Morning Sentinel
Comments about: RALLY CITES CLIMATE ILLS
WATERVILLE -- There are lots of well-known reasons -- both environmental and economic -- to address the threats...
[ back to story ]
Bookmark & share: digg del.icio.us Reddit

Welcome to onlinesentinel.com's reader comments forum, which is offered as a "public square" for our audience. We view this space as our readers' section of the Web site, separate from our journalistic offerings. We hope you will use the forum to advance public dialogue and community discourse. As such, we ask that participants refrain from personal attacks and offensive comments. If you believe a comment is inappropriate or offensive, you can bring it to our attention by clicking on the 'report abuse' link by the comment. It will be reviewed by online staff. Please understand that 1) a comment is not "inappropriate" solely because you disagree with its author; and 2) there may be a delay while the comment is being reviewed. Please review our Reader Comment Guidelines.


Reader comments

Sort by: Oldest first | Newest First

Leon Richard of Farmington, ME
Nov 16, 2008 10:18 PM
That said, conservation generally makes a whole lot of sense. Reducing and reusing is just smart policy, and something we should all be doing more of. I just want to be sure it's done smartly and with the right reasons in mind. Not just to feather someone's nest with grants and subsidies, only to find in the future it didn't amount to anything.report abuse
Leon Richard of Farmington, ME
Nov 16, 2008 10:15 PM
The majority of Americans don't have scientific degrees Doug. The majority don't have a degree at all.

I couldn't publish a study with a confidence level of 90% in any journal. We discarded two observations in one study I coauthored because they were at 92 percent, we had chosen 95% confidence as our interval and would be dishonest if we changed it.

You published anything? Non-scientific degree? A Masters of Science is not a non-scientific degree. Advanced research methods is only on the classes I studied to obtain it.

Look it up.

http://apt.allenpress.com/perlserv/?request=get-abstract&doi=10.1519%2FR-13433.1&ct=1

Interestingly enough, a large number of the signatories to the IPCC report were actually not "scientists" at all. There remains a large debate within the scientific community regarding "Global Climate Change". It has morphed into a political and social issue, when the question is science and science based.

Meteorologists cannot even begin to predict the weather today and tomorrow with anything approaching a 90% confidence level with any regularity. How are we to believe that observations based on the last 200 years or so, regarding a decade to a century into the future are any more precise? Especially when they are now claiming 180 degrees the opposite of what they "all" felt was happening as few as 30 years ago?

How about some facts instead of derision and politics? I posted my sources, didn't read a single one did you?

Typical, "My mind is made up. Don't bother me with facts."

When the day comes, I'll be the first one to say I was wrong. That day isn't here. I want more certainty before we make wholesale changes in our economic and social order that could be more detrimental than the last 8 years have been.

You seem more than willing to take jabs at people and make them out to be idiots and know-nothings, and have as much as gone ahead and called me one. Come to expect little more now.report abuse
Someoneelse of Standish, ME
Nov 16, 2008 10:58 AM
LOL,

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/11/16/do1610.xmlreport abuse
Jezzer of Waterville, ME
Nov 16, 2008 10:31 AM
Write a letter to Congress? What is this, the third grade? If you want that letter read, be sure to include a nice fat check.report abuse

Show all 18 comments

You must be a registered user of MaineToday.com to post a comment. Register or log in.