In The News

[sunny starry skies]

HI VP, I hope you didn't misinterpret my post - and as your description shows, many relevant problems are quite graspable by numerate non-specialists. But I think that in a way supports the point I was trying to make. It is not necessarily harder to teach a geoscientist sufficient mathematics than to teach a mathematician sufficiant geoscience. In the 'language' cotext, you can successfully buy your shopping in France with a far-from-complete knowledge of French (you can do your data analysis without a research-grade understanding of the full body of statistics)! But when dealing with problems in geoscience it is important to have a thorough understanding of the problem, the interrelated concepts and contexts, and how these systems operate in the real world. To publish research-grade science relevant to climate change I think you need to have a very good understanding of the processes relevant to your problem. That particular language is not always easy, and how easily it is picked up varies depending on the person. Some will do it well, others won't. I'll repeat my caveat - some, and maybe even many, will go both ways just as well, but it's not a given).

A classic example of someone who doesn't get it is the poster by the pseudonym of stevengoddard on WUWT. Among his myriad misunderstanding of the cryosphere is that Antarctica can't lose mass except by surface melting (and air temps in Antarctica aren't of course going above freezing any time soon!). By utterly failing to understand the processes of ice flow, calving and mass balance, he doesn't get the problem, and doesn't admit it. But of course he's quite happy to spout off about it, and deny the research and obvious fundamental issues when they are pointed out to him.

http://www.skeptical...to-Goddard.html {Robert Way has two previous relevant posts on glaciology too}

It is why as a scientist you need to be skeptical of work that has not been replicated or verified by some independent means - problems can occur with numeracy or the understanding of concepts that are missed by reviewers. This happens to both pro- and anti- papers. If a piece of work is not peer-reviewed or supported by corroborating evidence (often books, including examples cited by some here, fall into this category), you need to be even more sceptical of the conclusions because there has been far less of a verification process. You can claim pretty much any old rubbish in a book so long as the non-specialist publisher thinks it will sell copies!

Now goddard was an extreme example (McLean et al 2009 was another), and one who has shown with pretty much every posting that his grasp of numerical analysis is dreadful too, but hopefully it's a useful example to show how much difficulty someone can get into when they enter a complex subject with minimal training/skill in that subject.

sss

Edited July 17, 2010 by sunny starry skies

[VillagePlank]

But when dealing with problems in geoscience it is important to have a thorough understanding of the problem, the interrelated concepts and contexts, and how these systems operate in the real world.

Inter-related concepts can easily be modeled as digraph. A digraph can be represented as a matrix, and a matrix is made up of vectors, and a vector is a set of numbers .... I see your point, though - but since I wholly think that mathematics is the basis for all science, I, personally, think it is easier for a mathematician, of which I don't class myself as, by the way, to go to a specialist subject than the other way around.

Of course, the chances are that scientists are closet mathematicians, anyway ... I think it is a very rare problem indeed that can't succoumb to formal analysis.

Edited July 17, 2010 by VillagePlank

[Thundery wintry showers]

June was the warmest on record globally according to NCDC. NCDC also had April and May as the warmest on record.

CRU is yet to update for June but has all three spring months were second warmest on record, March narrowly falling being 2002 and April/May falling narrowly behind 1998.

Given that the winter was less exceptional, either we're seeing a lag effect from the El Nino, or the negative NAO/AO of the winter helped to shave a bit off the Northern Hemisphere temperature anomaly, or a bit of both perhaps.

[The PIT]

However the story rumbles on with the deniers hitting back http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2010/07/amazongate-smoking-gun.html no doubt they'll be a response and then another until it goes round in circles as per normal.

[Devonian]

However the story rumbles on with the deniers hitting back http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2010/07/amazongate-smoking-gun.html no doubt they'll be a response and then another until it goes round in circles as per normal.

Which is why such sceptics do it - FUD.

[HighPressure]

Which is why such sceptics do it - FUD.

I do hate the misuse of the term 'skeptic' in this debate when you actually mean denier, there is a clear difference. As a skeptic myself which means I 'doubt' we have a full understanding of the subject and further research in all areas should be carried out before making assumptions, I find it somewhat obnoxious.

A Believer = Someone who agrees totally with a current view.

A Skeptic = Someone who doubts or needs further convincing that the current view is entirely correct.

A Denier = Someone who does not believe there is any basis to the view held.

Please say denier when that is what is meant, skepticism is healthy and good in all scientific debates

[VillagePlank]

May I make suggestion? Please remove deleted posts, and PM the offender?

[weather eater]

I see the times is today is claiming that Exxon Mobil has paid climate sceptics over a £1,000,000 to keep get their message out, this in breach of a pledge not to do so.

The times now charges to view online but here’s the story as reported in the Australian.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/exxon-still-aids-climate-sceptics/story-e6frg6so-1225894256861

[Gray-Wolf]

And now for some weather news and the dangers of Vodee and swimming (take note PeteT!!!!)

http://www.terradail...rought_999.html

EDIT: In fact it tells us the 'coldest place on earth in winter' is suffering 32c temps!!!!

Edited July 20, 2010 by jethro

[Richie V]

Wait for the July global temp report to come out, I think a few will be surprised. Yep warm in Russia.

Dev

The NOAA had June global temps as 1.22 above average...........I'll bin that. 0.44 is more like it.

I am willing to see how this year turns out, it should cool off nicely if natural drivers are in control...a good test coming

BFTP

Yes there have been serious outcries and critisism about noaa on breakfast news this morning, aparently they are under investigation and prohibited from publishing temperature data untill investigation is complete BOUT BLOODY TIME

I'm not here for a fight, just relaying what I've heard, It's hard to ignore phrases like high rounding factors and 1.75% upward data correction! you be the judge!

Ric

Edited July 20, 2010 by Chassisbot

[Devonian]

Yes there have been serious outcries and critisism about noaa on breakfast news this morning, aparently they are under investigation and prohibited from publishing temperature data untill investigation is complete BOUT BLOODY TIME

I'm not here for a fight, just relaying what I've heard, It's hard to ignore phrases like high rounding factors and 1.75% upward data correction! you be the judge!

Ric

I wonder if you could start a new thread? Which TV channel? Any link available? That kind of thing.

[jethro]

GW - you're walking a dangerous line with that last post, please remember the code of conduct.

[Gray-Wolf]

GW - you're walking a dangerous line with that last post, please remember the code of conduct.

Sorry J' , I'm sure no offence is taken by anyone? Bit of light entertainment even?

[jethro]

Sorry J' , I'm sure no offence is taken by anyone? Bit of light entertainment even?

You know as well as I do that people do take offence. This area has been littered with spats and heated arguments provoked by just such comments, that style of posting has been consigned to the archives.

Thanks for the apology Ian.

[Gray-Wolf]

More on the Euro/Russian drought;

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-07-20/russian-farmers-urged-to-harvest-at-night-in-worst-heat-wave-in-a-decade.html

and an interesting commentary;

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/janet-ritz/the-planet-has-a-fever_b_650705.html

[Methuselah]

I can think of a few peeps whom this may annoy...

www.climatecops.com

Enjoy, Barrie???

[Gray-Wolf]

I can think of a few peeps whom this may annoy... :lol: :lol:

www.climatecops.com

Enjoy, Barrie??? :lol:

O.M.G.!

[Gray-Wolf]

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/capitalweathergang/2010/08/hot_weather_records_falling_le.html

Seems our old 'hot v's cold' records would be swamped this summer by N. Hemisphere heat!

[noggin]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1300043/With-Russias-wildfires-Pakistans-floods-2010-year-extreme-weather.html

I have posted this in desperation, really. What sort of reporting is it? There is mention of the cold southern hemisphere in the title, but no mention of it in the article itself which concentrates on heat and flooding. It really is rubbish reporting. Where is there any mention, for example, of the sitution in many parts of South America where States of Emergency have been declared because of the extreme cold and snow?

D'ya know, any dear reader, it's all a part of the reason why I don't bother anymore.....biased reporting, cherry picking, closed-mindedness, same old stuff all the time.

I am going to wait. I will continue to live as clean a life as possible and wait. I really am just staggered at the bias in the media, the slavishness to the current "cause". I am old enough and ugly enough to have seen it all before. There comes a point when you realise that to argue is futile. It's the same as some big company's/governmental department's call centres where you go around and around in circles. The frustration just ain't worth it.

[Methuselah]

It is the Tabloid Press, Nog...

[Devonian]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1300043/With-Russias-wildfires-Pakistans-floods-2010-year-extreme-weather.html

I have posted this in desperation, really. What sort of reporting is it? There is mention of the cold southern hemisphere in the title, but no mention of it in the article itself which concentrates on heat and flooding. It really is rubbish reporting. Where is there any mention, for example, of the sitution in many parts of South America where States of Emergency have been declared because of the extreme cold and snow?

D'ya know, any dear reader, it's all a part of the reason why I don't bother anymore.....biased reporting, cherry picking, closed-mindedness, same old stuff all the time.

I am going to wait. I will continue to live as clean a life as possible and wait. I really am just staggered at the bias in the media, the slavishness to the current "cause". I am old enough and ugly enough to have seen it all before. There comes a point when you realise that to argue is futile. It's the same as some big company's/governmental department's call centres where you go around and around in circles. The frustration just ain't worth it.

I've not got much time for The Mail but the reality is that while, yes, there has been cold weather in S. America looking at the global picture there is no doubt that it's been a warm July and year and that the story really is the warmth rather than the cold..

[sunny starry skies]

The Daily Mail actually reported something to do with weather/climate pretty much right!! From the same rag that was going nuts over our cold spell while the world as a whole was remarkably warm in Dec-Feb, and that was spectacularly inaccurate about Phil Jones in Feb. I am gobsmacked and surprisingly impressed. I'm not sure what your problem is with the article Noggin, seeing as it mentions a range of weather extremes, most of them are hot/wet, which is what is to be expected with AGW, and which is what we have seen this year. Maybe there is hope for the media after all...

[Gray-Wolf]

Meanwhile the Guardian tell us that in 09' China used more oil than the U.S. .The first time in history (since such records existed) that the U.S, has been knocked off number 1 spot! For their part China is committed to reduce it's 70% dependence on coal to 64% by 2014.

Of course China is still on the 'up and up' in it's energy production so any reduction in 'dependence' will be outstripped by it's increase in production (is it still a power station a week?)

I only mention this for 'balance' when we look at a world that is committed to reducing emissions (on paper) we have to know how the reality is.

Remember, China ,per capita uses 1/4 of the average American so if they end up using only 1/2 as much energy (by using latest tech-no etc.) they will consume twice as much oil as the current U.S. consumption........tailing off our carbon emissions eh?

[jethro]

A voice of reason, in a mad world

http://pgosselin.wordpress.com/2010/08/03/hans-von-storch-speaks-out-on-cru-ipcc-and-climate-science/

[Gray-Wolf]

netweather news......

I think we can now safely add Mark Serreze as a friend of net weather and his pointing us to this paper;

http://www3.intersci...ETRY=1&SRETRY=0

regarding changes to atmospheric circulation, due to sea ice loss is well worth both reading and digesting, (not , I repeat NOT ,a challenge to be shot down but read ,understood and discussed?)

It's not often we have a head of a global Organisation happy to help us in our endeavours (M.Fish included) so lets have a little bit of decorum even if we choose to dismiss the findings?

Edited August 5, 2010 by Gray-Wolf