Reminder: Colorado Climate Presentation next Monday Night

I will be making a presentation on the science of the climate skeptic’s position on April 12 from 5-7PM at the University of Colorado – Colorado Springs (UCCS) in the UC 302 theater  (campus map).  I hope folks who are interested in the Denver / Colorado Springs area will attend.

  • Roger Taguchi

    Best of luck in your presentation. I left a comment at your article “The Single Most Important Point”, since I believe it undercuts the entire IPCC scare.

  • hunter

    “I hope folks who are interested in the Denver / Colorado Springs area will attend.”

    Maybe they would enjoy it. But I hope no-one who’s interested in science goes, as they will only hear your endlessly-debunked, endlessly regurgitated inane bullshit. Then again, they might be entertained at least by the car crash humour of an idiot who’s so proud of his idiocy that he wants to parade it for all to see.

  • Jack

    Good luck with the presentation. I hope you will record it so that I and others can view it later. Thanks for every little thing to spread the truth on CAGW.

  • hunter (the sane one)

    Keep up the good work.
    That trolls and neverwuzzers attack is proof you are doing exactly the right thing.

  • Waldo

    If you are an interested UCCS party and you are coming to this blogsite, your time would probably be better spent actually studying and preparing for your classes. If you do go, do a little research beforehand – maybe even look up sources in the library, they are usually much more trustworthy than what you find on the Internet. Come prepared with questions. Take anything you hear with a grain of salt. Simply because someone self-labels themselves a “climate skeptic” does not mean you have to believe them.

  • Rick

    Bad link to campus map above. Here’s another:
    http://www.uccs.edu/~map/

  • laurent

    Funny Waldo, “Taking anything you hear with a grain a salt” is probably the definition of skeptic.
    So I guess anybody that self-labels “whatever-skeptic” will support that statement.

    I also urge students of UCCS to read, learn and inform themselves and to ask critical questions even if Warren will probably agree himself he is not the specialist that will be able to answer anything on the climate science. But hell, asking the right questions is the key step to becoming wise, not getting the right answers.

    Cheers (won’t be joining, I live on the wrong continent)!

  • laurent

    Ooops – I guess my english betrayed me (foreign language for me!)

    I did not mean Warren is not able to answer _anything_, but I meant he is not able to answer _everything_… as he says himself he is a layman.

  • Waldo

    Why, laurent, would you go listen to a layman when you could listen and learn from an expert?

  • hunter

    A good reason to listen to an outsider is when the insiders have stopped asking tough questions and have reduced peer review to pal review.
    Another good reason to listen to an outsider is that consensus based thinking has a great history of being wrong.
    Another would be to challenge one’s thinking- if the outsider is truly as wrong as his critics claim, then it should be no problem to poke holes in what the outsider says, and may even be informative.
    Generally when someone tries to dismiss an outsider to the point of seeking to shut them down, it is good evidence the one wanting the shut down really has no idea what they believe other than what someone has told them to believe.

  • Laurent

    Waldo,

    When I was in school, we had a very good guy in Maths in my class. We had another guy that was definetly less good, but still better than the rest of the class. Guess whom we asked for help?
    That was not that the best guy was not helpful, he was. But he was “too good” to be able to explain, he could not put himself at the place of somebody with difficulties, as for him math was “natural”. The second guy was the one helping. Good enough to discuss with the best guy if he did not understand something, but weak enough to know what it meant not to understand. He was the best teacher, simply.

    So what I mean is that it is helpful to have people trying to simplify and sort the information if you don’t have time or capacity to do it yourself.

    I am still undecided (which is the real meaning of skeptic) about climate. I am fully trained PhD-level natural scientist, so I could try to look up all the original papers, read them, understand them and make a real informed opinion. Problem? I got a day job, I am not in Academia any more. So I don’t have the capacity to do my research. I am forced to rely on pre-digested information. So I want to hear both side of the debate to make an opinion.

    In my country, most of the public information is going along with the mainstram “consensus” theory. I know of many cases where the consensus theory was wrong. I know that almost always, even if the thoery is correct, the details and consequences are often inflated. I know finally some people I respect that don’t share this opinion.
    So I look for diverging opinion. I don’t consider Warren is the Holy Bible, but I must say he has an excellent summary of very good arguments. Not enough to convince me fully “against” the scientific consensus, but enough to fuel doubt and push for getting more information.

    This is why I would advise everybody to listen to a talk of Warren.

    PS: I have some friends at the Environmental Administration of my country and I had them read Warren’s paper. They could NOT answer every points he was bringing. Some of them, but a couple of big ones remain open. So it is not just cherry-picked data easily wiped off but a good summary of issues that show that the whole science is not settled.

  • hunter

    So tell us how it went?