It’s funny, al. About a decade ago when I first got into this debate I figured it would take six months or so to straighten out the disinformation generated by Michael Mann’s Crook’t Stick.
I thought it was a flash in the pan. Instead, the ore body grows with each new drilling.
=================
Edward Wegman, under oath, commenting upon an IPCC graph he said earlier not to have:
> [E]ssentially a cartoon.
The Mississippi outlet has been petrified near the Eastern limit of its historic delta. It’s not nice to fool with Mother Nature.
==============
Steven,
“Cognitive bias – how petroleum scientists deal with it”
Forget the bias yet see the “good” process decisions.
The DOD and DOE have managed to process pragmatically. Ships at sea which can now fuel jets and themselves from sea water. Water treatment plants which can now fuel themselves with bio-waste and brackish water delivering power and potable water.
What bias in the face of innovation Mosh?
Is this post insightful? No, yet we’ll never lose sight of the need for carbon fuels and carbon products.
Does this post deliver “good decisions”? Few if any do without comment!
SM – compare the quantity and quality of data in the oilfield to that of climate. Oilfield geological data is primarily spatial for drilling purposes. Climatological data is needed over long time spans as well as over the entire spatial extent of the Earth – extending into outer space for some purposes.
The oil field guys have an easier job, but their job depends on it.
To be honest, the author speaks in tongues:
the 5 biases are poorly defined : /
Beththeserf – “That old Hammurabi code of
‘sleep under yer own bridge’ is sadly lacking in tenured guvuhmint professions like academic climate sci research and other ‘dismal’
professions where wrong calls, by Ehrlich, Stiglits et Al, are made
at no cost to themselves, but at great cost to the public.”
They need to eat their own dog food. :)
Fan,
Thanks for the Hansen paper link.
You do realize that all these posts of yours is your cognitive bias on display don’t you? But please do continue though, don’t know what we’d do without you :-)
John
“Do you think this process is good
Do you think it leads to good decisions
Simple yes or no questions.
Humans are not, by nature, good statisticians. We are, however, very good storytellers, though stories get distorted. Mine the data, but tell a story. Successful politicians know this.
John
For example..
“Does this post deliver “good decisions”? Few if any do without comment!”
My question wasnt does the POST deliver good decisions.
the post describes a process. That process has nothing to do with DOD or DOE or fuels or anything you mention
The post describes a process.
Read the post
Answer the simple questions.
you wont.
Depends on initial and boundary conditions – as I keep saying – and not silly verbiage based on silly little thought experiments.
Yes, we avoid the modern day apocolypto where we need to sacrifice entire cultures to appease the global warming gods. Why don’t we just sacrifice a virgin or two first to see if that works.
The lunacy of the 2 degree target defies description especially when you understand the origin.
Not at all, you only need to make the average spoke lengths for a large number of wheels the same length.
SM: why are you so prickly? Why so instantly on the offensive? Do you have conversations with others who disagree with you in this way?
The blogosphere is a series of monologues, for sure, but we are not in a race to shut down the tit-for-tat. We speak with more certainty, perhaps, than we really believe, in all conversations, and then listen to the replay and moderate – in the reply – what we might have said. The blog removes the immediate response and counter-point, by its nature; we have no reason to remove in-your-face civility.
Why do you antagonize as though on purpose?
On fourth thought, perhaps this small 97% group has a huge geopolitical impact.
on fifth thought, perhaps the huge geopolitical enterprise has a huge impact on climate science.
Warming never ended Brandon. Warmest month just occured, warmest year just occured and warmest decade just occured.
It seems completely irresponsible to base policy solely on the temps from 1 year, 1998.
