<<  <  Page 48/54  >  >>
User Rank
Re: volcano emissions
jpratch   2/6/2012 2:51:40 PM

Insulting Jon Titus is the kind of ad hominem attack I referred to in other posts that zeros-out credibility very quickly. The model evaluations conducted during Mt. Pinatubo make statements like "temperature change is consistent with the temperature anomalies observed". This is "modeling speak" for "my model gets the ups and downs mostly right". There were no claims of quantitative calibration. Heck, right out of college, I wrote a RADAR model whose detection ranges were better than "consistent with observed" but it was still crude and nowhere near calibrated to the point where the Navy could use it to choose between two competing systems under all circumstances.

Yet calibration and consistency under all circumstances are exactly what is necessary to base the kinds of decisions pushed by the AGW agenda. At the present time, the magnitude of the errors in climate predictions and inability to attain anything remotely called "calibration" makes using the words "incontrovertible" and "human-caused" in the same sentence quite pretentious. Books like the "Long Thaw" written by very smart people making catastrophic predictions based on qualitative information and educated conjecture do nothing to further the knowledge necessary to make public policy decisions on. The Professor did make a good living on the book sales and has the prestige of being "published", but I would say that a positive contribution to the dialog was not one of its attributes.

I live on the East Coast of Florida and every year I get to see the Hurricane Path Predictions based on not one model but usually on nearly a dozen of the best models that the smartest meteorologists could produce. The best we can get is human interpretation of the different results provided. Accuracy is measured in hundreds of miles and consistency is often missing. To make matters worse, at times the actual movement is "mis-reported" or "not-reported" if it does not support the evacuation decisions already made by civil authorities. So the best weather and atmospheric science is hard pressed to make predictions to the accuracy needed by climate models to determine public policies. Yet the Climate models ore not as precise and do not consider all factors known to affect the results (clouds etc.) and we are supposed to trust them more than Hurricane movement predcitions.

User Rank
Re: Off on a tangent
Cassiopeia   2/6/2012 2:41:12 PM
Alexander, as already briefly mentioned, your answer lies in this book.

Merchants of Doubt is a 2010 book by the American science historians Naomi Oreskes and Erik M. Conway. It identifies parallels between the climate change debate and earlier controversies over tobacco smoking, acid rain and the hole in the ozone layer. Oreskes and Conway write that in each case "keeping the controversy alive" by spreading doubt and confusion after a scientific consensus had been reached, was the basic strategy of those opposing action.[1] In particular, they say that Fred Seitz, Fred Singer, and a few other contrarian scientists joined forces with conservative think tanks and private corporations to challenge the scientific consensus on many contemporary issues.....


Alexander Wolfe
User Rank
Off on a tangent
Alexander Wolfe   2/6/2012 2:28:50 PM
What interests me here amid the robust discussion is, what makes a scientific discussion become overwhelmed by politics. Or, more specficially, which kinds of scientific issues are likely to become politicized. So, for example, irradiation of food became politicized briefly, but then that died off. (Likely because the area itself didn't have "legs.") I'm trying to think of other examples, but can't. Probably the closest is the population explosion debate circa 1970, although as I recall, that one was more poltical than scientific. This one (global warming) has both lots of science and lots of non-scientists. (The two groups seem to be having separate debates.)  Anyway, there's a very interesting social dynamic in that, at this point, it's somewhat pointless to engage because no discussion changes anyone's viewpoint. (That's why the psychological dynamic is of such interest to me.)

User Rank
Re: volcano emissions
HEC   2/6/2012 2:28:18 PM
seems like that site is linked to the propaganda machine supporting climate change.

User Rank
CO2 discussion
jeffbiss   2/6/2012 2:05:32 PM

Read The Long Thaw and take his online course, Open Climate Science 101.

User Rank
Re: How about a timeout here?
Watashi   2/6/2012 1:59:06 PM
It appears by your assertion that UK engineers suffer from "group think".  It is not that surprising that US engineers are independant and don't bow to "royalty" be it political or 'scientific'.

I am just as capable (probably more) than the "climate scientists" on either side.  So the 'scientists' should just show their data and methodolgies and let us decide who is lying on our own.  Pretty simple solution huh?

User Rank
volcano emissions
jeffbiss   2/6/2012 1:57:12 PM
Watashi and Stuart21,


The climate models were evaluated at the euption of Mt. Pinatubo.

User Rank
State Diagram Please
smallpond   2/6/2012 1:56:46 PM
Ok, I'm an Engineer, and this shouldn't be rocket science.  Since atmospheric CO2 is supposed to be the bad guy -- show me a documented state diagram for atmospheric CO2 flow.  Include a diagram that lists all CO2 sources by percentage, as well as all of the CO2 consumers by percentage, along with yearly overall flow rate between the two processes.  This would be worth more than a thousand words...

User Rank
jeffbiss   2/6/2012 1:47:36 PM
Jon titus,

You allege that science has gotten it wrong, so prove it. I doubt that science got it wrong with regards to contrails as there might have been conclusions drawn that warned of a "threat" but was debated and the conclusions evolved. For example, in World War II Bombing Raids Offer New Insight Into the Effects of Aviation On Climate, the study's authors note that "...but quantifiable data on the impact of AIC remains rare."

As for ozone depleting chemicals, in Significant Ozone Hole Remains Over Antarctica it is noted that "Levels of most ozone-depleting chemicals are slowly declining due to international action, but many have long lifetimes, remaining in the atmosphere for decades." You claim to have a Ph.D in chemistry, so you should have known that.

As for the irrelevant stats and "heat island" situated sensors, Richard Muller states in The Case Against Global-Warming Skepticism: There were good reasons for doubt, until now.that "Remarkably, the poorly ranked stations showed no greater temperature increases than the better ones. The mostly likely explanation is that while low-quality stations may give incorrect absolute temperatures, they still accurately track temperature changes." So, there is no bias in sensors positioned in urban areas (heat islands.

So, where're your citations? Your post is totally devoid of citations and illustrates the problem with science today. If you're really a PhD, then I'm surprised. I'm interested to see how you run your blog.

sensor pro
User Rank
Re: Solar activty
sensor pro   2/6/2012 1:26:24 PM
Earth climate will not respond overnight to increased or decreased sun activity. The fact that from 2008-2010 the sun spot activity was very slow states just that. The sun was uniform more or less and provided consistant energy levels, which resulted in a more constant Earth heating.

It is projected that the increased sun spots and flairs will create spikes in the weather patterns. Possibly heating, possibly some cooling.

The main point is what is the relative influence of Sun to the man made.

The believers will claim that we are killing the Earth. Skeptics will point out to some more possibilities. Sun is one of them.

I'm sure that you would agree that Sun does contibute to our weather, unless we live in an imaginary world of physics 101 ( no friction, not losses, ect....).

<<  <  Page 48/54  >  >>

Partner Zone
Latest Analysis
Clearly, zombies are in this year -- taking over from a decade of vampire dominance in Halloween fashion.
Researchers in China have developed a battery with self-healing electrodes that makes it resistant to cracking, leaking, or just plain breaking.
The IoT will bring us the many positives of AI, evolving our technologies in ways that only a few years ago seemed like science fiction, according to ARM’s buyer.
Days after a massive, distributed denial-of-service attack took down dozens of major websites around the country, ARM Holdings plc is rolling out a pair of new processor architectures aimed at shoring up IoT security.
Dow Chemical and several other companies have launched a program in Omaha, Neb. to divert about 36 tons of plastics from landfills in its first phase, and convert it into energy used for cement production.
Quick Poll
The Continuing Education Center offers engineers an entirely new way to get the education they need to formulate next-generation solutions.
Oct 10 - 14, Embedded System Design Techniques™: Getting Started Developing Professional Embedded Software
SEMESTERS: 1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6 |  7 | 8 | 9 | 10

Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.
Next Course September 27-29:
Sponsored by 3M
Learn More   |   Login   |   Archived Classes
Twitter Feed
Design News Twitter Feed
Like Us on Facebook

Technology Marketplace

Copyright © 2016 UBM Canon, A UBM company, All rights reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Service