Good one, tonyb. I think kim would like it too.
Comment on Week in review by Max_OK, Citizen Scientist
↧
↧
Comment on Week in review by jim2
It’s not so much a matter of honesty or dishonesty. It’a a matter of replication and simply checking the methods used, data used, data discarded, etc. Openness facilitates the self-correcting feature of science. Without openness, it is much more difficult and not very efficient to verify.
↧
Comment on Week in review by Jim D
PA, so your esteemed opinion is that IQ is lower in warmer countries and that explains the other correlations too. Why would a warmer climate make people dumber is the obvious question? Is that another thing to be concerned about in addition to less wealthy and less healthy, less wise. Interesting questions raised here. Care to expand?
↧
Comment on Week in review by David in TX
Vaughan Pratt | December 23, 2014 at 2:39 am | Reply
Richard Lindzen has publicly outed himself as such a person on the ground that to call oneself a skeptic of proposition P is to raise the possibility that P might be true and as far as he is concerned there is no question that P is false and therefore he is emphatically a denier. (He said all this at question time after a Heartland presentation that you can find online, I can help if needed.)
Richard Siegmund Lindzen (born February 8, 1940) is an American atmospheric physicist, known for his work in the dynamics of the middle atmosphere, atmospheric tides and ozone photochemistry. He has published more than 200 scientific papers and books. From 1983[1] until he retired in 2013, he was Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.[2] He was a lead author of Chapter 7, ‘Physical Climate Processes and Feedbacks,’ of the IPCC Third Assessment Report on climate change. He has criticized the scientific consensus about climate change[3] and what he has called “climate alarmism”.[4]
Yes, please help. I don’t believe that this Harvard educated professor at MIT is a “denier”. If he were a Stanford professor I’d believe almost any faculty member had left the reservation but not MIT.
↧
Comment on Week in review by c1ue
Uh no. Not all carbon on Venus is in the form of CO2.
Equally, even if all the carbon on Earth were somehow converted to CO2 magically – first of all, we would no longer have to worry about it because we’d all be dead.
Secondly, Venus’ atmosphere is rotating at a fantastic speed.
Thirdly, Venus is significantly closer to the Sun.
Fourthly, Venus has no magnetic field to speak of.
So – besides your magical hypothesis (all carbon converted to CO2), a fine mental construct…for a science fiction writer.
↧
↧
Comment on Week in review by PA
Well, if you look at all the relatively pure Han Chinese they have high IQs regardless of per capita GDP (and are in fact the smartest people on average on the planet).
If you look at South America – IQ correlates well with ethnic composition. So IQ is relatively immutable. GDP has some correlation to IQ – but countries with natural-resource-driven high GDPs frequently have relatively low IQs (it isn’t GDP that drives IQ – IQ drives GDP). Because other factors – such as socialism – can screw up GDP it isn’t a perfect correlation.
Head start failed because you can teach people skills but you can’t make them smart. There is a little give in IQ so you can make some small marginal gains.
↧
Comment on Week in review by Jim D
PA, so why would IQ be correlated with temperature? Do people with higher IQ’s prefer cooler conditions, or do cooler conditions lead to higher IQs?
↧
Comment on Week in review by Jim D
Some people don’t like the word denier or denial, so they need to come up with a name for people with an “a priori rejection of ideas” that the CSI labeled as denial. They sure are not just skeptics. This is the CSI’s complaint about them because they give true skeptics a bad name.
↧
Comment on Week in review by PA
It correlates with the amount of DNA from other species. So this causes one of those “are they smart from living in the cold for millennia because living in the cold is difficult or because they ran into Neanderthals, etc. etc. or because the smart people bailed from Africa first?” questions.
A study found that grey-eyed people have the fastest reaction times. So pigmentation is shown to be associated with neurological performance.
DNA studies will sort it out eventually.
↧
↧
Comment on Week in review by Jim D
So today the healthier, wealthier and wiser people live in cooler conditions. What do these three gradients tell us about the preferred climate for the species? Warmer or cooler?
↧
Comment on Week in review by phatboy
Confusing cause and effect again, I see
↧
Comment on Week in review by jhprince2014
The Tol tweet is interesting: It looks like a grammer school project for one.
↧
Comment on Week in review by PA
Jim D | December 23, 2014 at 10:30 am | Reply
So today the healthier, wealthier and wiser people live in cooler conditions. What do these three gradients tell us about the preferred climate for the species? Warmer or cooler?
That isn’t quite how it works. If you believe in evolution, man evolved in the tropics and the basic body plan is designed for the tropics.
Only the smartest and toughest could survive in the North during the ice age. So they adapted and evolved.
I’d call the fate of Northerners, karma – paid for by their ancestors who endured the hard times.
↧
↧
Comment on Week in review by Jim D
I find that “skeptics” are very resistant when facts on the surface go against their meme. It can’t be that simple they will say, and then they will go off and look for the real cause or just deny the facts in the first place.
↧
Comment on Week in review by kim
We are Siamese if you please.
We are Siamese if you don’t please.
==========================
↧
Comment on Week in review by climatereason
Fan
I wasn’t writing a complete treatise on Charles Dickens, merely reflecting his life in temperatures and pointing out that he lived during part of the LIA AND the great warming that followed.
That his influence on what we think of the climate of the times is considerable, is something on which I am sure you will agree.
tonyb
↧
Comment on Week in review by Jim D
PA, I think you need to be pretty smart to survive in the tropics too. The conditions are challenging to the health, and the shorter lifespan may even limit individual accomplishments and wisdom to some extent.
↧
↧
Comment on Week in review by Don Monfort
Here is something you will like, jimmy.
Did you know that Christmas is on Thursday? Don’t you have some things to do, other than bombard this blog with the same old, same old, day in and day out? Merry Christmas, jimmy!
↧
Comment on Week in review by phatboy
Jim D, looking in your mirror again, I see
↧
Comment on Week in review by Jim D
Don M, Merry Christmas. The piece on Miami is a sign of reality there. “Sunny day flooding” puts a nice face on it, I guess. Seems the target demographic for buying those condos is rich people who consider such homes as disposable.
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
