Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

NASA Names Gavin Schmidt Director of the Goddard Institute For Space Studies

samzenpus posted about a month and a half ago | from the new-boss dept.

Space 41

First time accepted submitter Graculus (3653645) writes "NASA has named Gavin A. Schmidt to head the agency's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) in New York, a leading Earth climate research laboratory. Currently deputy director of the institute, Schmidt steps into the position left vacant after the retirement of long-time director James E. Hansen and becomes only the third person to hold the post."

cancel ×

41 comments

space is for losers who can't get a date (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a month and a half ago | (#47196283)

Hint: sexy Trills aren't really out there.

Commence global warming alarm propaganda! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a month and a half ago | (#47196295)

I'm quite certain that's what his primary responsibility will be...

National Atmospheric Science Administration (2)

Tailhook (98486) | about a month and a half ago | (#47196323)

Climate modelers belong in NOAA.

Re:National Atmospheric Science Administration (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month and a half ago | (#47196509)

Before even debating which agency should be involved, why is the "Goddard Institute for Space Studies" a climate research facility? With a name like that, shouldn't it be studying, well, space?

Or is space a solved issue and since we've mastered everything else in the universe, space studies facilities are being repurposed to figure out how to model clouds?

Re:National Atmospheric Science Administration (2)

starless (60879) | about a month and a half ago | (#47197011)

Before even debating which agency should be involved, why is the "Goddard Institute for Space Studies" a climate research facility? With a name like that, shouldn't it be studying, well, space?

It's "space studies" because the studies are done (in many cases) from space.

We don't study "space" at NASA - we study stars, planets, galaxies, the universe as a whole, the Sun, and, yes, the Earth - all from space.

That's why the Hubble Space Telescope is a "space" telescope. Not because it looks at "space" but because the telescope itself is in space.

funding shortages (-1, Troll)

harvey the nerd (582806) | about a month and a half ago | (#47197073)

time to defund GISS. We don't need another CAGW religionista wasting money and air.

Re:funding shortages (2)

KeensMustard (655606) | about a month and a half ago | (#47198135)

Yes, how dare they report facts that you don't like.

Re:funding shortages (1)

harvey the nerd (582806) | about a month ago | (#47251579)

They distort long known facts as soon as any discrepancy with their CAGW religion surfaces. Whither 1934 being the highest temp temporarily until the fickle fudge factor fingers were placed on the scale, and the Medieval Warming Period. Zealots and frauds.

Why are taxpayers funding this? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a month and a half ago | (#47196361)

If it's part of NASA, then it is paid through money extorted from the population. There's no reason for this. If climate science is really worthwhile, then the private sector can fund it.

Of course, on a statist-dominated forum like Slashdot, we'll probably have people cheering this on, unaware they are sacrificing their own liberty.

Re:Why are taxpayers funding this? (3, Insightful)

oodaloop (1229816) | about a month and a half ago | (#47196413)

If climate science is really worthwhile

You mean our atmosphere, the thing that keeps us alive and will hopefully continue to do so in the future as long as we don't fuck it up? That thing? Yeah, totally not worth the sliver of NASA's small budget.

Re:Why are taxpayers funding this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month and a half ago | (#47196921)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjuGCJJUGsg :)

Re:Why are taxpayers funding this? (0)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | about a month and a half ago | (#47198125)

You mean our atmosphere, the thing that keeps us alive and will hopefully continue to do so in the future as long as we don't fuck it up? That thing? Yeah, totally not worth the sliver of NASA's small budget.

I, for one, celebrate Hansen's stepping down. Maybe for a change we will get responsible science as opposed to Hansen's zealotry.

Re:Why are taxpayers funding this? (2)

riverat1 (1048260) | about a month and a half ago | (#47199195)

Good luck, Gavin Schmidt is one of the primary architects of the GISS Model-E, one of the preeminent climate models in the world.

Re:Why are taxpayers funding this? (1)

Eunuchswear (210685) | about a month and a half ago | (#47200867)

In what sense is "one of the primary architects of GISS Model E" not doing "responsible science"?

Re:Why are taxpayers funding this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month and a half ago | (#47200991)

because it's a fucking model, and NONE model the planet correctly at all.

They are way off

Re:Why are taxpayers funding this? (2)

Eunuchswear (210685) | about a month and a half ago | (#47202667)

Ah, so we're not to use models any more.

That'll make getting into an airplane more exciting in the future.

As for being "correct", Schmidt himself said: "Models are not right or wrong. They are always wrong. They are always approximations. The question you have to ask is whether a model tells more information than you would have had otherwise. If it does, it is skillful."

Re:Why are taxpayers funding this? (1)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | about a month and a half ago | (#47208285)

As for being "correct", Schmidt himself said: "Models are not right or wrong. They are always wrong. They are always approximations. The question you have to ask is whether a model tells more information than you would have had otherwise. If it does, it is skillful."

And this is EXACTLY why the models are bullshit. Because they have not been JUST consistently wrong, but consistently HUGELY wrong [judithcurry.com] .

I actually DO give credit to the models as being "guesses". But if we are to accept them as science, they are terrible guesses. If you have ever read Asimov's The Relativity of Wrong [tufts.edu] , and actually looked at how weel the models have reflected reality (or, more properly, failed to do so), you could only conclude that we are going back to the Stone Age in our understanding of what is correct.

Wrong may be relative, but when it's that wrong, it's just wrong. Period.

What the science shows (1)

Layzej (1976930) | about a month and a half ago | (#47208659)

Well, could trust a blog, or check the peer reviewed science?

What are the predictions of climate models, should we believe them, and are they falsifiable? Probably the most iconic and influential result arising from climate models is the prediction that, dependent on the rate of increase of CO2 emissions, global and annual mean temperature will rise by around 2–4C over the 21st century. We argue that this result is indeed credible, as are the supplementary predictions that the land will on average warm by around 50% more than the oceans, high latitudes more than the tropics, and that the hydrological cycle will generally intensify. Beyond these and similar broad statements, however, we presently find little evidence of trustworthy predictions at fine spatial scale and annual to decadal timescale from climate models. -- http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com... [wiley.com]

Re:Why are taxpayers funding this? (1)

Layzej (1976930) | about a month and a half ago | (#47203215)

In what way was his predecessor not? Only in the minds of the paranoid conspiracy nut. His predecessor was elected to the National Academy of Sciences in 1996 for his "development of pioneering radiative transfer models and studies of planetary atmospheres; development of simplified and three-dimensional global climate models; explication of climate forcing mechanisms; analysis of current climate trends from observational data; and projections of anthropogenic impacts on the global climate system."

Re:Why are taxpayers funding this? (1)

riverat1 (1048260) | about a month and a half ago | (#47204295)

I certainly didn't mean to imply that Schimdt is not doing responsible science, just that JQP's hope is a pipe dream. I have tremendous respect for Dr. Schmidt. He gave a TED talk recently on The emergent patters of climate change [ted.com] that covers the study of climate from the smallest scale up to the big picture.

You can't understand climate change in pieces, says climate scientist Gavin Schmidt. It's the whole, or it's nothing. In this illuminating talk, he explains how he studies the big picture of climate change with mesmerizing models that illustrate the endlessly complex interactions of small-scale environmental events.

Re:Why are taxpayers funding this? (1)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | about a month and a half ago | (#47208159)

I know who Schmidt is, and his personal charisma does not responsible science make. TED is an idea workshop, not a science forum. While it is interesting and even sometimes educational (in the sense that new ideas are often presented), nothing that happens at TED can be accepted as authoritative.

The fact that a purported scientist is resorting to TED to make his point is a tribute to "climate change" propaganda.

Back to the ivory tower with you poindexter! (1)

Layzej (1976930) | about a month and a half ago | (#47208637)

Down with scientific outreach!

Re:Why are taxpayers funding this? (1)

riverat1 (1048260) | about a month and a half ago | (#47209483)

That's one way to look at it. You could also say the TED talk is outreach, bringing science to the public.

Re:Why are taxpayers funding this? (1)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | about a month and a half ago | (#47208243)

Check out this website [wordpress.com] . The author has made it a duty of his to record the ASTOUNDINGLY MANY injuries to responsible data that have been perpetrated by GISS.

He uses their own data to show how they manipulate the truth. At his own personal cost, on his own time.

In particular, the "adjustments" GISS makes to temperature data is under very serious question.

Re:Why are taxpayers funding this? (1)

Layzej (1976930) | about a month and a half ago | (#47208627)

Oh lord. I guess every other group studying global temperatures is part of the conspiracy? They all seem to find similar warming, We're supposed to trust some pseudonymous blogger rather than peer reviewed science?

Re:Why are taxpayers funding this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month and a half ago | (#47196445)

If climate science is really worthwhile, then the private sector can fund it.

Right. Because the public sector has such a great track record of fixing the shit they've caused.

The public sector excels at one thing -- maximizing shareholder value at the expense of everybody else.

The private sector is incapable of addressing problems like this.

You're an idiot, and your use of the word 'statist' confirms is.

Go feed your baby melamine laced formula from China, and tell us how well "the market" is capable of solving such problems.

The fact is, it is incapable of solving such problems.

Fucking drooling Americans.

Re:Why are taxpayers funding this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month and a half ago | (#47202655)

Hey fuckface,
What is the proper ppm of CO2 we should "design"?
What is the proper "global temperature"?
How the fuck will we know we are making a difference?
How much is that difference worth, 50% of YOUR FUCKING INCOME?
The entire "green" market is shit, and the private sector identified that long ago.
What the private market does is strip away the bullshit, and guys like you that think they have the answer on how to spend my money.

GODDAMN (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month and a half ago | (#47196363)

space.

He has the experience for the job (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month and a half ago | (#47196371)

Gavin was captain of The Love Boat.

Di[3k (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a month and a half ago | (#47196945)

prospects -are very overly morbid and BSD sux0rs. What The next round of outstrips perform keeping track of where resound as fitting

Muslim outreach (0)

argStyopa (232550) | about a month and a half ago | (#47197433)

Has he been properly briefed, that the main mission of NASA is muslim outreach?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/... [huffingtonpost.com]

That's a direct quote, by the way:
"..."When I became the NASA administrator -- or before I became the NASA administrator -- he charged me with three things. One was he wanted me to help re-inspire children to want to get into science and math, he wanted me to expand our international relationships, and third, and perhaps foremost, he wanted me to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science ..."

Will he finally admit (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month and a half ago | (#47198067)

that NASA was created and is still ran by Nazi's?

Re:Will he finally admit (1)

ezzthetic (976321) | about a month and a half ago | (#47199029)

Hope they weren't grammer Nazis.

Re:Will he finally admit (1)

Raenex (947668) | about a month and a half ago | (#47202027)

Or spelling Nazis (grammar).

Here is his TED talk (3, Informative)

Layzej (1976930) | about a month and a half ago | (#47198711)

Here is the man himself giving a TED talk on the limitations and capabilities of climate models: http://www.ted.com/talks/gavin... [ted.com]

Re:Here is his TED talk (2)

Layzej (1976930) | about a month and a half ago | (#47198759)

Best line: "Models are not right or wrong. They are always wrong. They are always approximations. The question you have to ask is whether a model tells more information than you would have had otherwise. If it does, it is skillful."

Re:Here is his TED talk (2)

Layzej (1976930) | about a month and a half ago | (#47198883)

Or perhaps "If we had observations of the future, we obviously would trust them more than models, but unfortunately observations of the future are not available at this time."

Re:Here is his TED talk (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month and a half ago | (#47200999)

He's an idiot, all a wrong model tells you is how that wrong model behaves, not how the real atmosphere works.

Re:Here is his TED talk (1)

Layzej (1976930) | about a month and a half ago | (#47202361)

I think you are missing the point. All models are wrong, but we use them very successfully for a wide array of tasks. We used models to discover Neptune for instance. The models that we used were wrong (as are ALL models), but they successfully predicted the location of Neptune based on the orbit of Uranus.

Bravo Gavin (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month and a half ago | (#47200133)

This is a very special day Gavin.

As a Non-Citizen of the USA you have achieved a monumental penuchle within NASA as GISS Director and not even a citizen of the USA.

Ha ha. What a Day in the USA !

Such a Brit Lackey as you with the killing power of ... 1000 ... above the "Restaurant" ... beloved of Seinfeld TV shows.

May the scrumptious smells of the "Soup Nazi" fill your ever wakeful hour and even enter your dreams when asleep. I.e. no shelter old boy.

Ha ha

Re:Bravo Gavin (1)

Layzej (1976930) | about a month and a half ago | (#47203083)

+1 creepy?
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...