Re: Global Warming: How Do Scientists Know They're Right?

In article <f7pj4i$n02$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Peter Muehlbauer <spamtrap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"Rodney Blackall" <rblackall@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote
In article <FZKdnfs6cs1x_wPbnZ2dnUVZ_hisnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Rich
<someone@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Further, expressing uncertainty, or questioning that climate is fully
understood will get you labeled an evil oil-soaked 'denier' and every
attempt will be made to silence, shame, or ostracize you. If you work in
the climate field expressing uncertainty can be a career ending move.

You are sure of that are you?

Expressing CERTAINTY would be much more dangerous.

It seems that you've already made bad experiences?

NO! I have just met many who work in the field, reported on their work and
listened to them give presentations of their work to their peers and
seniors.

Anyone who works in meteorology should know that there are ONLY TWO things
that can truly be regarded as constant and reliable; they are "pi" and "e"
(the base of natural logarithms). I was going to add a third - a public
disbelief in the ability of met. men to forecast the weather - but a
spectacularly successful forecast of widespread torrential rain and flooding
for the southern half of the UK today (made 48 hrs in advance) will have
stopped that for a while.

--
Rodney Blackall (retired meteorologist)(BSc, FRMetS, MRI)
Buckingham, ENGLAND
Using Acorn SA-RPC, OS 4.02 with ANT INS and Pluto 3.03j


.