/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.15438679]

Will Dr Carl Sagan be correct on climate change ?

An old cspan video of him testifying before congress in 1985 on climate change
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wp-WiNXH6hI

At 11:30 in the video
>At the present rate of burning fossil fuels there will be a several degrees centigrade temperature increase by the middle to the end of the next (now this) century
>Consequences include redistribution of local climates through the melting of glaciers, an increase in global sea level, collapse of west antarctic ice sheet and a general rise of many many meters in sea level

[Anonymous No.15438696]

>>15438679
>many many meters
He was a stoned pop-sci entertainer and subverter who was rightfully smote with cancer by God.

[Anonymous No.15438705]

>>15438696
He was also ignorant of basic astronomy and planetary science.

[Anonymous No.15439047]

>>15438679
>failed astronomer turned popsci television celebrity opines on climate science to politicians on TV
Science™

>In 1968, Sagan was denied tenure at Harvard. He later indicated that the decision was very much unexpected.[41] The tenure denial has been blamed on several factors, including that he focused his interests too broadly across a number of areas (while the norm in academia is to become a renowned expert in a narrow specialty), and perhaps because of his well-publicized scientific advocacy, which some scientists perceived as borrowing the ideas of others for little more than self-promotion.[37] An advisor from his years as an undergraduate student, Harold Urey, wrote a letter to the tenure committee recommending strongly against tenure for Sagan.[22]

[Anonymous No.15439119]

>>15439047
why was an ignorant loser like that testifying (shilling) before congress instead of someone who knew what they were talking about?

[Anonymous No.15439120]

>>15439119
>(shilling)
Why are you asking questions you obviously already know the answer to? Because the whole damn thing is a farce and they value famous people participating in the farce and don't give a shit about actual expertise. You know that already, so why did you ask?

[Anonymous No.15439174]

>>15439047
I like how you skipped things like this
>He published more than 600 scientific papers
And this
>he pioneered the field of exobiology
And this
>became a full professor at Cornell
among many other things, and you selected the one paragraph out of many thousands of words where he didn't get likely one of the hardest jobs to get in the country and you're using that to try and character assassinate him because you assume people are probably like you and are to dumb to spend a minute looking up what he's done to see you're full of shit and are just trying to stroke your ego for 4chan edgelord points

[Anonymous No.15439175]

>>15438679
jew

[Anonymous No.15439182]

>>15439175
Idiot

[Anonymous No.15439190]

>>15439174
>600 scientific papers
All popsci trash
>exobiology
science fiction
>professor at Cornell
yes, only because of fellow tribesman (((thomas gold))) and cornell was mostly a hippie/commie proto-SJW school that was more interested in having FAMOUS faculty to brainwash students into following a political agenda than pursuing real science.
Hilarious that you would crawl out of the woodwork to defend that pompous poser.

[Anonymous No.15439204]

>>15439174
>He published more than 600 scientific papers
Derivative crap, which is the reason he was denied tenure at Harvard.
>he pioneered the field of exobiology
Science fiction. There is no empirical evidence for life off earth AT ALL. There may never be.
>became a full professor at Cornell
And everybody there hated him for being a prima dona who cared more about making popular media than doing good research.

[Anonymous No.15439214]

>>15439182
Fool.

[Anonymous No.15439224]

>>15438679
I only listen to greta
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mptNDINqYnQ