geologist-1011.netGeologist-1011net - Geologist-1011

eMail directory . Software . Web Design . Geologist Consulting Geologist | Home | About me | Contact me | Site Map | Privacy | Security | Standards | Legal | Timothy Casey B.Sc.(Hons.): Consulting Geologist . Not so Apologetic . Deforestation . Climate . Greenhouse Effect . Volcanic CO 2 . Volcanic CFCs . Expanding Earth . Palaeomagnetism . The Age of the Earth . Fossil Record -- . Science . Pseudoscience . Genesis . Interpretation . Movies and Books -- . Most Misquoted Welcome to the apologetics part of my site where I discuss some of my own opinions concerning scientific issues of interest to the public. This site is focussed on using empiricism to stay informed because an uninformed choice is meagrely the illusion of choice. This is how any form of propaganda constitutes a clear and present danger to individual liberty and subverts democracy. Although democracy may often depend on science for the informedness of choice, science is empirical and neither democratic nor authoritarian. Material evidence is the only arbiter of science, and whatsoever does not defer to material evidence is not science. Thus interpretation, by its arbitrary nature, is unscientific - and the claim that interpretation is part of the scientific process denies the empirical nature of science. A hypothesis meagrely extends beyond the known facts a question of what might yet be discovered. Moreover, if scientific, it will specify the physical observation of material phenomena that will resolve the hypothetical question. This is the furtherest an idea may venture from the evidence, and remain scientific. Anything more is pseudoscience. A common theme running through most of the topics covered at http://geologist-1011.net it that of catastrophism. It would seem that in most examples of pseudo-science, a catastrophe is invoked for the purpose of escaping scrutiny. More than being a powerful motivator, fear is a potent decoy and in this sense a powerful method of hiding contradictory evidence and the faults in the logic. Some notable exceptions to the usual examples of catastrophic pseudo-theory, are the expanding earth theory and the the idea that the next magnetic reversal will end computerised civilisation as we know it. The Expanding Earth Theory was originally invoked to challenge the Plate Tectonics hypotheses at a time when it lacked evidence of subduction. The idea that a magnetic reversal may end computerised civilisation as we know it, is quite possibly wishful thinking on the part of its proponents. A surprising amount of modern pseudoscience is coming out of the environmental sector. Perhaps it should not be so surprising given that environmentalism is political rather than scientific. However, time and again, we hear the argument that we must act before the science is researched just in case the hypothesis is correct and catastrophe is about to strike. Often enough, the research concerning many of the claims has already been done, and shows that such imaginary catastrophes are little more than sensationalised science fiction. Yet, whenever such objections are brought to bear, the evidence is deftly sidestepped by attacks on the person's character or dubious claims that experts know more. Such ad homenim arguments are inherently dishonest because, by its very design, ad homenim sidesteps and censors the facts by focussing the argument on the person. The only reason to avoid discussing the facts in debate is if the facts are clearly inconvenient. In the case of the so-called "environmentalists", this ultimately leads to the denial of a great many verifiable facts. Such denials occur so often in field of geology that I think the term geology denier is most apt. Assertions of the geology deniers include the claims that: Temperatures of the twentieth centrury are unprecedented [contrary to the Phanerozoic record] Carbon dioxide levels of the twentieth century are unprecedented [contrary to the Phanerozoic record] Carbon dioxide inhibits plant growth [numerous studies show otherwise] Global warming causes mass extinctions [which actually correlate with cooling] Global warming causes desertification [so why is aridity a feature of ice ages instead?] Tuvalu's putative inundation is due to rising sea levels [as opposed to volcanic subsidence] Kilimanjaro's ice is melting due to global warming [as opposed to ablation due to regional deforestation] Fourier fathered the greenhouse effect, likening the atmosphere to the glass of a greenhouse [when Fourier actually argued the contrary] Tyndall measured thermal absorption in gases, thereby proving the "Greenhouse Effect" [when Tyndall actually measured opacity] The "Greenhouse Effect" is a valid concept of Physics wih experimental confirmation [so why is it missing from physics textbooks?] The atmospheric impact of volcanic carbon dioxide can be isotopically distinguished from fossil fuel carbon dioxide [when we don't even have a statistically significant average volcanic carbon isotope ratio] Estimates of volcanic contributions to atmospheric carbon dioxide include measurements of submarine volcano emissions [when the source literature explicitly admits a lack of such measurements] There are no natural CFCs [when volcanic and biological CFC production is well documented] In all cases, the above statements (in italics) are obvious fictions that even a superficial review of the scientific literature can overturn. Yet they continue to be propagated by self proclaimed "environmentalists" despite the fact that they have long been refuted by scientific research. The articles presented here on this site review the science that refutes these claims, but this is only the tip of the iceberg, and one must ask how competant scientists could possibly dream up such obvious fiction. The modern "environmentally" motivated "science" of anthropogenic global warming is either based on incompetance and charlatanism or lies and dishonesty. I will endeavour to leave the interpretation to you. However, suffice it to say that such a pitiful excuse for science as we see in modern "environmentalism" compells us to ask for the material evidence every single time an assertion is claimed to be scientific. We may yet ponder how a single lobby outperforms and outclasses all other pseudosciences put together for sheer diversity and volume of brazen disinformation. Yet the most profound consequence of subverting empirical science with political propaganda is the denial of scientific fact, and the deprecation of the very empiricism of scientific endeavour, without which technological progress is impossible. How Deforestation Represents the Largest Anthropogenic CO 2 Contribution This article is a product of my investigation into the media hysteria surrounding global warming. Here, I show how deforestation dwarfs all other anthropogenic contributions to atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations combined. This raises questions as to why we have a single-minded media obsession with fossil fuel combustion to the exclusion of what is by far, the biggest anthropogenic contribution to atmospheric carbon dioxide levels? Let's face it, the Amazon basin is now becoming far more accessible to seismic trucks and land drilling rigs than ever before as a direct result of deforestation. Climate Change Catastrophism: Intellectual Fascism for Science Pretenders. As a petroleum geologist specialising in sedimentology, I've a a keen fascination with past environments, and palaeoclimate as indicated by aspects of the geological record is a substantial part of that fascination. It was with considerable interest that I observed the debate over global warming as it evolved. Initially, I thought I'd be fortunate enough to witness the first ever scientific assimilation of compound recursive analysis in the pursuit of understanding complex feedback systems such as climate and climate change mechanisms. I was to be bitterly disappointed. Like their Nineteenth Century counterparts, modern C...