Re: global warming

On Oct 4, 4:52 pm, Raveninghorde <raveninghorde@invalid> wrote:
On Sun, 4 Oct 2009 07:00:35 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman

<bill.slo...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

SNIP



Raveinghorde has generalised this implication to create a conspiracy
theory which implies that nine of the ten separately published papers
that support Mann's orignal "hockey stick" curve aren't "really"
independent, because several authors show up in one or other of the
nine, despite the fact that the peer-review process checks for this
kind of re-publication of old data, and accepted the papers as
independent, as is demonstrated by the fact that they were published.

It is - theoretically - possible that Ravenghorde is right, and he has
detected an academic conspiracy, but it is much more likely that
Raveinghorde, who clearly knows very little about dendrochronology,
has got it wrong and the journals' editors and referees, who can be
expected to know rather more, have got it right.

http://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.com/2009/10/02/presentation-at-the-...

/quote

The IPCC structure has a small group of lead authors who dictate the
focus of each chapter, as well as what research to cite. In the
November 27, 2005 issue of EOS, the news report “Meeting Updates
Progress of U.S. Climate Change Program” there is a quote by Antonio
Busalacchi, Professor and Director of the Earth System Science
Interdisciplinary Center at the University of Maryland;

“Busalacchi…called for the inclusion of a wider range of scientists,
including international scientists, in developing these reports. In
addition, he warned that some small scientific communities had become
‘incestuous’ with report authors reviewing their own work.”

This inbred arrangement permeates the climate assessment reports and
leadership of climate science professional organizations (e. g see
alsohttp://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.com/2009/01/13/protecting-the-ipcc-....).

It is also pretty much the rule in most scientific disciplines - the
top people in pretty much every speciality know the other top people
personally, and trust their judgment. They wouldn't have become top
people in the speciality if their judgment wasn't both good and
trustworthy.

With respect to the IPCC, it managed by a relatively small group of
individuals who are using the IPCC process to control what
policymakers and the public learn about climate on multi-decadal time
scales.

/end quote

This was more or less what the IPCC was put together to do; to
assemble the top people in climatology to report to politicians on
what the science meant in terms that politicians could understand.

The fact that this group was drawn from the rather larger group of
senior scientists who do the bulk of the refereeing in the area
follows from the way science is organised. You don't have to invoke
any daft conspiracy theory to explain why it works out this way, and
you have to be pretty ignorant of the way science works to see this as
"controlling" what policy-makers and the public learn about climate on
multi-decade time-scales, except in the sense that none of us -
including the IPCC top - know as much as we'd like to, and the top
scientists in the area have a particular responsiblity to encourage
research that will lead us to know more, which does mean that their
opinions - rightly - carry more weight than those of gullible suckers
like Raveinghorde, who are dunb enough to take denialist propaganda
seriously, and would like to see money wasted on exploring long-
exploded hypotheses like solar variation.

Solar variation is real, but it is known to be too small to explain
what's going on.

--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Ping Bil Slowman; The global warming hoax reveiled
    ... I'm basically "at home" with snow and ice. ... Proof is not to be had in science. ... The scientists active in these areas make it their ... climate forcing, in my view. ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: OT - Hansen acknowledges solar forcing
    ... but that doesn't say anythihg about global warming. ... If you'd ever done any real science, ... initialised to the observed state and none of the climate states in the ... Then we were warned by the Club of Rome,supported by large numbers of scientists, that we would run out of natural resources in our lifetimes. ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Science warms to the cause -- Global Warming, Climate Change
    ... If scientists disagree on the greenhouse effect, ... asks science writer Leigh Dayton ... was real and significant changes to Earth's climate were inevitable. ... concluded in the three-volume report, ...
    (sci.energy.hydrogen)
  • Science warms to the cause -- Global Warming, Climate Change
    ... If scientists disagree on the greenhouse effect, ... asks science writer Leigh Dayton ... was real and significant changes to Earth's climate were inevitable. ... concluded in the three-volume report, ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: That crashing sound...
    ... And if you are a vigilant observer of the global warming debate, you know how inconveniently cold it is in the Arctic this winter for Al Gore and his army of climate alarmists. ... Granting a long overdue forum to noted dissenting scientists, economists and policy experts from around the world, the Heartland Institute-sponsored symposium at the Marriott Marquis offered welcomed reasoned analysis as alternative to last December's hysterical circus which was Bali. ... Even before the first mention was made of activists and media misrepresenting current climate science while completely ignoring the serious inaccuracies in virtually all IPCC documents at Sunday's opening dinner, alarmist groups were busy marginalizing the event. ...
    (rec.martial-arts)
Loading