Comments on: Revised Temperature Data? http://micahtillman.com/2007/11/27/revised-temperature-data/ Philosophy, Politics, Religion, Etc. Fri, 05 Sep 2008 18:02:09 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1 By: Casey http://micahtillman.com/2007/11/27/revised-temperature-data/#comment-935 Casey Sun, 02 Dec 2007 14:00:29 +0000 http://micahtillman.com/2007/11/27/revised-temperature-data/#comment-935 I agree. Science is progressive and always ready to change its mind. I just wish the same could be said about scientists in general. I agree. Science is progressive and always ready to change its mind. I just wish the same could be said about scientists in general.

]]> By: Andrew Stevens http://micahtillman.com/2007/11/27/revised-temperature-data/#comment-931 Andrew Stevens Sun, 02 Dec 2007 04:00:59 +0000 http://micahtillman.com/2007/11/27/revised-temperature-data/#comment-931 Casey, thanks for the compliment. I could be wrong on any of the above, of course. As Mr. Tillman says, science is progressive and always ready to change its mind. Casey, thanks for the compliment. I could be wrong on any of the above, of course. As Mr. Tillman says, science is progressive and always ready to change its mind.

]]> By: Casey http://micahtillman.com/2007/11/27/revised-temperature-data/#comment-924 Casey Sat, 01 Dec 2007 15:16:53 +0000 http://micahtillman.com/2007/11/27/revised-temperature-data/#comment-924 Andrew, may I just say that I admire your brain? I am very doubtful that humans have any substantial impact on global warming, but I agree wholeheartedly with everything else you just said. Andrew, may I just say that I admire your brain? I am very doubtful that humans have any substantial impact on global warming, but I agree wholeheartedly with everything else you just said.

]]> By: Andrew Stevens http://micahtillman.com/2007/11/27/revised-temperature-data/#comment-908 Andrew Stevens Thu, 29 Nov 2007 14:25:02 +0000 http://micahtillman.com/2007/11/27/revised-temperature-data/#comment-908 He's correct about the revision of surface temperatures, but I am unable to confirm his claim about satellite temperatures. It should be pointed out that 1998 was an unusually warm year (as was 1934) due to the El Nino effect. So, even if temperatures have been lower since 1998, this is still perfectly consistent with the global warming hypothesis. Moreover, the United States only makes up about 2% of the world's landmass so the aforementioned revision has had a negligible effect on global temperatures. I have no doubt that global warming is, in fact, occurring. I have some doubts that it is occurring due to human activity (as does the IPCC report which gives it about a 90% probability), but I agree with the IPCC that it is more likely than not. I have much graver doubts about whether A) we can do anything about it, B) we should do anything about it, C) that the catastrophic scenarios occasionally suggested will actually occur, and D) that the process will continue to go on, even if we don't do anything about it in a coordinated way. I certainly agree that it is tempting to simply dismiss these people out of hand. The two things that can be said about doomsayers are 1) they have always existed and 2) they have always been wrong. However, that doesn't mean that they will always be wrong. A broken clock is right twice a day. Having said that, ideally we should certainly try to move from carbon-based fuels to cleaner sources of energy like nuclear power or (best of all) hydrogen fusion power, assuming it can be made practical. You don't have to be an environmental zealot to agree that burning fossil fuels is a dirty and damaging process and in a perfect world we would transition past them. He’s correct about the revision of surface temperatures, but I am unable to confirm his claim about satellite temperatures. It should be pointed out that 1998 was an unusually warm year (as was 1934) due to the El Nino effect. So, even if temperatures have been lower since 1998, this is still perfectly consistent with the global warming hypothesis. Moreover, the United States only makes up about 2% of the world’s landmass so the aforementioned revision has had a negligible effect on global temperatures.

I have no doubt that global warming is, in fact, occurring. I have some doubts that it is occurring due to human activity (as does the IPCC report which gives it about a 90% probability), but I agree with the IPCC that it is more likely than not. I have much graver doubts about whether A) we can do anything about it, B) we should do anything about it, C) that the catastrophic scenarios occasionally suggested will actually occur, and D) that the process will continue to go on, even if we don’t do anything about it in a coordinated way.

I certainly agree that it is tempting to simply dismiss these people out of hand. The two things that can be said about doomsayers are 1) they have always existed and 2) they have always been wrong. However, that doesn’t mean that they will always be wrong. A broken clock is right twice a day.

Having said that, ideally we should certainly try to move from carbon-based fuels to cleaner sources of energy like nuclear power or (best of all) hydrogen fusion power, assuming it can be made practical. You don’t have to be an environmental zealot to agree that burning fossil fuels is a dirty and damaging process and in a perfect world we would transition past them.

]]> By: Scott http://micahtillman.com/2007/11/27/revised-temperature-data/#comment-900 Scott Thu, 29 Nov 2007 03:49:55 +0000 http://micahtillman.com/2007/11/27/revised-temperature-data/#comment-900 Have you tracked down the sources? I'm a global warming skeptic myself, but I find it suspicious that he doesn't cite where that information is coming from. He displays a pretty clear bias in the rest of the article. Doesn't mean he's wrong, but it does make me more cautious about checking out his sources. Have you tracked down the sources? I’m a global warming skeptic myself, but I find it suspicious that he doesn’t cite where that information is coming from. He displays a pretty clear bias in the rest of the article. Doesn’t mean he’s wrong, but it does make me more cautious about checking out his sources.

]]> By: Micah Tillman http://micahtillman.com/2007/11/27/revised-temperature-data/#comment-895 Micah Tillman Thu, 29 Nov 2007 02:20:24 +0000 http://micahtillman.com/2007/11/27/revised-temperature-data/#comment-895 I shall. Right now. Oh. Wait. I don't have one. "Pretty soon we're going to get nasty letters saying, 'Where's my waterbuffalo?' 'Why don't I have a waterbuffalo?'" I shall. Right now.

Oh. Wait. I don’t have one.

“Pretty soon we’re going to get nasty letters saying, ‘Where’s my waterbuffalo?’ ‘Why don’t I have a waterbuffalo?’”

]]> By: Amanda R. http://micahtillman.com/2007/11/27/revised-temperature-data/#comment-885 Amanda R. Tue, 27 Nov 2007 23:15:23 +0000 http://micahtillman.com/2007/11/27/revised-temperature-data/#comment-885 HA! Put that in your pipe and smoke it. :D HA! Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

:D

]]>