Comments on: Why scientists aren’t more persuasive, Part 1 http://climateprogress.org/2008/09/30/why-scientists-arent-more-persuasive-part-1/ The Latest on Climate Science, Solutions, and Politics Sun, 22 Nov 2009 02:38:10 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: shop http://climateprogress.org/2008/09/30/why-scientists-arent-more-persuasive-part-1/#comment-27195 shop Thu, 15 Jan 2009 10:32:41 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/09/30/why-scientists-arent-more-persuasive-part-1/#comment-27195 There’s a fair chance of succeeding there, too. Going after coal now is much harder and less likely to succeed, especially if the cap-and-trade income isn’t returned to the middle-class taxpayers directly, because such AGW efforts will be painful and are up against the problems you see in the Launch letters and that this post discusses. There’s a fair chance of succeeding there, too. Going after coal now is much harder and less likely to succeed, especially if the cap-and-trade income isn’t returned to the middle-class taxpayers directly, because such AGW efforts will be painful and are up against the problems you see in the Launch letters and that this post discusses.

]]> By: Dano http://climateprogress.org/2008/09/30/why-scientists-arent-more-persuasive-part-1/#comment-20254 Dano Tue, 07 Oct 2008 15:35:48 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/09/30/why-scientists-arent-more-persuasive-part-1/#comment-20254 The key to pointing out trolls know nothing is not to fall for their distractions and hand-waving. Keep on task. Best, D The key to pointing out trolls know nothing is not to fall for their distractions and hand-waving. Keep on task.

Best,

D

]]> By: John Hollenberg http://climateprogress.org/2008/09/30/why-scientists-arent-more-persuasive-part-1/#comment-20246 John Hollenberg Tue, 07 Oct 2008 14:13:50 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/09/30/why-scientists-arent-more-persuasive-part-1/#comment-20246 Another troll bites the dust. Another troll bites the dust.

]]> By: John Hollenberg http://climateprogress.org/2008/09/30/why-scientists-arent-more-persuasive-part-1/#comment-20154 John Hollenberg Sat, 04 Oct 2008 20:55:48 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/09/30/why-scientists-arent-more-persuasive-part-1/#comment-20154 Looks like Ryan disappeared... not a surprise. Looks like Ryan disappeared… not a surprise.

]]> By: Dano http://climateprogress.org/2008/09/30/why-scientists-arent-more-persuasive-part-1/#comment-20149 Dano Sat, 04 Oct 2008 19:44:53 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/09/30/why-scientists-arent-more-persuasive-part-1/#comment-20149 Let's bet, brrrrave Ryan from SoCali! Hello? Hello? Best, D Let’s bet, brrrrave Ryan from SoCali!

Hello?

Hello?

Best,

D

]]> By: David B. Benson http://climateprogress.org/2008/09/30/why-scientists-arent-more-persuasive-part-1/#comment-20075 David B. Benson Thu, 02 Oct 2008 23:30:27 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/09/30/why-scientists-arent-more-persuasive-part-1/#comment-20075 Dano --- Well, NCDC and HADCRU leave out the Artic Ocean; GISS extrapolates for this. But its not a big deal: http://tamino.wordpress.com/2008/01/24/giss-ncdc-hadcru/ Dano — Well, NCDC and HADCRU leave out the Artic Ocean; GISS extrapolates for this. But its not a big deal:

http://tamino.wordpress.com/2008/01/24/giss-ncdc-hadcru/

]]> By: Dano http://climateprogress.org/2008/09/30/why-scientists-arent-more-persuasive-part-1/#comment-20072 Dano Thu, 02 Oct 2008 22:23:20 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/09/30/why-scientists-arent-more-persuasive-part-1/#comment-20072 We can do one, or a blend. It matters not David as long as the temps are where people live. Best, D We can do one, or a blend. It matters not David as long as the temps are where people live.

Best,

D

]]> By: David B. Benson http://climateprogress.org/2008/09/30/why-scientists-arent-more-persuasive-part-1/#comment-20069 David B. Benson Thu, 02 Oct 2008 21:29:14 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/09/30/why-scientists-arent-more-persuasive-part-1/#comment-20069 Dano & Joe --- For some form of neutrality, I recommend basing the bet upon the HadCRUTv3 global surface temperature product. Dano & Joe — For some form of neutrality, I recommend basing the bet upon the HadCRUTv3 global surface temperature product.

]]> By: Dano http://climateprogress.org/2008/09/30/why-scientists-arent-more-persuasive-part-1/#comment-20049 Dano Thu, 02 Oct 2008 14:33:11 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/09/30/why-scientists-arent-more-persuasive-part-1/#comment-20049 Ryan from SoCali: People live on the surface of the earth. They don't live in dirigibles and airships 4-7 km above the surface. Sat temp measurements are not for measuring change on the surface, where people live. Therefore, I'll pitch in for whatever the group sets up to bet you, provided we bet on a metric for where people live, as I doubt we'll have technology to live above the surface in a decade. So. Surface temps. Next decade. Folks pitch in. I'm in. Best, D Ryan from SoCali:

People live on the surface of the earth. They don’t live in dirigibles and airships 4-7 km above the surface. Sat temp measurements are not for measuring change on the surface, where people live.

Therefore, I’ll pitch in for whatever the group sets up to bet you, provided we bet on a metric for where people live, as I doubt we’ll have technology to live above the surface in a decade.

So. Surface temps. Next decade. Folks pitch in. I’m in.

Best,

D

]]> By: Joe http://climateprogress.org/2008/09/30/why-scientists-arent-more-persuasive-part-1/#comment-20035 Joe Thu, 02 Oct 2008 01:48:06 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/09/30/why-scientists-arent-more-persuasive-part-1/#comment-20035 I have been focused on S&N and not reading this thread. I confess I don't trust the folks who control the satellite data since have repeatedly misanylzed the data (see <a href="http://climateprogress.org/2008/05/22/should-you-believe-anything-john-christy-or-roy-spencer-say/" rel="nofollow">here</a>). When independent scientists re-analyze the data, they find that it shows warming (see <a href="http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008/05/tropical-tropopshere-ii/" rel="nofollow">here</a>). The problem of course is that satellites don't measure temperature directly, and in particular they don't look at the surface, which is where we all live. I confess also I'm a bit tired of making bets. I think I have three big ones out there. But it may be four. So I think for the sake of simplicity and relevance and trustworthiness, I'd like to stick to the surface temperature data for any big bets. That said, I'm game. I have been focused on S&N and not reading this thread.

I confess I don’t trust the folks who control the satellite data since have repeatedly misanylzed the data (see here). When independent scientists re-analyze the data, they find that it shows warming (see here). The problem of course is that satellites don’t measure temperature directly, and in particular they don’t look at the surface, which is where we all live.

I confess also I’m a bit tired of making bets. I think I have three big ones out there. But it may be four.

So I think for the sake of simplicity and relevance and trustworthiness, I’d like to stick to the surface temperature data for any big bets. That said, I’m game.

]]>