Between 6th to 14th August was the annual Geologists conference. This was the story that Real Climate reported on over the weekend, which in their wisdom above all else decided to criticise as they 'allowed' a balanced debate to happen over Climate issues. Why RC feels it is the judge and jury on what a separate group of scientists think is beyond me.

Anyway, there is quite a long video (which I've not even watched myself yet) of 66 minutes duration, of the Panel Debate.

http://www.33igc.org/coco/EntryPage.aspx?guid=1&PageID=5100&ContainerID=11823&ObjectID=12520

I heard about it first hand (well second). The problem was that the panel were not all really experts and the issue kept on getting bogged down. You really do need people who are working in the subject if you are going to have a proper discussion otherwise you get a lot of missunderstanding.

TomC:

I heard about it first hand (well second). The problem was that the panel were not all really experts and the issue kept on getting bogged down. You really do need people who are working in the subject if you are going to have a proper discussion otherwise you get a lot of missunderstanding.

Well, we can all judge it 1st hand now, and see what we think 1st hand!

Waterspout:

Well, we can all judge it 1st hand now, and see what we think 1st hand!

I think the answer to the anomaly is in the Congress Page Header.

Main Sponsor 'Statoil Hydro' : StatoilHydro is the biggest offshore oil and gas company in the world

Ulric:

I think the answer to the anomaly is in the Congress Page Header.

What anomaly?

All these companies are sponsoring London 2012 (so far)  BP,Lloyds TSB, EDF Energy, adidas, British Airways and BT.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7486966.stm

Will they be dictating the order of events, and running of the athletes, do you think?

Strawman, especially as Oil/Coal companies pretty much need the Geo Sciences! Unless you have evidence that they controlled the scientific debate then the point is mute and is in the same category as calling mainstream scientists fraudsters - which is also frowned upon. This accusation should also be frowned upon in exactly the same light.

In fairness to the company this is what they say of their website

'StatoilHydro acknowledges that a link exists between human activity and global warming. The company wants to help find solutions which can contribute to reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

"Nature is sounding a warning, and people would be wise to listen," says Lund'

http://www.statoilhydro.com/en/EnvironmentSociety/Environment/Climate/Pages/Skarpklimastrate.aspx 

Ulric:

Waterspout:

Well, we can all judge it 1st hand now, and see what we think 1st hand!

I think the answer to the anomaly is in the Congress Page Header.

Main Sponsor 'Statoil Hydro' : StatoilHydro is the biggest offshore oil and gas company in the world

If the moderators want to ensure good discussion they should clamp down on Ulric's denigrating crap such as this, that seems to get spewed into every thread.

Oh for goodness sake do we have to lock this one as well?

Michael:

Oh for goodness sake do we have to lock this one as well?

I had a pet hate when at school. It infuriated me so much when the whole class would get punished for the actions of a couple of others. Rather than lock threads and make others suffer, I'd prefer an alternative. But you guys are the Moderators and I'll leave you to do your jobs in a fair manner.

Right, I'm off to watch it now, and then I'll be able to make some comments about the contents of the debate.

An hour then. And Woe betide anyone who trolls my thread in that hour!

We are all waiting WS for the verdict  oops

Only just finished! Well, Ulric would eat his words if he bothered to view it. Wasn't that a balanced collection of Panelists and floor speakers. It was a bit slow in parts and some of the questions dragged on (especially the 1st guy who I had no idea what he was going on about!)

I think that Minister lady probably has it about right regarding her 'Being Prepared' stance. I liked the 'insurance' analogies also. I thought the guy who said to Bob Carter "You're looking at an Elephant with a Microscope" was quite funny! They all appeared sensible enough to me. Svensmark was very quiet I thought. I think the Cosmic Rays must have zapped him away.

Waterspout:

Only just finished! Well, Ulric would eat his words if he bothered to view it. Wasn't that a balanced collection of Panelists and floor speakers. It was a bit slow in parts and some of the questions dragged on (especially the 1st guy who I had no idea what he was going on about!)

I think that Minister lady probably has it about right regarding her 'Being Prepared' stance. I liked the 'insurance' analogies also. I thought the guy who said to Bob Carter "You're looking at an Elephant with a Microscope" was quite funny! They all appeared sensible enough to me. Svensmark was very quiet I thought. I think the Cosmic Rays must have zapped him away.

Yup, and I agree about the elephant analogy - very good! Several rather badly informed geologists there though imo

Devonian:

Yup, and I agree about the elephant analogy - very good! Several rather badly informed geologists there though imo

I suspect you mean the one who said he lived in the Paleozoic (I think ) and said when temperatures go up the World got wetter and didn't dry out (as told will happen with AGW). He said deserts were formed in the Ice House mode?

I guess the continents had a different configuration would be your answer? I don't know. I'm not a Geologist. I can listen to their POV, but how do I decide who is right? I just think its marvelous to be able to listen to POVs from people in their area of expertise.

I mean you say 'badly informed', but didn't it just hit you listening to those people speak - different from reading a paper or an IPCC report. Did any of them from either side sound like they were knowingly making it up? I think that's whats wrong with the Climate debate that makes it such a switch off to most people. Listening to a BBC News report loses that connection whereby you want to see the expression on the faces of those selling their position. It's completely lost in the ether of the News Gathering process. To have a voice and person behind it lent it more weight, I thought.

Actually the "closing down" of the debate in the mainstream press has done AGW a dis-service I think. Anyway, it makes even more perplexing the RC stance on this conference. What was their complaint again?

Devonian:

 Several rather badly informed geologists there though imo

Compared to our very own Tom C, I assume you mean?! He wouldn't want you to generalize.

The relationship between Oil Companies, advances in climate change techniques and geologists is very close - Ulric please note.

Marcus P:

.

The relationship between Oil Companies, advances in climate change techniques and geologists is very close - Ulric please note.

 ...which, WS, is the reason for RealClimate's petulant attitude to the conference. They weren't geologists, they were petroleum geologists. Or, rather, thats what geologists are to RealClimate anyway.