This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
William, why don't you trust www.sepp.org ? Is it only because they find sources which contradict what you believe?
If Fred Singer interprets things differently from you, that means he has a different point of view. -- Uncle Ed 14:29, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
May we then begin the SEPP article by calling it a propaganda organisation, citing you as a source? -- Uncle Ed 16:02, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
If you wish to begin the SEPP article by calling it a propaganda organization, you may cite me as Dr. Connelley's source, or yours, for this information. -- User:jlancaster
Deleted from article:
Anon wrote in his edit summary Deleted statement that is factually incorrect. Revelle was not a co-writer of article referenced but without explaining how he knows this. I'll wait a few days, but if no reason for the deletion is given I'll restore it (something like this):
Fair enough? -- Uncle Ed
Its not in the ISI index. William M. Connolley 15:45, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
"Many years later, during the 1992 presidential campaign, Gore was accused of having misrepresented Roger’s position on global warming. The problem arose in connection with an article first published in the Cosmos Club Journal, “What to Do About Greenhouse Warming: Look Before You Leap.” The cautionary admonition “look before you leap” is uncharacteristically tame for Roger, and it is my contention that it represented more the views of the other authors, Fred Singer and Chauncey Starr." [6]
For those wanting to rely on "reliable, third-party, published sources", an academic researcher and a lawyer/journalist have each dug into the evidence and drawn their conclusions of the story, respectively. [1] [2]
Really is pathetic how the left propagandists have taken over wikipedia. Revelle 'pressured' into working on the paper? What? Your evidence? Oh, just accusations by high priest Gore. Singer successfully sued for libel about that claim. "We should be careful not to arouse too much alarm until the rate and amount of warming becomes clearer" - Revelle 1988 letter to Tim Wirth. Total opposite of the left/alarmists way of behaving. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.151.225.177 ( talk) 21:22, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
References
Dr. Lancaster,
Perhaps we should say that your friend Roger let his name be used but contributed nothing to the article other than a galley review.
Moreover, if he was unable to concentrate well, and especially if edits made in what you personally recognize was his handwriting were ignored, readers should know this. -- Uncle Ed 18:09, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
Myasuda, I know of no known connection here. Can you explain, or give source? Jlancaster 01:21, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
inspired al gore's interest in global warming and the making of his documentary. could be mentioned in legacy? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tejas81 ( talk • contribs) 19:04, 27 December 2006 (UTC).
Should be added: During the last couple years of his life, Revelle reversed his position on Global Warming, stating that he was wrong about man causing global warming through gas emissions. Dr. Singer, referenced above, has also reversed his position on global warming. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
161.213.49.1 (
talk) 15:37, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
It might be informative to add an link to the predecessors mentioned in WIKI to Revelle and Suess in the global warming part. These would be, at last Svante Arrhenius and G.S. Callendar, and of his contemporaries, at least Gilbert Plass. Vastarannankiiski 13:20, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
Just to be clear. Revelle did state, and there are reliable sources to back it up, that he did not feel that CO2 was a contributing factor on global warming. This is not to say that he didn't think there was global warming, only that CO2 was not the reason for it. Arzel ( talk) 00:50, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
I have a problem with this sentence just before the section UC San Diego. This might be a typo, a half edited sentence so maybe some of it should be saved:
Geology, geochemistry, atmospheric chemistry, ocean chemistry ... this amounted to one of the earliest examples of "integrated assessment", which 50 years later became an entire branch of global warming science.
As for the last half about the "entire branch", a reliable reference will be needed for that to stay. -- Knowsetfree ( talk) 05:36, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
One such reference is at SEDAC [10], while Googling "climate change integrated assessment" will bring more than 500,000 other citations. user:jlancaster 4 January 2011 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.69.132.70 ( talk) 07:21, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
Most of this talk page, these sections: ( Revelle and Singer paper, Authorship_dispute, Global Warming are talking about a paper co-authored by Dr. Roger Revelle and some editors are calling for the exclusion of this paper.
Let me see if I'm hearing the argument correctly by some perhaps including DD2K and User:jlancaster and others about Dr. Revelle:
If my summary is correct, I think the arguments against citing the paper in question are frivolous, and fail the wiki standard for exclusion. If my facts are wrong, let me know. If you would argue a different opinion from the stated facts, please do. It seems quite clear to me that the philosophy of a PhD is to be gleaned from his published papers. -- Knowsetfree ( talk) 06:14, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
I'm dubious we want this section at all William M. Connolley ( talk) 14:41, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
There is a lack of proper citation in the section about what the daughter thought and it confuses global warming with anthropogenic global warming. Its is WP:VER that "The scientific base for a greenhouse warming is too uncertain to justify drastic action at this time."
But then the rest disintegrates to a opinion piece by the writer and anecdotal comments. This is putting undue weight on the conclusions of the writer. I suggest changing "Nothing could be farther from the truth. When Revelle inveighed..." to "However, while he opposed "drastic" action, he considered steps to mitigate anthropogenic global warming prudent". Comments? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.155.185.234 ( talk) 02:31, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Roger Revelle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.physicstoday.org/resource/1/phtoad/v45/i2/p119_s1?bypassSSO=1When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:58, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
William, why don't you trust www.sepp.org ? Is it only because they find sources which contradict what you believe?
If Fred Singer interprets things differently from you, that means he has a different point of view. -- Uncle Ed 14:29, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
May we then begin the SEPP article by calling it a propaganda organisation, citing you as a source? -- Uncle Ed 16:02, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
If you wish to begin the SEPP article by calling it a propaganda organization, you may cite me as Dr. Connelley's source, or yours, for this information. -- User:jlancaster
Deleted from article:
Anon wrote in his edit summary Deleted statement that is factually incorrect. Revelle was not a co-writer of article referenced but without explaining how he knows this. I'll wait a few days, but if no reason for the deletion is given I'll restore it (something like this):
Fair enough? -- Uncle Ed
Its not in the ISI index. William M. Connolley 15:45, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
"Many years later, during the 1992 presidential campaign, Gore was accused of having misrepresented Roger’s position on global warming. The problem arose in connection with an article first published in the Cosmos Club Journal, “What to Do About Greenhouse Warming: Look Before You Leap.” The cautionary admonition “look before you leap” is uncharacteristically tame for Roger, and it is my contention that it represented more the views of the other authors, Fred Singer and Chauncey Starr." [6]
For those wanting to rely on "reliable, third-party, published sources", an academic researcher and a lawyer/journalist have each dug into the evidence and drawn their conclusions of the story, respectively. [1] [2]
Really is pathetic how the left propagandists have taken over wikipedia. Revelle 'pressured' into working on the paper? What? Your evidence? Oh, just accusations by high priest Gore. Singer successfully sued for libel about that claim. "We should be careful not to arouse too much alarm until the rate and amount of warming becomes clearer" - Revelle 1988 letter to Tim Wirth. Total opposite of the left/alarmists way of behaving. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.151.225.177 ( talk) 21:22, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
References
Dr. Lancaster,
Perhaps we should say that your friend Roger let his name be used but contributed nothing to the article other than a galley review.
Moreover, if he was unable to concentrate well, and especially if edits made in what you personally recognize was his handwriting were ignored, readers should know this. -- Uncle Ed 18:09, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
Myasuda, I know of no known connection here. Can you explain, or give source? Jlancaster 01:21, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
inspired al gore's interest in global warming and the making of his documentary. could be mentioned in legacy? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tejas81 ( talk • contribs) 19:04, 27 December 2006 (UTC).
Should be added: During the last couple years of his life, Revelle reversed his position on Global Warming, stating that he was wrong about man causing global warming through gas emissions. Dr. Singer, referenced above, has also reversed his position on global warming. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
161.213.49.1 (
talk) 15:37, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
It might be informative to add an link to the predecessors mentioned in WIKI to Revelle and Suess in the global warming part. These would be, at last Svante Arrhenius and G.S. Callendar, and of his contemporaries, at least Gilbert Plass. Vastarannankiiski 13:20, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
Just to be clear. Revelle did state, and there are reliable sources to back it up, that he did not feel that CO2 was a contributing factor on global warming. This is not to say that he didn't think there was global warming, only that CO2 was not the reason for it. Arzel ( talk) 00:50, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
I have a problem with this sentence just before the section UC San Diego. This might be a typo, a half edited sentence so maybe some of it should be saved:
Geology, geochemistry, atmospheric chemistry, ocean chemistry ... this amounted to one of the earliest examples of "integrated assessment", which 50 years later became an entire branch of global warming science.
As for the last half about the "entire branch", a reliable reference will be needed for that to stay. -- Knowsetfree ( talk) 05:36, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
One such reference is at SEDAC [10], while Googling "climate change integrated assessment" will bring more than 500,000 other citations. user:jlancaster 4 January 2011 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.69.132.70 ( talk) 07:21, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
Most of this talk page, these sections: ( Revelle and Singer paper, Authorship_dispute, Global Warming are talking about a paper co-authored by Dr. Roger Revelle and some editors are calling for the exclusion of this paper.
Let me see if I'm hearing the argument correctly by some perhaps including DD2K and User:jlancaster and others about Dr. Revelle:
If my summary is correct, I think the arguments against citing the paper in question are frivolous, and fail the wiki standard for exclusion. If my facts are wrong, let me know. If you would argue a different opinion from the stated facts, please do. It seems quite clear to me that the philosophy of a PhD is to be gleaned from his published papers. -- Knowsetfree ( talk) 06:14, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
I'm dubious we want this section at all William M. Connolley ( talk) 14:41, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
There is a lack of proper citation in the section about what the daughter thought and it confuses global warming with anthropogenic global warming. Its is WP:VER that "The scientific base for a greenhouse warming is too uncertain to justify drastic action at this time."
But then the rest disintegrates to a opinion piece by the writer and anecdotal comments. This is putting undue weight on the conclusions of the writer. I suggest changing "Nothing could be farther from the truth. When Revelle inveighed..." to "However, while he opposed "drastic" action, he considered steps to mitigate anthropogenic global warming prudent". Comments? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.155.185.234 ( talk) 02:31, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Roger Revelle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.physicstoday.org/resource/1/phtoad/v45/i2/p119_s1?bypassSSO=1When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:58, 6 January 2018 (UTC)