http://www.vancouversun.com/technology/Climate+scientist+troubled+skeptic+teachings+Carleton+University/6236435/story.html

This, and a few other sources I have found have quoted a report by CFI about this issue, and have done so in a poor way, it seems not to indicate what the report says.

I was wondering if a copy of this report is available. What it says, and what CFI stance on human-derived climate change is.

I was most disappointed in the news, as it doesn’t even seem to indicate if the report supported or not the teaching of the professor.

Cheers.

Thanks all.

kevinnem - 02 March 2012 08:18 AM

http://www.vancouversun.com/technology/Climate+scientist+troubled+skeptic+teachings+Carleton+University/6236435/story.html

This, and a few other sources I have found have quoted a report by CFI about this issue, and have done so in a poor way, it seems not to indicate what the report says.

I was wondering if a copy of this report is available. What it says, and what CFI stance on human-derived climate change is.

I was most disappointed in the news, as it doesn’t even seem to indicate if the report supported or not the teaching of the professor.

Cheers.

Thanks all.

No idea what this is about, and for some reason I can’t read the beginning of the article in the link.

At any rate, HERE is a position paper from CFI about global warming. (Click on the .pdf link to read the whole thing).

dougsmith - 02 March 2012 08:31 AM

kevinnem - 02 March 2012 08:18 AM

http://www.vancouversun.com/technology/Climate+scientist+troubled+skeptic+teachings+Carleton+University/6236435/story.html

This, and a few other sources I have found have quoted a report by CFI about this issue, and have done so in a poor way, it seems not to indicate what the report says.

I was wondering if a copy of this report is available. What it says, and what CFI stance on human-derived climate change is.

I was most disappointed in the news, as it doesn’t even seem to indicate if the report supported or not the teaching of the professor.

Cheers.

Thanks all.

No idea what this is about, and for some reason I can’t read the beginning of the article in the link.

At any rate, HERE is a position paper from CFI about global warming. (Click on the .pdf link to read the whole thing).

Ah, you have an official sceptical position.

Perhaps there should be warnings given to not to cross the party line. You receive funding for this too ?

A big faux pas on my part, no doubt, to talk out.

This experience was like walking into Catholic School with a meatball sub on Friday - or maybe even they have relaxed by now.

Don’t bother trying to force me into error any more. Just say the word, I’ll leave permanently if that is what good ol’  Doug desires.

FrenchCurve - 07 March 2012 06:21 PM

Ah, you have an official sceptical position.

The position any responsible skeptical organization will take (viz., CFI, CSI, JREF, Skeptics’ Society, etc.) is the position of consensus science.

FrenchCurve - 07 March 2012 06:21 PM

You receive funding for this too ?

I am not an employee of the organization, but AFAIK, no. Unlike Heartland and the Tobacco Institute, we don’t have billionaire owners of multinational firms who are looking to increase profits through harmful propaganda.

dougsmith - 07 March 2012 07:54 PM

FrenchCurve - 07 March 2012 06:21 PM

Ah, you have an official sceptical position.

The position any responsible skeptical organization will take (viz., CFI, CSI, JREF, Skeptics’ Society, etc.) is the position of consensus science.

Holey Moley. I had no idea these had any positions on anything.  That’s nuts. Political Party affiliation not a matter of choice, also ? Don’t ask don’t tell ? This is incredible to me. Sorry.

FrenchCurve - 07 March 2012 07:58 PM

dougsmith - 07 March 2012 07:54 PM

FrenchCurve - 07 March 2012 06:21 PM

Ah, you have an official sceptical position.

The position any responsible skeptical organization will take (viz., CFI, CSI, JREF, Skeptics’ Society, etc.) is the position of consensus science.

Holey Moley. I had no idea these had any positions on anything.  That’s nuts. Political Party affiliation not a matter of choice, also ? Don’t ask don’t tell ? This is incredible to me. Sorry.

Ok, I believe this crosses party lines, but it does not cross skeptical positions. Denial of scientific concensus is not “skeptical”, it is folly.

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/14/10680379-invisible-tsunami-of-rising-sea-levels-puts-us-coasts-at-risk-expert-says

http://sealevel.climatecentral.org/

dougsmith - 02 March 2012 08:31 AM

kevinnem - 02 March 2012 08:18 AM

http://www.vancouversun.com/technology/Climate+scientist+troubled+skeptic+teachings+Carleton+University/6236435/story.html

No idea what this is about, and for some reason I can’t read the beginning of the article in the link.

At any rate, HERE is a position paper from CFI about global warming. (Click on the .pdf link to read the whole thing).

As we know from the Heartland Institutes papers school education is the next target of AGW denialists. 
From folks who believe science is about creating doubt and debate rather than a systematic learning process with checks and balances.

Tom Harris Teaches Heartland Institute Fake Science to Students
http://profmandia.wordpress.com/

A science watchdog has released a report slamming a course taught at Carleton University (Canada) over what they call “biased and inaccurate” claims concerning climate change.

The course “Climate Change: An Earth Sciences Perspective”, taught by Tom Harris for two years, is the subject of a 98-page report written by the Committee for the Advancement of Scientific Skepticism (CASS). The report constitutes a blow-by-blow response citing extensively from the scientific literature to rebut 142 erroneous and fully-quoted claims.

Also see

http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2012/02/climate_denial_at_carleton_uni.php

The course is taught by Tom Harris, who is affiliated with a number of climate change and science denialist organizations, including the Friends of Science (which asserts that “the Sun is the main direct and indirect driver of climate change”); the Natural Resources Stewardship Project (NRSP), ( which is “a proactive grassroots campaign to counter the Kyoto Protocol and other greenhouse gas reduction schemes while promoting sensible climate change policy”); etc., etc., etc.

For a little more on the instructor in question see

http://www.desmogblog.com/r-timothy-patterson

Incidentally, the freak’n “debate” we should {...must} be having is on how to deal with it rather than trying to deny what’s happening in front of our faces.