Welcome to the Autopsy. Contrary to the title, this isn’t about forensic science– it’s about politics, science, teaching, universities, religion, and anything else that comes up. It’s all from the perspective of a professor at a midwestern university in the physical sciences. So sit back and enjoy the ride.


15 Responses to “About The Autopsy”


  1. 1 Glenn Speck
    December 11, 2009 at 7:25 pm

    Doc:

    If you have not seen this video, you just must.

    Regards,

    Glenn

  2. December 12, 2009 at 10:55 pm

    I wouldn’t trust Monckton as far as he claims I could throw him. Is there any fact he won’t distort? Is there any branch of science where he will just admit he’s not got a grasp of much?

    http://timpanogos.wordpress.com/2009/10/18/monckton-lies-again-and-again-and-again-and-again-the-continuing-saga-of-a-practicer-of-fiction/

  3. 3 Glenn
    December 13, 2009 at 3:34 pm

    Perhaps so, but Al Gore’s claims of a 20 foot rise in sea levels is a bit much too. I had a gent in a chat room a few days ago tell me that major coastal cities will be flooded as Gore predicts within 2 years. Bad science is everywhere.

    • 4 Steve McKechnie
      December 31, 2010 at 12:52 pm

      When did Al Gore make these claims? Are you reffering to a HollyWood movie?

    • March 26, 2011 at 10:13 am

      Gore didn’t say the seal levels would rise 20 feet under all circumstances, only if we fail to act and the worst happens. And even then, Gore pushed that prediction back a century or so.

      It seems to me you’re blaming Gore for what some odd guy in a chat room said.

      Which is why I asked for a citation to Gore. Gore has always been deadly accurate, and careful about attribution, in my experience. On the few errors I’ve caught him on, he’s usually found them first, and fixed them.

      Al Gore is an inherently honest wonk. He is much ridiculed, unfairly and inaccurately, for things he didn’t say and things he didn’t do. A Cassandra curse.

  4. December 13, 2009 at 9:30 pm

    Glenn, what was it Gore said, exactly, and why do you find that “too much?” Do you disagree with the amount of ice calculated to be on Greenland? Do you disagree with the volumes of the oceans? Where is there serious error on the part of science, or Gore?

  5. 7 Glenn
    December 14, 2009 at 11:42 am

    Do you agree that U.S. coastal cities will be under water in 2012?

  6. December 14, 2009 at 11:57 am

    No, nor has Gore ever suggested that.

    What was it Gore said exactly, where, and why do you find that “too much?” Do you disagree with the amount of ice calculated to be on Greenland> Do you disagree with the volumes of the oceans? Where is the error?

  7. December 14, 2009 at 12:00 pm

    Also, a new report released today by the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program says that by 2100 ocean levels are expected to rise by 0.5 to 1.5 meters.

    That is more than double the amount predicted in the 2007 report published by the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

    Hmmmm. More flooding than Gore and his colleagues predicted. Oops for you, yes?

    • March 26, 2011 at 10:15 am

      1. The article attributes the claim to the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program, not to Al Gore. I’d say that is corroboration of Gore’s general message, that we need to act to slow or stop warming.

      2. Where is there any inaccuracy there?

      3. That’s not the same claim you criticized above. Goalpost moving, much?

  8. 11 Glenn
    December 14, 2009 at 1:06 pm

    20 feet “in the near future” is what Gore said. A nebulous quantity for certain, but less than 20-30 years would be assumed by most. The figures I have seen from the IPCC and others show a sea level rise of from 4-24 inches every 100 years, so all things being equal,(and they won’t be) Gore’s ridiculous statement would take from 1,000 to 3,000 years to meet his mark.

    If you’re so proud of Gore, tell me why he lives in a huge mansion, flys the world in private jets, rides in limos and buys carbon credits from himself while endlessly spewing his alarmist nonsense telling the rest of to live frugal. Worst of all, this non-scientist will not debate his position. He financially supports the activist site Real Climate, so they have no credability either.

    Lord Monckton has the balls to name names and tell us who the crooks are. He is a much more believable and honorable man than Gore. Richard Lindzen and many others have shown us what a scam AGW is. It is the warmies who are caught with their drawers down with their unethical data rigging and conspiracy. This is all political ranting back and forth and means nothing. The science simply does not make the case for AGW.

    • 12 Steve McKechnie
      December 31, 2010 at 1:00 pm

      “Lord Monckton has the balls to name names and tell us who the crooks are. He is a much more believable and honorable man than Gore.”
      Are you out of your mind? Chris is one of the most widely recognized liars of our time.
      And stop calling the joker a Lord or risk attaching his reputation to your own.
      Have a look at these letters – and try to laugh the fraud Chris off. http://friendsofginandtonic.org/files/c3974ede3d81495627404f7acde7a7ce-186.html

    • March 26, 2011 at 10:18 am

      Lord Monckton has no balls, at least none of the glass type usually called “marbles” and referring to what he has between his ears.

      The man is a craven liar. Rachel Carson was not a personal friend of President Kennedy. President Kennedy was not a personal friend of William Ruckelshaus. President Kennedy’s ghost nor zombie — neither one — haunted the White House in 1971 and 1972 to create the EPA and appoint Ruckelshaus its first director.

      Those are facts of history that Monckton repeatedly lies about. The science stuff is even worse, I imagine, because Monckton has a degree in humanities, but appears to be a complete wanker in science.

  9. July 20, 2010 at 8:44 am

    Lord Monckton has the balls to name names and tell us who the crooks are. He is a much more believable and honorable man than Gore. Richard Lindzen and many others have shown us what a scam AGW is. It is the warmies who are caught with their drawers down with their unethical data rigging and conspiracy. This is all political ranting back and forth and means nothing. The science simply does not make the case for AGW.
    +1


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s




About Me

My name is Doc. Welcome to my blog. If you're visiting from another blog, add me to your blogroll (and I'll happily reciprocate). I have a Ph.D. in Chemistry and live in Wisconsin. If you have any questions, feel free to email me. My email is docattheautopsy at gmail. (No linking to deflate the incredible spam monsters).

Categories

Archives

World Temp Widget

Blog Stats

  • 123,300 hits

RSS The Autopsy

The Autopsy

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: