice. We are not at all able to deduce the properties of a cockroach using our standard model, and this will never change. |
From the book In Search of the Ultimate Building Blocks
by Dutch Nobel prizewinner Gerard 't Hooft.
(I haven't read the book! I found the quote in another science book. ) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Richard111
Experienced User
Joined: 19 Sep 2008
Posts: 433
|
| Posted: 09 May 2009 06:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | "the job of a scientist is to invent a story which accounts for a set of observations and then decide how likely the story is." |
Kinsmen (1957) LINK |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Richard111
Experienced User
Joined: 19 Sep 2008
Posts: 433
|
| Posted: 15 May 2009 08:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
"There are two futures, the future of desire and the future of fate, and man's reason has never learnt to separate them."
J.D. Bernal 'The World, and the Flesh and the Devil' (1929)
No link. I read it in Arthur C. Clarke's book 'Greetings, Carbon-Based Bipeds!' chapter 31 page 497. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
