Dedicated to the balanced discussion of global warming
Examiner.com – July 31, 2007
This is terrible!
For those of you that are not from the US, you should first understand that the US is a society that loves to sue. There are all sorts of ridiculous stories on spurious litigation (hot coffee is the one that never fails to get a laugh for comedians). Much of the cost of our products (especially medicine) is blamed on companies reserving huge sums of cash to cover legal fees.
Now to think that lawyers will sue due to CO2 emissions or other global warming grievances is terrible. Companies should not be blamed for following standard industry practices unless they did so with full knowledge that the use would significantly affect the users. Or, as with asbestos, there is a clearly defined link between the actions of a company and its placement among the victims. Neither situation would be true for carbon dioxide emissions.READ MORE
National Post – November 28, 2006
Dr. Edward Wegman: “I am baffled by the claim that the incorrect method doesn’t matter because the answer is correct anyway. Method Wrong + Answer Correct = Bad Science.” With bad science, only true believers can assert that they nevertheless obtained the right answer.
I have repeatedly called for better math and computational methodologies to understand our current climate change predicament. My statement comes from the belief that if we don’t understand where we are and how we got here, how in the world can we make appropriate changes that can bring meaningful changes?READ MORE
Financial Post – June 20, 2007
As those who read this site regularly know, I am firm believer in more research in the sciences of the global climate. It is important to understand, though, that scientists are people and generally have a position to defend or promote.
This particular study is interesting in that it re-confirms other studies that show an approximate 11 year cycle of climate change. This cycle is similar to the solar sunspot cycle however this does not mean that there is a causality here or is this simply a correlation. The author then adds to the argument by referencing another popular theory of cosmic radiation.READ MORE
RealClimate – May 27, 2007
I have written about this excellent site often (here and here and here and here and here) but I really must encourage all of my regular readers to read this article on climate models. As you know, I regularly have called for more effort to be done in this area of computer technology as I honestly believe that the climate scientists need a concerted effort for a rapid increase in capability in handling massive amounts of numbers and equations in parallel.READ MORE
New York Times – May 24, 2007
This article reinforces my constant call that we need to spend more time, effort, and money learning about our very complicated weather. It concerns me when I read stories that some scientists want the press to not cover the entire issue (Climate reporting “too balanced” say scientists) and this article only reinforces that feeling.
Scientists from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution studied the lagoon mud on a Caribbean island and found that ocean temperature was not the only factor that influenced the birth of hurricanes. Our understanding of this causality is still evolving and we need to have more effort and publicity about our advances in knowledge, not less. One of the scientists hypothesizes that the warming of the Pacific could stifle Atlantic based hurricanes.READ MORE