MIT Physicist Debunks Global Warming at Chabad

from the Worcester Telegram:

Arctic ice, rising sea levels, and polar bears were the stuff of spirited discussion over bagels and lox Sunday morning at Central Massachusetts Chabad.

Atmospheric physicist Richard S. Lindzen, the Alfred P. Sloan Professor Emeritus of Meteorology at Massachusetts Institute of Technology and an eminent dissenter from the popular consensus that climate change poses a significant threat to the planet, spoke at a breakfast at the Jewish center at 22 Newton Ave.

Mr. Lindzen’s topic: “Global Warming or Climate Alarmism?” He argued the latter.

While headlines blare “the world is coming to end,” Mr. Lindzen said, that is not happening. A “totally insignificant spike” in temperature of a tenth of a degree last year led to reports that 2016 was the “warmest year on record,” he said. He showed graphs of temperatures over centuries that he said showed fluctuations in temperature are normal.

“The relationship of modest warming to coming catastrophe are blatantly false,” said Mr. Lindzen, who warned against “indoctrinating a generation of young people with foolishness.”

Click here to continue reading at the Worcester Telegram.

23 Comments

  • 1. Omg wrote:

    This guy is an absolute moron. And a threat. Please take care of our environment.

    • 2. Richard Roe wrote:

      Rather interesting that you have no arguments to counter his, just name-calling – and anonymously, at that, rather than at least putting your name behind your words as Dr. Lindzen is doing.

    • 4. Richard Roe wrote:

      Fine, let’s take the first argument from your first link as an example:

      Lindzen:
      We’ve already seen almost the equivalent of a doubling of CO2 (in radiative forcing) and that has produced very little warming.

      Rebuttal:
      This argument ignores the cooling effect of aerosols and the planet’s thermal inertia.

      In other words, then, even the rebuttal agrees that CO2 isn’t the be-all and end-all of warming – i.e., that there are other factors to be considered. But you won’t hear a thing about that from #1 and his ilk, for whom it’s always “The sky is FALLING! We’re all going to DIE unless people stop using CARBON!!!”

  • 5. True wrote:

    I guess #1 is one of the indoctrinated people the good doctor is talking about, and a fool to boot.

    “If the hat fits…”

  • 6. DeClasse' Intellectual wrote:

    There are issues and they should be explored and dealt with. The research gathered should help and point the way for alternative action. In that way we can advance the growth and improvement of our environment

  • 7. Milhouse wrote:

    Omg, you’re the moron. Lindzen is a prominent scientist who knows what he’s talking about, and you have a chutspah to dismiss him.

    Oh, and polar bears are not even slightly endangered, in fact their numbers have grown recently, not shrunk.

    • 8. K wrote:

      It’s not about polar bears. It’s not about carbon or ANYTHING ELSE.

      The world EXISTS in zchus of Torah learning!

      When we learn more Torah – the vitality of the world is strengthened. If c”v there is a decrease of Torah learning, the world starts to deteriorate.

      That is the “why”.

      The “how” it deteriorates does NOT matter and with less Torah learning – it is unavoidable.

      Learn more Torah and the planet will be healthier!

      Brought to you by Da’as Torah

  • 9. Mavin wrote:

    How refreshing to see a truly balanced article that doesn’t shirk its responsibility to mention the many occasions on which Lindzen has been called out by numerous physicists and climatologists of equal rank who think that he’s gone completely off the rails on this one.

    Oh, wait…never mind.

    • 10. Milhouse wrote:

      How many articles by them mention that he thinks they’ve gone off the rails? Science doesn’t work by authority but by evidence, and the evidence is with him.

  • 11. Torah! wrote:

    I went to one doctor who told me I didn’t have cancer but the other 99 doctors told me I definitely did and without chemo and surgery I’d definitely die.

    Who should I believe?

    • 12. Milhouse wrote:

      What other 99? Even the most fanatic warmenists only claim 97% support, not 99%, and that claim is a lie. But even if there were 99 to one it wouldn’t make a difference, because all that matters is who’s right, not who has more numbers. If 20 doctors tell you you must amputate your legs immediately, five say you’re perfectly healthy, and five more say yes, you’re sick, but you can wait ten years before deciding anything, would you amputate immediately just because the former are the majority? What if they’re wrong, and you’ve lost your legs for no reason? No, you’d examine the evidence for yourself and if in doubt shev ve’al taaseh odif. at any rate, even if you would cut your legs off, you have no right to force someone else to cut his legs off just because 20 doctors say he must.

  • 13. he's right wrote:

    At #1, read the facts, don’t get your education through media or others teaching. collect ALL the facts and make your own judgment.
    yes, this might take some effort, sorry

  • 14. Oh, but don'tcha know.... wrote:

    “Omg” is officially POLITICALLY CORRECT! Someone pin a medal on him or her!

    But Dr. Lindzen is of course suspect.

    When the politically correct pick on people like Professor Lindzen of MIT, I am reminded of an old Cole Porter song called, “They All Laughed”:

    They all laughed when Christopher Columbus said he thought the world was round.
    They all laughed when Edison recorded sound.
    They all laughed at Wilbur and his brother
    When they said that man could fly.
    They told Marconi
    Wireless was a phony.
    It’s the same old cry…

    • 15. Milhouse wrote:

      actually they didn’t laugh when Columbus said the world was round, because everyone knew that. They laughed when he said the world was only half as big as everyone knew it was, and India is just a few day’s sail west of Spain. They laughed because they knew exactly how far away it really was, and they were right.

  • 16. #1 wrote:

    EVERYONE MY LORD. #1 is absolutely correct! This man is a physicist! And you want to know why he hasn’t had backlash? (Supposedly…) It’s becasue this “scientist” isn’t important, and not worth the time.
    Please listen to experts on climatology.. Not a physics guy.
    ALSO. It’s not the warmth that’s the issue. It’s the rate of change. If any of you were educated on the subject, you would know that the earth has been way hotter in the past than it is now. (Tropics in the poles, thousands of years ago, look it up.) The problem isn’t the heat. It’s the rate of change, which is unprecedented. Also the greenhouse gasses are so intense and thick that they have basically become trapped in the atmosphere, hence more rapid warming of the earth.
    Thank you #1 for your statement. Glad I’m not the only one who believes in facts and thoroughly tested
    evidence.

    • 17. Richard Roe wrote:

      “Please listen to experts on climatology.. Not a physics guy.”

      Doesn’t climatology, like anything else in the physical world, have to follow the laws of physics? If there is a contradiction between them, then that alone indicates that climatology as presently practiced is bunk.

  • 18. Rebecca wrote:

    Anyone who has studied world history since written records have been kept knows that relatively large fluctuation in temperature has changed disease and migration patterns in all living things. Inventions to cope with the changes are familiar to any student of world history. There is nothing new about global warming, from a purely historical point of view.

    • 19. the difference wrote:

      the greenhouse gasses are new. That is what is trapping the heat. Nobody used fossil fuels in those days

  • 20. A scientist wrote:

    This man has been discredited by all of his peers. He is the equivalent of an anti-vaccination biologist. Climate change is real and dangerous!

    • 21. Milhouse wrote:

      On the contrary, the warmenists have been caught time and again falsifying their data, just like Wakefield did to create his anti-vaxx hoax. The entire theory is based on computer models which can’t retrodict the known record, so how can we think of relying on them to predict the future? The fact is that there has been no warming since 2000, despite all the increase in CO2, and none of the models explain that. Until they can they’re garbage.

  • 22. jason wrote:

    What is the agenda to have an anti climate change scientist to speak at Chabad? What does this have to do with reaching put to Jews and spreading Judaisim?

  • 23. Stop talking during the Haftara wrote:

    Global warming is real and part of the prophecy that Hashem will “remove the sun from its sheath” and the wicked will be punished by it, yet the righteous will be healed by it, etc.
    I also took Physics, and most Physicists I met don’t believe in G-d or the Bible.

×

Comments are closed.