Comment on What separates science from non-science? by Peter Lang
Faustino, Thank you for you’re your reply. I agree with all the points you make, (but should just correct this misunderstanding of one of my assumptions): You said: Peter, I can’t comment on the $3.5...
View ArticleComment on Gamesmanship by Max_OK
CO2 levels certainly are rising. Some stations in the arctic were showing 400 ppm this spring.
View ArticleComment on What separates science from non-science? by Pekka Pirilä
I’m not really worried about Ozzie’s problems in understanding my writing. Actually I have written a couple of my messages, when I have noticed that he hasn’t understood at all what native English...
View ArticleComment on Gamesmanship by Peter317
<blockquote>On the other hand, that unused fossil fuel will still be available for future generations</blockquote> Which future generations would that be? Won't they all in turn be saving...
View ArticleComment on Gamesmanship by BatedBreath
In the game, imposing the eight-sided die represents the imposition of “the science is setted”. You may not question or reject this, you can only treat it is a given.
View ArticleComment on What separates science from non-science? by gavincawley
@Latimer The model ensemble aims to provide a projection of the response of the climate to the change in forcings. Thus it is not a direct estimate of the evolution of the climate itself as the...
View ArticleComment on What separates science from non-science? by gavincawley
of course it is an ad-hom, you are dismissing an argument on the grounds of its source rather than its content. That is the very definition of an ad-hom.
View ArticleComment on Science is not about certainty by Brian H
OTOH, it’s some of he 1-49%ers who will end up replacing the 51-99%ers as a New Consensus. The problem is guessing which ones!
View ArticleClik here to view.
Comment on Science is not about certainty by Anteros
pekka – You beat me to it! But well put anyway
View ArticleComment on Science is not about certainty by Brian H
Thanks, JC, for those suggestive excerpts. As is unfortunately usual, however, the quality of the translation and editing degrades the closer to the end one gets. That last sentence borders on...
View ArticleComment on Gamesmanship by Peter Lang
No, I was correct the first time: 100 days (not 100 weeks) to build an aircraft carrier in WWII. “USA was building aircraft carriers in 100 days at the end of WWII. “...
View ArticleComment on Science is not about certainty by David Springer
@Pekka I was reading your english blog’s most recent entry and would point out that the basic physics underlying atmospheric physics are not as settled as you seem to think. I would point to one very...
View ArticleComment on Gamesmanship by Peter317
Which part of the MT paper do you believe illustrates whatever point you’re trying to make? The only reference to global warming I could find is: In Fig. 5, we gave the yearly number of days n in which...
View ArticleComment on Science is not about certainty by David Springer
@Pekka As an aside, if English were your native language your competence with it it is admirable. If Finnish is your native language your fluency and precision with English it is astounding. I didn’t...
View ArticleClik here to view.
Comment on Science is not about certainty by capt. dallas 0.8 +/-0.2
The sky dragon response though is not helpful either. There is a radiant impact that varies with conditions. ASHREA did a cursory test for including a radiant barrier on the R-value of construction...
View ArticleComment on Science is not about certainty by Jim D
No, radiation dominates surface cooling at night. What are you talking about? You don’t get convection and evaporation at night (dew formation is the opposite of evaporation).
View ArticleComment on Science is not about certainty by Jim D
sometimes I think skeptics live on a different planet.
View ArticleClik here to view.
Comment on Science is not about certainty by capt. dallas 0.8 +/-0.2
I think I could use a multiple radiant disc model that could compare well with triple glazing Actually, I suggested a three layer greenhouse experiment for the doubting Thomases at one time. If you...
View ArticleComment on Science is not about certainty by Greg House
Pekka Pirilä | June 2, 2012 at 4:48 pm | The atmosphere is very different, because the temperature at tropopause is much lower than at the surface. This temperature difference is essential for that...
View ArticleComment on Gamesmanship by m
A “revenue neutral carbon tax” will not change our planet’s climate one iota. No tax ever did. (And no tax is “revenue neutral”, by definition.) Max PS The above is my assessment of the premise. If yo,...
View Article