Do we need to be preparing for Arctic cruising strategies because of Global Cooling

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by GordMay

Which of those funders gave you fits & giggles?

Excluding tho ones with snouts in the trough? None.

Sent from my SGP521 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[newhaul]

Here is something that just occurred to me. Is there anyone that received funds be it donations /grants regardless of where the funds come from to fix the problem or was the money to fund study of the problem?

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by newhaul

Here is something that just occurred to me. Is there anyone that received funds be it donations /grants regardless of where the funds come from to fix the problem or was the money to fund study of the problem?

I am not sure what you are asking.

Both "sides" get government funding. For example, all of the funding for Roy Spencer's work at University of Alabama Huntsville comes from NOAA, NASA and DOE. He denies AGW.

Global Warming « Roy Spencer, PhD

Richard Lindzen was awarded over $3,000,000 in National Science Foundation grants during his career.

Both "sides" also get private / corporate funding. Willie Soon got over $1,000,000 for the American Petroleum Institute. The Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature (BEST) study was initially funded by both the Gates Foundation and the Koch Foundation.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by newhaul

Here is something that just occurred to me. Is there anyone that received funds be it donations /grants regardless of where the funds come from to fix the problem or was the money to fund study of the problem?

How do you mean? It's not like climate scientists are about to build a giant climate-fixer machine.

[newhaul]

OK that was meant in general not climate specific. I should have been more clear on my post.
Did any of the climatology studies come up with a viable plan ? The last time I remember was about the depletion of he ozone and the potential melanoma risks risks to everyone. That issue was dealt with quickly.

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by newhaul

Here is something that just occurred to me. Is there anyone that received funds be it donations /grants regardless of where the funds come from to fix the problem or was the money to fund study of the problem?

Scientists much prefer to study Antarctic plankton whilst burning 5000 gallons of diesel per day (around 50 tonnes of CO2 daily, fwiw) but that's ok 'cos it's all in the name of climate research - despite the fact that 97% are convinced it's real and man made - than to actually research anything that could possibly help fix the problem.

It's kind of like having a plethora of doctors poking and prodding you to confirm a single prognosis without ever attempting to actually cure you.

Sent from my SGP521 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by newhaul

OK that was meant in general not climate specific. I should have been more clear on my post.
Did any of the climatology studies come up with a viable plan ? The last time I remember was about the depletion of he ozone and the potential melanoma risks risks to everyone. That issue was dealt with quickly.

Ozone depletion was deal with by government regulation banning / restricting the use of CFCs and cap and trade systems. The Montreal Protocol was one of Reagan's initiatives.

Climatologists have tended to leave the policy decisions to politicians. James Hansen is a major exception; he strongly advocates for a revenue neutral carbon tax and for nuclear energy.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

Scientists much prefer to study Antarctic plankton whilst burning 5000 gallons of diesel per day (around 50 tonnes of CO2 daily, fwiw) but that's ok 'cos it's all in the name of climate research - despite the fact that 97% are convinced it's real and man made - than to actually research anything that could possibly help fix the problem.

It's kind of like having a plethora of doctors poking and prodding you to confirm a single prognosis without ever attempting to actually cure you.

Sent from my SGP521 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

Research money is available for solutions. I posted a link earlier. That research is often in the hands of engineers.

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

Excluding tho ones with snouts in the trough? None.

Originally Posted by GordMay

Which of those funders gave you fits & giggles?

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

Actually, linkety click through to the source of that hysteria, and their sources of funding for fits and giggles...
Report - DARA
Who supports us - DARA

Well, thanks for that highly responsive answer, full of verifiable fact.

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by jackdale

Research money is available for solutions. I posted a link earlier. That research is often in the hands of engineers.

Perhaps you'd care to quote the funding ratio between the two fields? I, for one, am interested in this number.

Sent from my SGP521 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by GordMay

Well, thanks for that highly responsive answer, full of verifiable fact.

Gord. You disappoint me. My google-** is strong, too.

Sent from my SGP521 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by jackdale

Ozone depletion was deal with by government regulation banning / restricting the use of CFCs and cap and trade systems. The Montreal Protocol was one of Reagan's initiatives.

Climatologists have tended to leave the policy decisions to politicians. James Hansen is a major exception; he strongly advocates for a revenue neutral carbon tax and for nuclear energy.

I understand that the science is separate however the Montreal protocol ( and I'm just using it as a reference). Had to have been based on the science that cfc's were bad to get the politics to enact the protocol to begin with. Now they need to get he proof that agw mmgw or whatever label you want on it is bad to force the worlds leaders to act.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

Perhaps you'd care to quote the funding ratio between the two fields? I, for one, am interested in this number.

Sent from my SGP521 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

I honestly do not know. It would take a lot of digging, which I do to have time to do.

Perhaps you could do so, as it is of interest to you.

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by jackdale

I honestly do not know. It would take a lot of digging, which I do to have time to do.

Perhaps you could do so, as it is of interest to you.

I suspect I could guess the approximate ball park answer already.

Sent from my SGP521 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by newhaul

I understand that the science is separate however the Montreal protocol ( and I'm just using it as a reference). Had to have been based on the science that cfc's were bad to get the politics to enact the protocol to begin with. Now they need to get he proof that agw mmgw or whatever label you want on it is bad to force the worlds leaders to act.

The science is based on evidence. Proof is for mathematics and booze.

Paris, 2015 was a start by the politicians.