Comments for Climate Etc.

Thanks for the reference, Arch. However, note that double-counted money is not doubled money. Double-counted money may bias our estimate of a country's wealth. It does not change its wealth, at least not directly. I don't think we should conflate this phenomenon with money creation.

So, an <a href="http://www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/skeptical" rel="nofollow">antonym of skeptical is gullible</a> What do gullibles need? Why would anyone take gullibles seriously to begin with?

2. Co2 emissions pose a risk

But can you articulate this risk?
Especially articulate this risk with numbers, not adjectives?

“First, sceptics do not have to assemble their own climate model or a set of climate hypotheses. They don’t have to write their own papers either.

All that is necessary is to point out flaws in the CAWGer’s models, hypotheses, and papers.

Don’t let Mosher tell you otherwise.

################################

1. That is not my argument.
2. Here is my argument: If skeptics want to be taken seriously they need an alternative theory.

Given a choice, which would you choose? would you be in a stronger position if you
A) had No alternative theory
B) had an alternative theory that explained the facts better

I argue B. Skeptics would be taken more seriously if they had a theory that worked better than standard theory.
The point is criticism as you point out is necessary, but my argument is that it is not sufficient. That’s why so many skeptics get excited when, for example, willis or anyone else proposes alternative concepts.

This is obvious. criticism is necessary but not sufficient.

Next, publishing. Yes, you need to publish your ideas. They cannot have influence unless people can read them.

Re Alternate Theory

In the spirit of scientific enterprise, maybe Mosher himself can supply us with an alternate theory or two. Isn’t that what “scientists” are supposed to do? Do science? lol

Andrew

We don’t really have any way to evaluate the nature or extent of the risk(s).

Right, so risks could be zero and the benefits ( which don’t get much coverage ) could be greater than zero.

Makes a person wonder just how China went from melting down vintage woks to building ghost cities in just fifty years? They had no money yet they built with money. How were they able to do it? We had swing once.

Why would anyone take gullibles seriously to begin with?

‘Cause the vote?

What do gullibles need?
a pen and a phone.

Right, so risks could be zero and the benefits ( which don’t get much coverage ) could be greater than zero.

Nope. The risks can’t be zero when you don’t know what they are. Not to you.

tonyb
What is your reaction to the new HadCru4 adjustments? Seem to be falling in line for Paris with the canvas and wood bucket SST adjustments from Karl. How he took the random and high error bars from ship bucket thermometers to adjust buoys and ARGO thermocouples left a question as to Jones et al integrity. For some time they seemed to be on a higher integrity course than the US government scientists but seems to be backsliding.
Scott

> They had no money yet they built with money.

Blame on on double-entry accounting. The inventor was Leonardo’s lover anyway.

> The inventor […]

Make that the promoter, promotion being a technical term in the auditing sciences.

What I discovered is that PeterL might reject AGW, Bad. I had the impression he was more into the CAGW meme.

Speaking of memes, where’s Andy?

While it is true that a cohesive and explanatory computer model or theory from sceptics would enhance their case, it isn’t a necessity. It is adequate to simply shoot holes in the CAGWer’s models and theories. That’s where we disagree, I posit that criticism is adequate.

Of course, there are sceptical climate scientists who have published their own interpretations of climate concepts and data interpretations. So your argument that sceptics have not published papers and done other work is vacant. But that isn’t necessary for most CE denizens.

Now we could say it is AGW with a twist of Lime.

Justin: Did you notice those chemtrails last night just at dusk… then we got thunder and lightening. You know Elon Musk is part of the Bilderburgers and the Tri-Lateral commission. Just sayin