Global Warming Skeptic Byrson Reid believed that the Ice Age was about to occur, do you think he's credible?

Question

No joke.

This is the same guy in the 70s who led a small group of climatologists to champion the belief that the return of the Ice Age has come. He also claims to be a self-effacing scientist and that the scientists who support global warming are just trying to advance a name for themselves with some "novel idea." As of 1986, he retired from UW-Madison but decided to work there without a paid tenure. His meterology degree also dates back to 1948 – pretty old for a scientist who hasn’t been in school for half a century. So why would an aging professor who's claim to fame as the "Father of Climatology" attack the overwhelming evidence that links a correlation between human activities and the increase of C02?

Look at what he wrote in his book, "The Weather Conspiracy":

“There is very important climatic change going on right now, and it’s not merely something of academic interest..It is something that, if it continues, will affect the whole human occupation of the earth – like a billion people starving. The effects are already showing up in a rather drastic way.”

At the end of the day, science trumps all politics and the stack of cards that you cons handpick will eventually fall from its foundations. Who do really believe in this issue, scientists who reason with the evidence or an Ice Age loon who criticizes global warming without providing any other alternative explanations?

http://bigcitylib.blogspot.com/2007/05/who-heck-is-reid-bryson.html

Answer 1

Wow. Almost no scientists bought into the 70s global cooling = coming ice age line of thinking. I thought it was almost entirely the media sensationalizing that short-term cooling, because most scientists realized that they couldn't conclude anything long term from it. Very revealing that Bryson thought otherwise and now claims that humans don't cause global warming. What a flip-flopper!

Nice find, SF State.

This whole argument that we can't even predict the weather 5 days ahead of time is so lame. It's like the stock market - you can't tell what the heck it's going to do on a daily basis, but in the long term you can pretty much tell that it's going to go up. Like the stock market, global weather gets easier to predict in the long term because all the little fluctuations average out.

Nobody is saying that on July 22nd, 2098 it's going to be 100 degrees Farenheit in Austin, Texas. The prediction is simply that on average the temperature of the Earth will be so much higher.

Answer 2

As did UC Berkeley and UCLA claiming an Ice Age (I was there at the time and it lasted till the early 80's). And if you bother to check, until very recently, they supported Man Made Global Warming.
Recently both have added disclaimers saying they are making assumptions, though not scientific, that are used in their computer modeling. And that the Temp. has risen 1 degree since the end of the "Little Ice Age" ended in the Mid to Late 1800's.
And if current trends continue, in 200-300 years the Earth wiould have the same Temp. they estimate, as the Earth did during the times of the Greek and Roman Empires.
Betwen 1250-1850 the Earth cooled by an estimated 3 degrees. So Global warming would have to TRIPLE to match the weather prior.....
Yes, Science does trump politics, but only if you take the time to read and study it.....

Answer 3

Not really. Even the best computer models when fed the most accurate parameters will not usually result in a credible weather forecast, outside of a week or two. There are simply too many variables to take into account, and these can occur in relatively short time.

It however is too easy to predict the possible outcomes if we continue to dump carbon into the air. I guess no one really considers what happens to an already heavily polluted atmosphere when a natural disaster like Krakatoa * 2 occurs.

Answer 4

He's the leading climatologist in the world, is often called the "the father of the science of modern climatology", and was one of the first people to believe that human activity could change the climate.

He realizes that most of climatology today is a farce and that these so-called scientists are liberals looking for grant money.

He's acknowledged his mistakes and your attempt to discredit him was lame.

some of his famous quotes:
"You can go outside and spit and have the same effect as doubling carbon dioxide."

“Do you believe a five-day forecast?”

Answer 5

The earth goes through cycles but it must be evident to most rational people that we're in a warming trend. This trend may be caused by natural phenomena but it mus also be evident that we're contributing to it and my argument is why throw gas on a burning house? Why isn't it prudent to behave in a beneficial manner to assist in the solution rather than the problem?

Answer 6

Global warming is real. It's not a political issue, it's a human issue which will affect republicans as much as it will everyone else. Those who continue to vehemently object to it really should examine the real reasons they do so.

Answer 7

No kidding? Damn - the Ice Age deal was his? Now that is ironic. Lol!

Answer 8

be fair he only meant that he was about to fill his whiskey glass full of ice
that is why they called it the little ice age

Answer 9

the earth heats up the earth cools down no matter how bad al bore scared you its gonna be OK