Climate Science Glossary

Term Lookup

Enter a term in the search box to find its definition.

Settings

Use the controls in the far right panel to increase or decrease the number of terms automatically displayed (or to completely turn that feature off).

Term Lookup

Settings

All IPCC definitions taken from Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Annex I, Glossary, pp. 941-954. Cambridge University Press.

Home Arguments Software Resources Comments The Consensus Project Translations About Support

Bluesky Facebook LinkedIn Mastodon MeWe

Twitter YouTube RSS Posts RSS Comments Email Subscribe


Climate's changed before
It's the sun
It's not bad
There is no consensus
It's cooling
Models are unreliable
Temp record is unreliable
Animals and plants can adapt
It hasn't warmed since 1998
Antarctica is gaining ice
View All Arguments...



Username
Password
New? Register here
Forgot your password?

Latest Posts

Archives

Recent Comments

Prev  1067  1068  1069  1070  1071  1072  1073  1074  1075  1076  1077  1078  1079  1080  1081  1082  Next

Comments 53701 to 53750:

  1. PBS False Balance Hour - What's Up With That?
    Lars Larson is going to feature Skeptical Science and the claim that ‘…we need a conspiracy to save humanity‘ on his program today. How very scientific! The final nail in the coffin of global warming, again? But where's the climate science part? Do skepticons even do climate science these days? The picture seems to be shifting entirely to cognitive psychology and gossip.
  2. PBS False Balance Hour - What's Up With That?
    fretslider@116; your fake skeptic underwear are showing..;) There is *no* "alleged" taking care of biases in the temperature record: it's well-documented, utterly open to anyone whoc ares to learn about it, and there's simply no 'there' there. If you are truly trying to learn, and not just be a troll, you can find all that info on this website, among many others. There's no conspiracy here...except in some folks' *heads.*
  3. PBS False Balance Hour - What's Up With That?
    Vroomie #112: Thanks for the research on Dale's two personas. Thank Goid that not a lot of people can pull it off in a convincing manner.
  4. Philippe Chantreau at 04:37 AM on 21 September 2012
    It's not bad
    Let's take a look now at the high altitude claims. Those were put forth seemingly under the assumption that a high altitude environment presents conditions similar to what will be experienced in an atmosphere with more CO2. For myself, I consider the analogy inappropriate considering how significant the hypoxia is in the examples considered. Nonetheless, let's see what the science says. As I recall, AH1, you argued that high altitude induced a higher than normal PaCO2 to PaO2 ratio, which would be called respiratory acidosis. Educational texts on the subject disagree: http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/~pe/exs336web/336altitude.htm It is also contradicted by this study: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9079156 Note that Sherpas do have a slightly higher PaCO2 than Caucasians, but at all altitudes. Note also: "Moreover, in Caucasians sojourning for 3 weeks at 5050 m, PaCO2 kept decreasing whereas pHa, PaO2 and SaO2 remained constant." In caucasian people, acclimatation to altitude led to a lower PaCO2. In fact, the study points to Sherpas having a higher PaCO2 purely as an adaptation to limit the respiratory alkalosis brought by all the other responses to hypoxia. I looked at the life expectancy of various countries and did not find evidence of an advantage to high altitude living: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2102rank.html Nepal ranks #161, less than low lying countries without well developed health care, like Viet-Nam and many more. Modern advances have brought Sherpas' life expectancy to from 35 to 65. The islands of Sardinia and Okinawa have the highest rates of centenaries in the World. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sardinia The study on animal hearts cited earlier was given a somewhat selective quote. This study points to cattle heart adaptation to hypoxic conditions and says nothing about CO2. Here is the end of the abstract: "These changes are discussed as an intracellular mechanism which would serve to preserve oxidative metabolism in hypoxia, particularly under exercising conditions. The effective conservation of oxygen pressure head by this means is probably less than one mm Hg." The hypoxic conditions endured by these animals are severe enough to trigger a massive adaptation of the heart, whose sole purpose is to ensure adequate oxidative capability. No doubt that, put at sea levels, these would be some pretty darn athletic cows, at least for a little while, until they adapt to the new conditions. High altitude athletic preparation is well known and practiced because it enhances oxygen transport and oxygen use, not because it raises CO2. It is also well known that the benefits of high altitude preparation fade away pretty quickly when the body lives again at normal altitude. I cited a study discussing the ventilatory response to CO2 and was told that the point was missed. The point is that the brain stem centers that regulate ventilation have sensors that are extremely sensitive to CO2. The moment PaCO2 increases, ventilation kicks in to re-establish normal range. In other words, healthy people will not all of a sudden start to live with a higher PaCo2, altitude or not, higher amospheric CO2 or not. In summary: The claim that high altitude leads to higher PaCO2 is not verified in scientific litterature or physiology texts. Sherpas have higher PaCO2 at all altitudes. Their life expectancy is mediocre by world standards. Response to altitude related hypoxia actually reduces PaCO2. The claim that people living at high altitude live longer has no merit; it is not verified by worldwide demographics. Nepal ranks #161, Bhutan is #158. The top 10 include Monaco, Macau, Hong-Kong, Singapore and Gernsey, where people live pretty much at sea level. In japan (#1) the immense majority of the population resides in the low lying cities. I see no evidence of any altitude related PaCO2 effect on mitochondrial population and efficiency. What was presented instead is evidence of mitochondrial response to hypoxia. Although it was kinda fun to look up, I'm not sure I'm going to continue spend time on this.
    Moderator Response: [Sph] And that is how one presents a scientific argument and supports it with citations/references, rather than mere declarations of confident knowledgehood.
  5. PBS False Balance Hour - What's Up With That?
    Is National Talk Radio in Australia?
  6. PBS False Balance Hour - What's Up With That?
    >115 Conspiracy? See Lewandowsky, he's the, er, expert. (-snip-)
    Moderator Response: [DB] Inflammatory snipped.
  7. It's not bad
    Eric (skeptic), Of course the expansion is seasonal. That's the nature of the Hadley Cell (it migrates north and south of the equator with the sun). It can't, for the most part, expand only over the ocean and not over land. It doesn't work that way. And with the expansion, the arid areas must expand. This means Texas, Arizona, Oklahoma, Mediterranean Europe, and other places. There's no getting around this. The deserts will expand in places where human populations will be directly affected.
  8. Extreme weather isn't caused by global warming
    AHuntington, The main cause of deserts is the Hadley Cells (and in a few special cases altitude). This is readily apparent by noting that the latitudes at which deserts occur are the same (above and below the equator) and is readily explained by the mechanics of the Hadley Cells. You may argue all you want to otherwise, and certainly some of those arguments will be valid in some cases, but this does not change the fact that one major, unavoidable and already observed effect of global warming will be the expansion of the Hadley Cells, which will in turn necessarily and proportionally expand the existing deserts poleward. Texas, the American Southwest, Mediterranean Europe and others are in for a very rough ride.
  9. PBS False Balance Hour - What's Up With That?
    @111: NOAA is "quietly funding" it by announcing it in their annual report? How devious! I smell a conspiracy! Seriously? They're researching it because that's what researchers do: research things. Methods can always be refined and there is always room for better understanding. This in no way, shape, or form undermines their statement to PBS. And, as mentioned ad nauseum on this site, including in the big pretty picture at the top of this very article, the theory of global warming does not rest on temperature readings; it is just one of many lines of evidence.
  10. PBS False Balance Hour - What's Up With That?
    Have you heard? Skeptical Science to be featured on National Talk Radio.... (-snip-).
    Moderator Response: [DB] Off-topic snipped.
  11. Extreme weather isn't caused by global warming
    AHuntington: "DSL, if you believe that human emissions of fossil fuels, and human errors such as overgrazing, deforestation, etc are causing desertification, you believe that all desertification is anthropogenic. Isn't this correct? What aspects of desertification are not anthropogenic?" Hadley-type circulation existed before significant human modification of the atmosphere. Hadley-type circulation can be modified by other major forcings (solar, volcanic aerosols, etc.). Desertification has occurred as large-scale circulation patterns have shifted in response to major forcings over the course of Earth's history.
  12. Extreme weather isn't caused by global warming
    John Hartz, I am not disputing the fact that climate change is a driving factor in desertification. The ecosystem's ability to cope with a change in local climate is a bigger causal factor in desertification. When the horse latitudes heat up (whether from anthropogenic emissions sooner, or the sun slowly enveloping the earth later [ http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2008/feb/26/earth-is-doomed-in-5-billion-years ]) rainfall will become more sparse and sporadic. There are certain ecological mechanisms that have evolved to cope with such sporadic moisture. If humans properly exploited these mechanisms- changed our behavior to fit the changing climate- desertification as we know it (climate change characterized by increasing erosion, destruction of biodiversity, and breakdown of ecosystems) could be avoided to a high extent. You mention burning fossil fuels, and deforestation as potential causal candidates for desertification. I don't disagree, although overgrazing, deforestation, and local ecosystem destruction are also major players. Co2 driven climate change would cause rainfall patterns to change. Whether human management of bio-diverse ecosystems (or lack thereof) can cope with these changes determines desertification. DSL, if you believe that human emissions of fossil fuels, and human errors such as overgrazing, deforestation, etc are causing desertification, you believe that all desertification is anthropogenic. Isn't this correct? What aspects of desertification are not anthropogenic? So the only issue on which we seem to disagree (so far as I can tell) is my contention that higher atmospheric Co2 is not as big a driving force of desertification as human promotion or demotion of bio-diversity. Ecosystem management is really the issue here. If humans stopped burning all fossil fuels, the rate of deforestation would probably skyrocket (as deforestation is already primarily a fuel issue in developing countries). Mismanaged cattle would still be roaming around. Biodiversity would likely decrease. Desertification will likely continue, regardless of human Co2 emissions, unless land management is addressed. Ecosystem destruction is at the root of desertification. gws, my argument is more like this: 1. Land management errors cause desertification (undisputed). 2. Therefore, without changing these specific land management issues (eg. overgrazing, deforestation, species extinction, burning the grasslands too much, etc.), desertification will continue to occur, regardless of human emissions of Co2. Human emissions might be a factor in causing the initial climate change, but human land management practices are the primary reason for subsequent desertification.
  13. PBS False Balance Hour - What's Up With That?
    gallopingcamel, 110% is a valid number. See if you can figure it out. Consider it a homework assignment.
  14. PBS False Balance Hour - What's Up With That?
    I find it highly entertaining--and insightful--seeing the two "Dales:" One is the Dale we know who is, IMHO, at least a fake skeptic but makes the attempt to work it all out as a real skeptic, and for that I give you/him/her credit. Then, there is the "Dale" that posts over on WUWT (when JC/DB *force* me to go read it--jk, fellers!) and that Dale is....ah, er..., well, let's say not as charitable towards SkS and the scientific method as one might think he/she would be, as many here can be charitable towards Watts. That said, I think it's just another bit of data, showing how utterly screwed-up the general public's (and almost all of the MSM's) understanding is, of what constitutes true, ethical journalism and scientific debate. Can't remember who stated it here, but it hit me like a lead balloon: "Error" in scientific debates does *not* mean the same as it does in general conversations; it means a level of uncertainty. To my somewhat steam-powered brain, it's not a far reach to see how disconnected all the various parties are wrt the filed of climate change research. I can only hope forces such as this site, Tamino's, DeSmogBlog RA et al, can stem the flow of stupidity, before it really is too late. PBS certainly deserves the oft-overused term of 'epic fail' in its broadcasting of Watts as anything like a credible source of information.
  15. PBS False Balance Hour - What's Up With That?
    "When asked to describe his 'skepticism' about human-caused global warming, Watts went into a long discussion about his concerns that encroachment of human development near surface temperature stations has introduced a bias into the temperature record. However, what Watts failed to mention is that the scientific groups who compile the surface temperature record put a great deal of effort into filtering out these sorts of biases." If this assertion - the scientific groups who compile the surface temperature record put a great deal of effort into filtering out these sorts of biases. - is true, (-snip-). "5.1.3 Planning for Thermal Impacts Experiment Initial funding was provided this year by the USRCRN Program for a multi-year experiment to better understand the thermal impacts of buildings with parking lots on air temperature measurements." NCDC Annual Report
    Moderator Response: [DB] Imputation of dishonesty snipped.
  16. Philippe Chantreau at 02:55 AM on 21 September 2012
    It's not bad
    Well, I'm not entirely sure but the way I see it, AH1 argument is this: More atmospheric CO2 will lead to higher PaCO2 in circulating blood of live healthy animal subjects. This is a good thing because higher PaCO2 leads to reduced lymphocyte production of active oxygen forms and improved mitochondrial efficiency. The anesthesiology study on therapeutic hypercapnia applies to deperately ill patients on ventilators who are receiving what is called in medical jargon "heroic measures" so I consider it a stretch to apply that at any level to healthy subjects. In support of this theory, AH1 cites effects seen in high altitude acclimated subjects, under the assumption that these subjects experience higher than normal PaCO2 and that (it seems to be the argument) the higher PaCO2 is the reason for the beneficial changes. AH1 also asserts that people living at high altitude have better life expectancy. Let's examine the antioxidant part. It refers a number of studies by Kogan, Bolevich and Diliniak, with various others, that rely on chemoluminescence of lymphocytes. In this study it is found that the effect applies to healthy subjects but to only 30% of subjects with bronchial asthma, suggesting a possible decreasing sensitivity in subjects experiencing higher than normal PaCO2 due to the asthma. In this further study the same authors reach the following conclusion: "It may be held that the literature-described use of carbon dioxide for the treatment of bronchial asthma is justifiable only in a lower proportion of patients who have preserved a high sensitivity to the inhibitory effect of carbon dioxide on the generation of active oxygen forms." That's already not so encouraging, back in 1996. These studies are 16-17 years old and relied on chemoluminescence as an indication of lymphocyte activity. This articel, which predates the Kogan studies, shows some difficulties in interpreting CL results: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7663293 Further investigation revealed that the changes in chemoluminescence observed were rather a consequence of the CO2 concentration itself than that of CO2 induced lymphocyte inhibition: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12033328 I work with COPD and asthma patients quite often in a critical care setting. I have not heard of any form of hypercapnic therapy applied to these patients for the purpose of preventing free radicals formation. I looked at more recent reviews and did not see mention of hypercapnia. 17 years later, it does not appear that the line of research followed by Kogan, Bolevich and Diliniak was actively purseued by others. Permissive hypercapnia is normal in deperately ill ARDS patients because there are things taking much higher priority in these patients that bringing down the PaCO2, namely ensuring adequate oxygen delivery to the vital organs. Consideration on other claims to follow.
  17. SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
    The amount of funding avaialable for science pales in comparison to the Trillions of dollars in income that the fossil fuel industry has generated over the past couple of centuries and will generate under a "Business as Usual" scenario in the future. The Wattsonians have spent way too much time rattling around in the Climate Denial Spin Machine. It has negatively affected their ability to think in a rational manner.
  18. PBS False Balance Hour - What's Up With That?
    Dale @ 104: Using words like miniscule and thus might make you sound smarter, but it doesn't make you any more correct. Would you care to back up your assertions? This is not a case of 'opposing sides have extreme views, so the truth must lie exactly in the middle'. Or even anywhere near the middle. The truth is that there has already been a lot of research into the future impact, and it overwhelmingly looks bad.
  19. It's not bad
    DSL, ok, I see that now. Main conclusions  The current loss of mesic trees in the Sudano-Sahel zone appears to be driven by the sharp drop in rainfall since the 1960s, which has effectively stranded anthropogenically distributed species beyond their rainfall tolerance limits.
  20. SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
    caerbannog@22, I try my darndest to not visit WUWT, anytime, irrespective of what may squirt from my nose..;( I really only visit it when I *have* to, and it's usually some dad-blamed thread on here that makes me--forces me--to go there. Something about the cessation of a hammer and its collision with a/my head, methinks. finally, I'm *pissed*, and not in the Aussie way: Where the hell are all *my* funds, from being a "money-grubbing" scientist?? The "gravy train" I see resembles more along the lines of a Lionel choo-choo, than anything like..yannow..keeping one foot ahead of bill collectors. Starve with dignity, I say!
  21. SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
    I am amazed that most of Ms Curry's comments have nothing to do with the science. the closest she gets is talking about uncertainty, but even then, she seems to believe it only goes one direction.
  22. SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
    Interesting article John. Being a relatively late comer here, I was not aware of the early beginnings of SkS. Myself excluded, together with your team you have accomplished an amazing achievement. Your success and integrity when communicating the science are obviously rubbing certain personalities in the blogosphere the wrong way-- no longer will their distortions and cherry-picking go unchallenged. It is pretty sad that their only response thus far have been repeated personal attacks, vitriol, bluster and the hacking of the private forum. Surely it would require much less effort on their part to avoid twisting and contorting the data and science in the first place? They must have no idea how poorly such juvenile and mendacious behaviour reflects on them (for those of us who are in touch the world outside blogs), because they seem incapable of stopping themselves. In the meantime, I am confident that SkS will continue to do an excellent job refuting the stream of misinformation, spin and misrepresentations made by "skeptics" and those in denial about anthropogenic global warming. Not to mention also elucidating the complexities of climate science to a broader audience.
  23. SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
    Followed that link to Curry's site and read her post. Wow. She's really has gone off the deep end. How sad.
  24. It's not bad
    No, Eric. I was objecting to AHuntington's apparent claim that desertification was a primarily human-caused phenomenon.
  25. Extreme weather isn't caused by global warming
    @AHuntington1 #56: As they say, "What's good for the goose is good for the gander" Please Google "Climate change and desertification" and read some of materials listed. You just might learn something new.
  26. Extreme weather isn't caused by global warming
    @AHuntington1#56: Thanks for the providing the link to the peer-reviewed paper, "Nature and causes of land degradation and desertification in Libya: Need for sustainable land management." In the paper's Abstract, the authors state: "Among others, overexploitation of natural resources, inappropriate land use planning, insufficient water resources etc. are the main factors escalating the process of desertification and deteriorating environmental quality." Some of the factors cited are caused by human activity and others are not even identified. My position is that the natural environment existing at any location on Earth has been and will continue to be affected by changes in the planet's global climate system. From my perspective, your sweeping assertion that desertification is primarily caused by human activity at the local and regional scale may hold true in the short-run, but will not hold true in the long-run. In the long-run, desertification has been and will continue to be driven by changes in the Earth's global climate system caused primarily by the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation. Note: When I refer to the "global climate system" I mean the standard definition used by climate scientists. The entire system includes the atmosphere, the aquasphere, the cyrosphere, the biosphere, and the lithosphere.
  27. 2012 SkS Weekly News Round-Up #1
    Must Read America's the only nation? Who broke into the Hadley Center email server?
  28. SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
    Clockwork: Not quite Friday Funny . "Apparently Mr. Cook doesn’t feel the Nature editorial putting science on notice saying: ‘Better models are needed before exceptional events can be reliably linked to global warming’ is worth heeding. It’s climate activist comedy gold." Look at said editorial at Nature . Apparently mr Watts can only read bold lettering so he got stuck in the first line and didn't manage to read what follows: "As climate change proceeds — which the record summer melt of Arctic sea-ice suggests it is doing at a worrying pace — nations, communities and individual citizens may begin to seek compensation for losses and damage arising from global warming."
  29. It's not bad
    On another thread AHuntington1 and DSL were debating the potential of Hadley cell expansion to cause drying in the horse latitudes which would be considered a negative consequence. While Hadley cells are expanding, the expansion is seasonal and it is unclear what will happen in the future, see http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/2009JCLI2794.1. The effects of measured expansion in the Hadley cells depends greatly upon geography. The result over the ocean is fairly certain, there has been expansion. The result over land is very uncertain, see for example http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2538841/ in which they state that the greening of the Sahel is a potential (and rare) example of a beneficial tipping point. See section starting with "Sahara/Sahel and West African Monsoon (WAM)" and note that there are large uncertainties. Reading these two references I'm not even sure that Hadley expansion has any relevance at all in the Sahara and Sahel.
  30. SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
    I'll have to admit to be a new user happy to stumble across your site. I have to say congratulations after reading your first paragraph. Technical acceptance with media and educational institutions sure to eventually overcome the dollars of denial.
  31. Extreme weather isn't caused by global warming
    AHuntington, thank you for the clarification from "desertification" to "anthropogenic desertification." For a minute there, I thought you were trying to blame the general process of desertification on humans. Humans can obviously cause desertification, but circulation-based desertification is the primary mechanism and has been for the duration.
  32. SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
    Note to self: I *really* gotta get a new keyboard. This one makes ~way~ too many typos......;) To keep that from happening, you might want to refrain from visiting WUWT while sipping hot coffee. ;)
  33. SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
    caerbannog: No problem. I've just discovered Web Workers, which have solved a major headache I had in developing the app (i.e. avoiding constant callbacks or freezing the browser during the calc). So I might be able to get the project moving again. Hope yours goes well.
  34. SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
    NEWS FLASH: The SkS "Skunk Works" is located in John Cook's vast wine cellar. The fumes affect SkS authors everytime we meet there. Most of the George Soros funding received by SkS is used to pay for the travel expenses of SkS authors flying to and from their home location to Queensland, Australia. Until this year, we held an annual summer meeting in an igloo in the Arctic circle.
  35. It's not bad
    My understanding of AHuntington1's position so far: 1. CO2 will improve mitochondrial respiration, which he presents with evidence of small scale, controlled and very focused laboratory experiments. 2. His statement is presented without any evidence of an actually realized positive benefit in at least some living creatures, and certainly not all. 3. He self-admittedly makes no statement of the ultimate value of this benefit in the real world because he has not/will not put it into the context of all of the real world negative impacts that will accompany such a "benefit." 4. He has not (presumably because he agrees it does not exist) presented any evidence that such a benefit would mean that increased CO2 levels will ultimately be more beneficial than harmful to human civilization (which, in the end, is the whole point, isn't it?).
  36. PBS False Balance Hour - What's Up With That?
    Bernard@103....FaceTube. Get it right. >;-D
  37. SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
    Just another quick note: I uploaded a "WattsBuster Light" zip file to tinyurl.com/WattsBusterLight. It does not include the GHCN temperature data, so is a much smaller download.
  38. SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
    Note to self: I *really* gotta get a new keyboard. This one makes ~way~ too many typos......;)
  39. SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
    JohnHartz@3: I *think* you meant, "repealed." >;-D To echo some here, I'm grateful for SkS and its wide and very deep database: I find I access it almost daily in combatting the denilati on other various blogs. I look forward to doing more to help address this critical issue and thank all the "regulars" for educating me way better, and faster, than going back to school. Anyway, by the time I *might* be able toa fford schooling again, 21 December will ahve come and gone. *Poof*.....:)
  40. SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
    Just a quick note -- I forgot to include an important file in the "WattsBuster" package that I uploaded to the WattsBuster link. So to anyone downloaded the zip file at that link, you will need to download it again. Apologies to those with slow net connections. Note to Kevin C: As much as I'd like to help, I don't have any experience developing browser-based apps -- by the time I got up far enough on the learning curve to be of much help, someone else with real experience in that area could probably have that all pretty well wrapped up. But here's hoping that an experienced developer out there will take up that ball and run with it. It looks like a very worthwhile project.
  41. SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
    One of my other regular science-based blogs routinely discusses the rhetoric and conspiracy-mongering of the anti-vaccine movement, both as an isolated instance of anti-science denialism and as a component of the wider phenomenonof "alternative medicine". That the behaviour of self-styled "skeptics" is indistinguishable from the behaviour of anti-vaccine activists (who may be found at such august fora as Age of Autism or Thinking Mom's Revolution) or alt-med charlatans such as Mike Adams or Joe Mercola speaks volumes.
  42. Dikran Marsupial at 21:27 PM on 20 September 2012
    It's not bad
    AHuntington1 I offer this as helpful advice. SkS is interested in a fair portrayal of the science. We would also wish these metabolic benefits to be considered if there is good evidence to suggest they actually exist. So far you have pointed to a mechanism that suggest that there may be an effect, but have not provided any evidence that unequivocally suggests there is a measurable effect in vivo all things being otherwise equal. Evidence of a change in glucose metabolism at altitude is not evidence of this as there all things are not equal as the reduction in atmospheric pressure means there is less oxygen, rather than just higher CO2. It doesn't surprise me that respiration is less efficient at altitude (as we are not evolutionarily highly adapted to life at altitude) and therefore requires more energy. As a result, we are skeptical of you claims, but are willing to be persuaded. Is there anyone other than yourself that is currently proposing this hypothesis?
  43. Record Arctic Sea Ice Melt to Levels Unseen in Millennia
    The Polyak-link is broken, there is an extra www.skepticalscience.com/ in the URL.
  44. SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
    #13 - me neither!!!
  45. SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
    It's worth pointing out that the SkS author community is made up of a larger pool of volunteers than is apparant from the team page. Also, as author of a handful of articles published at SkS over the past year or so, I can honestly testify that no World Government Eco-Nazi Billionaire funding has found it's way to me yet!
  46. SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
    I've always enjoyed SkS for the factual content, so a big thank you. The Lewandowsky response though, is just hilarious. My favourite from one of the Watts threads (remember, Anthony is furious about skeptics being portrayed as conspiracists):
    POSTER: I also want to know why Jo Nova’s site shows a notice saying it has been ‘Suspended’. What is behind this? REPLY: DDoS attacks. She’s had a couple of threads outlining them. I wonder what sort of group might want to take down her website? Oh, wait. – Anthony
    Wonderful.
  47. PBS False Balance Hour - What's Up With That?
    And, btw, it is not "Dana's attribution" either, he only interprets the data, but has not done the research. That is to say, comments that find errors in posts are most welcome, so they can be corrected. Comments that point to different interpretations of the data used in a post, need to be made equally clear and are welcome when constructive.
  48. Extreme weather isn't caused by global warming
    AHuntingdon1 A: "Overgrazing can cause desertification" (not detested) BTW, this does not jibe with your comment @51, last paragraph B: "Desertification is observed, therefore overgrazing must have been happening" (incorrect conclusion, aka logical fallacy) Correct: Desertification can be caused by other factors aside from overgrazing, or any grazing. For instance, a change in climate, particularly increasing T alongside reduced rainfall, can cause desertification. When posting at SkS, try making cohesize statements as you would in a written text for students, not blurbs that can be misinterpreted. You maybe perceived as a troll.
  49. Bert from Eltham at 16:32 PM on 20 September 2012
    SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
    I have donated vast sums to SKS and you still tell me off when I am scientifically wrong! Your integrity is something to be feared. This situation is just wrong as you should advocate what your backers want not what is real that is based on evidence. I do not know how you know that I do not know. All I know is you are not a nice person and worthy of much fruitless investigation. I will remain not yours seething in ignorance and hope! Bert
  50. SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers
    caerbannog and any other interested coders: One of my side projects has been re-implementing a computationally efficient version of the temperature record calculation in Javascript so you can run it in your browser (assuming it's a recent one) with no other software. I've currently got a rough working version which has options to switch between CRU-like or GISTEMP-like calculations from the CRU data (GHCN planned). You can also pull in the HadSST2/3 data to produce a land-ocean index. Results are graphed in the browser using an HTML5 canvas. In CRU-mode the calculation takes a few seconds, in GISTEMP mode a minute or two. The project is stalled because I'm working on a more important project. If anyone wants to get involved and make this come to fruition I'd be very happy.

Prev  1067  1068  1069  1070  1071  1072  1073  1074  1075  1076  1077  1078  1079  1080  1081  1082  Next


The Consensus Project Website

THE ESCALATOR

(free to republish)


© Copyright 2024 John Cook
Home | Translations | About Us | Privacy | Contact Us