When I first entered the domain of internet discourse I noted that a great advantage the medium has over face to face conversation is that sharp disagreement doesn’t have to end in fisticuffs, or, worse yet, in agreement.
==========================
Comment on Public intellectuals in the climate space by kim
↧
↧
Comment on Public intellectuals in the climate space by R Graf
I saw that on WUWT. It’s not only pitiful that they never tested it themselves, but as I sure everybody knows here the theory only applies to the interface with a vacuum, like the TOA. You would think that even Nye would know the true physics.
↧
Comment on Public intellectuals in the climate space by timg56
Armagnac:
What the French keep while exporting Cognoc to the rest of the world.
↧
Comment on Public intellectuals in the climate space by timg56
Stepping in the poo you randomly drop can have that effect.
↧
Comment on Public intellectuals in the climate space by kim
On we plod, as we ponder, lost in wonder, thus we plod.
===================
↧
↧
Comment on Public intellectuals in the climate space by Matthew R Marler
A fan of *MORE* discourse: <i> Fortunately, SOME folks focus (responsibly) upon the strongest climate-science, rather than irresponsibly upon the weakest climate-science! …</i>
What now is the strongest science? Sea level change? The sea level has risen at a fairly consistent rate for a long time. <i>Projections for sea level rise in New York City are 11 to 21 inches by the 2050s, 18 to 39 inches by the 2080s, and could reach as high as 6 feet by 2100. </i> Do you consider those projections to be "solid science"? Will they become weak science if they are not confirmed?
↧
Comment on Public intellectuals in the climate space by Danny Thomas
Michael,
Vs. some of the nonsense even I can see through, maybe she’s mindless in her response as that’s all the effort it warrents?
↧
Comment on Public intellectuals in the climate space by Diogenes
Andrew Montford’s wonderful book “The Hockey Stick Illusion: Climategate and the Corruption of Science” had a seminal influence on me and served as an excellent primer on paleoclimatology.
Michael Crichton’s “State of Fear” (with its extensive bibliography and Sources of Data for graphs) provided a good overview of climatology and sources of original data for this layman to commence his own independent examination of the subject.
↧
Comment on Public intellectuals in the climate space by Matthew R Marler
A fan of *MORE* discourse: http://grist.org/cities/miami-sea-level-rise-climate-change/
Grist?
You know better by now than to exaggerate short-term fluctuations in one locale. Every heavy-duty climate scientist has warned against exaggerating short-term fluctuations in single localities.
↧
↧
Comment on Public intellectuals in the climate space by Rud Istvan
Danny, see essays Pseudo Precision for SLR, and essays By Land or by Sea and Tipping Points for the possibility of sudden change therein. Enough sources and footnotes to sort it all out for yourself.
↧
Comment on Public intellectuals in the climate space by Rud Istvan
Kim, a great thought. +1
↧
Comment on Public intellectuals in the climate space by Matthew R Marler
I didn’t think that the Matt Nisbett article was very informative or thought-provoking, perhaps because I believe that the diverse scientific issues require a couple more decades of dedicated research to resolve (such as how will the hydrological cycle change?), and because “we” already “know” that we need to construct more, improved, higher capacity flood control and irrigation systems whether CO2 causes warming or not. Nisbett’s article strikes me as a distraction.
↧
Comment on Public intellectuals in the climate space by Mark Silbert
Ron, this is from a piece in today’s American Interest by Peter Berger:
Ideas that have become an ideology do not admit falsification. Global warming has become an ideology, mostly but not exclusively concentrated in the progressive portion of the political spectrum. Its three central propositions have become axiomatic among progressives: that significant global warming is in fact occurring (“the science is in”); that its consequences will be dire; and that its major cause is industrial pollution (especially by evil American capitalism—never mind the fog of pollution hanging over the cities of India and China). Deeply committed progressives are as eager to sign petitions to stop this or that “carbon footprint” as petitions to pull American troops out of Afghanistan or to boycott Israeli products. The only (rather ambiguous) concession to the notion that, just maybe, all the science is not in, has been a shift in language from “global warming” to “climate change”. Critics of the ideology are pelted with pejorative labels—political reactionaries, uneducated ignoramuses (comparable to creatonists or flat-earth theorists), or agents of the petroleum industry.
I think that Berger qualifies as a Type II Intellectual.
↧
↧
Comment on Public intellectuals in the climate space by timg56
Jim D,
It isn’t hard to commision a panel of clowns (excuse me, experts) and get them to issue reports and studies which support the agenda of the people who commissioned them. Did you bother to check what actual tidal gauge data is for NYC? Or what percentage of it is due to subsidence?
It is exactly reporting such as this that sparked my interest in the subject. It isn’t science. It is gadfly journalism masquarding as science. When someone makes a claim like the 6 ft increase in sea level, you should automatically know they haven’t a clue or have an agenda. You don’t get to 6 ft using the available data. The only way you get there is picking a model and “projecting” a number. That ain’t science.
↧
Comment on Public intellectuals in the climate space by Richard Drake
Kim nailed it again.
↧
Comment on Public intellectuals in the climate space by A fan of *MORE* discourse
mosomoso notes that “[tide-gauge data] will tell you a bit about the centuries old phenomenon called sea level rise.”
Thank you for posting that tide-gauge data, mosomoso!
Yes, the sea-level rise-rate acceleration, in the latter half of the 20th century relative to the first half (that even by eye, is so plainly evident in your cherry-picked data set) is affirmed by recent, larger analyses.
Preliminary analysis of acceleration of sea level rise through the twentieth century using extended tide gauge data sets (August 2014)by Peter Hogarth
This work explores the potential for extending tide gauge time series from the Permanent Service for Mean Sea Level (PSMSL) using historical documents, PSMSL ancillary data, and by developing additional composite time series using near neighbor tide gauges.
The aim was to increase the number, completeness, and geographical extent of records covering most or all of the twentieth century.
The number of at least 75% complete century-scale time series have been approximately doubled over the original PSMSL data set. In total, over 4800 station years have been added, with 294 of these added to 10 long Southern Hemisphere records. Individual century-scale acceleration values derived from this new extended data set tend to converge on a value of 0.01 ± 0.008 mm/yr2.
This result agrees closely with recent work [that affirms sea-level rise-rate acceleration]
Conclusion Data rules — ideology fools!
That common-sense reality has long been evident to pretty much *EVERYONE* — professional city-planners especially! — eh Climate Etc readers?
![\scriptstyle\rule[2.25ex]{0.01pt}{0.01pt}\,\boldsymbol{\overset{\scriptstyle\circ\wedge\circ}{\smile}\,\heartsuit\,{\displaystyle\text{\bfseries!!!}}\,\heartsuit\,\overset{\scriptstyle\circ\wedge\circ}{\smile}}\ \rule[-0.25ex]{0.01pt}{0.01pt}](http://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Cscriptstyle%5Crule%5B2.25ex%5D%7B0.01pt%7D%7B0.01pt%7D%5C%2C%5Cboldsymbol%7B%5Coverset%7B%5Cscriptstyle%5Ccirc%5Cwedge%5Ccirc%7D%7B%5Csmile%7D%5C%2C%5Cheartsuit%5C%2C%7B%5Cdisplaystyle%5Ctext%7B%5Cbfseries%21%21%21%7D%7D%5C%2C%5Cheartsuit%5C%2C%5Coverset%7B%5Cscriptstyle%5Ccirc%5Cwedge%5Ccirc%7D%7B%5Csmile%7D%7D%5C+%5Crule%5B-0.25ex%5D%7B0.01pt%7D%7B0.01pt%7D&bg=bbffcc&fg=0055ff&s=2 "\scriptstyle\rule[2.25ex]{0.01pt}{0.01pt}\,\boldsymbol{\overset{\scriptstyle\circ\wedge\circ}{\smile}\,\heartsuit\,{\displaystyle\text{\bfseries!!!}}\,\heartsuit\,\overset{\scriptstyle\circ\wedge\circ}{\smile}}\ \rule[-0.25ex]{0.01pt}{0.01pt}")
↧
Comment on Public intellectuals in the climate space by beththeserf
Practical experiment is different from computer models.
↧
↧
Comment on Public intellectuals in the climate space by mosomoso
I once stayed the night in an armagnac “chai” where they make or store the product called “aygo ardento”, burning water, in the old language. It was in Gascony, near where the musketeer, D’Artagnan, hailed from. (He existed.)
I shouldn’t say this in front of Mark, but armagnac is now struggling in the French market and there are good bargains to be had.
↧
Comment on Public intellectuals in the climate space by Bill Norton
Thanks for referencing Sowell’s article. As usual, he is spot on with his comments. I love the guy.
↧
Comment on Public intellectuals in the climate space by mosomoso
Yes, the whole do-the-math thing is starting to looks suspect. Do the math when the geek does the aqueduct.
Too many people are using calculation as an exemption from, or substitute for, observation and thought. “Climate science” comes to mind!
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
