Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

One Paper in toto is what the theory of global warming is based on


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> One Paper in toto is what the theory of global warming is based on Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
One Paper in toto is what the theory of global warming ... - 9/25/2013 10:35:34 AM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline 		Interesting article. What do you think?
http://www.theregister.co.uk/Print/2008/07/21/monckton_aps/
Profile   Post #: 1
RE: One Paper in toto is what the theory of global warm... - 9/25/2013 10:38:19 AM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline 		I think the claim is full of shit
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=climate+change&btnG=&as_sdt=1%2C14&as_sdtp=

(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: One Paper in toto is what the theory of global warm... - 9/25/2013 11:07:53 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		I think it is not at all an interesting article.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: One Paper in toto is what the theory of global warm... - 9/25/2013 11:12:11 AM   
Yachtie


Posts: 3593
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

I think it is not at all an interesting article.



I find it quite interesting.

_____________________________

“We all know it’s going to end badly, but in the meantime we can make some money.” - Jim Cramer, CNBC

“Those who ‘abjure’ violence can only do so because others are committing violence on their behalf.” - George Orwell

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: One Paper in toto is what the theory of global warm... - 9/25/2013 11:14:04 AM   
Hillwilliam


Posts: 19394
Joined: 8/27/2008
Status: offline 		Well, I feel that the thread title is quite misleading.
According to the article, quoted, the paper isn't what the theory is based on (that's the absorption curve of CO2 which is chemistry 101) the paper was about the derivation of one of the constants that is used in climate modeling. It was also supported by a couple of others etc, etc.

Now, let's look at this opinion piece that people were supposedly not supposed to look at.

The author is no less than Viscount Monckton (sounds fucking impressive doesn't it)
Let's look at Mr Monckton's qualifications, shall we?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Monckton%2C_3rd_Viscount_Monckton_of_Brenchley

Mr Monckton's degree is in..............................Journalism

That's right kids. He has no scientific training. That MIGHT be why there was a cautionary note in front of his opinion piece in the Newsletter of the American Physical Society.

Quite bluntly, he isn't a Physicist or a Chemist. He's a journalist and Conservative gadfly.
Based on that, I would take his OP Ed in a journal of Physics with more than a grain of salt because of his total lack of qualifications in the sciences involved.

ETA. I do believe this whole foofaraw was initiated in the Drudge Report, was it not?

< Message edited by Hillwilliam -- 9/25/2013 11:16:35 AM >

_____________________________

Kinkier than a cheap garden hose.

Whoever said "Religion is the opiate of the masses" never heard Right Wing talk radio.

Don't blame me, I voted for Gary Johnson.

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: One Paper in toto is what the theory of global warm... - 9/25/2013 11:21:13 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		As an effect of gazing upon his visage and his cirriculum vitae, I am forced to the realization, that William F. Buckley has done some venal sinning by tatting in the tweeds with Mère Letitia.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to Hillwilliam)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: One Paper in toto is what the theory of global warm... - 9/25/2013 12:32:26 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

As an effect of gazing upon his visage and his cirriculum vitae, I am forced to the realization, that William F. Buckley has done some venal sinning by tatting in the tweeds with Mère Letitia.

Considering that the linked article is 5 years old I think its likely.

And in case anyone with an open mind is curious, here is a detailed debunking of Monckton's lies from the first time he put that crap out there.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/11/cuckoo-science/

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: One Paper in toto is what the theory of global warm... - 9/25/2013 12:44:18 PM   
Hillwilliam


Posts: 19394
Joined: 8/27/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

As an effect of gazing upon his visage and his cirriculum vitae, I am forced to the realization, that William F. Buckley has done some venal sinning by tatting in the tweeds with Mère Letitia.

Considering that the linked article is 5 years old I think its likely.

And in case anyone with an open mind is curious, here is a detailed debunking of Monckton's lies from the first time he put that crap out there.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/11/cuckoo-science/

If I'm not mistaken, Monckton is the guy I saw on Glen Beck a few years ago when he was still on TV.
His statements didn't sound right so I looked up his credentials.

Long story short, I have a lot more qualifications commenting on Arthurian literature through the centuries than he does on anything scientific. But, as he was willing to say what his employers wanted to hear, there he was on TV,

_____________________________

Kinkier than a cheap garden hose.

Whoever said "Religion is the opiate of the masses" never heard Right Wing talk radio.

Don't blame me, I voted for Gary Johnson.

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: One Paper in toto is what the theory of global warm... - 9/25/2013 12:50:16 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

As an effect of gazing upon his visage and his cirriculum vitae, I am forced to the realization, that William F. Buckley has done some venal sinning by tatting in the tweeds with Mère Letitia.

Considering that the linked article is 5 years old I think its likely.

And in case anyone with an open mind is curious, here is a detailed debunking of Monckton's lies from the first time he put that crap out there.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/11/cuckoo-science/

If I'm not mistaken, Monckton is the guy I saw on Glen Beck a few years ago when he was still on TV.
His statements didn't sound right so I looked up his credentials.

Long story short, I have a lot more qualifications commenting on Arthurian literature through the centuries than he does on anything scientific. But, as he was willing to say what his employers wanted to hear, there he was on TV,

Yeah that was probably him. He's making a lot of money sounding like he knows what he's talking about and claiming stuff is simple and then presenting total crap it takes a lot of knowledge on the subject to see through.

(in reply to Hillwilliam)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: One Paper in toto is what the theory of global warm... - 9/25/2013 1:17:11 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

Interesting article. What do you think?
http://www.theregister.co.uk/Print/2008/07/21/monckton_aps/

It is what we have come to expect. Moronic bullshit.

(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 10
RE: One Paper in toto is what the theory of global warm... - 9/25/2013 2:57:34 PM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline 		I read the rebuttal which actually had nothing that rebutted the point of the claims.


For example - find in your rebuttal anything that addresses the following:

"It is of no little significance that the IPCC’s value for the coefficient in the CO2 forcing equation depends on only one paper in the literature; that its values for the feedbacks that it believes account for two-thirds of humankind’s effect on global temperatures are likewise taken from only one paper; and that its implicit value of the crucial parameter κ depends upon only two papers, one of which had been written by a lead author of the chapter in question, and neither of which provides any theoretical or empirical justification for a value as high as that which the IPCC adopted." [our emphasis]

Its relatively simple. Show that that coefficient for forcing depends on 20 papers for example. Show that K isn't depending on a lead researcher and one other....

< Message edited by Phydeaux -- 9/25/2013 3:04:47 PM >

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 11
RE: One Paper in toto is what the theory of global warm... - 9/25/2013 2:58:38 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		OH, well we dismissed the OP as asswipe out of hand so the rebuttal apologism will not be necessary.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 12
RE: One Paper in toto is what the theory of global warm... - 9/25/2013 4:22:35 PM   
dcnovice


Posts: 37282
Joined: 8/2/2006
Status: offline 		FR

I shared this earlier, but we seem to need it again.



_____________________________

No matter how cynical you become,
it's never enough to keep up.

JANE WAGNER, THE SEARCH FOR SIGNS OF
INTELLIGENT LIFE IN THE UNIVERSE

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 13
RE: One Paper in toto is what the theory of global warm... - 9/25/2013 4:30:52 PM   
Hillwilliam


Posts: 19394
Joined: 8/27/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux



"It is of no little significance that the IPCC’s value for the coefficient in the CO2 forcing equation depends on only one paper in the literature;

There are 2 keys to the article.

1. Someone disagrees with a constant derived in an article that is plugged into models predicting future climate.

The title of your thread is "One Paper in toto is what the theory of global warming is based on"

That is incorrect. the theory of global warming is based on the physical properties of CO2 which are set and immutable and that's Chemistry 101.

2. Mhe guy that is quotes again and again in the article is a known charlatan tho is quite ignorant about chemistry and Physics but he gets press because of his hereditary title in Merrie Olde England.

You really should read the wiki article on him. He's your classic Brit upper crust never worked a day in his life crackpot.

_____________________________

Kinkier than a cheap garden hose.

Whoever said "Religion is the opiate of the masses" never heard Right Wing talk radio.

Don't blame me, I voted for Gary Johnson.

(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 14
RE: One Paper in toto is what the theory of global warm... - 9/25/2013 5:07:11 PM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline 		Hey Hill

1. I think your quibble is a bit symantecs. If the theory hinges (critically) on one value derived from one paper - thats a terrible weakness. Should be easy to disprove his allegation. Show where that value has been verified by others. I have a completely open mind on this . If not admit that Monkton is right.

2. Broadly, I know Monkton's background. Doesn't matter. 1000 people can say the world is flat. Consensus and pedigree matter not one whit if you're wrong. And the IPCC 2007 global warming report was clearly and spectacularly.. wrong.

3. Regarding CO2. Its wrong to say that global warming depends solely on the physical properties of CO2. Nasa latest research which i pointed to earlier, says that the net effect of carbon depends on its altitude and concentration. Other studies have confirmed that troposhperic co2 is migrating to the exosphere. Nasa's research said (paraphrasing) the net greenhouse effect of CO2 is much less than expected.

Think about it. The volumetric arc decreases with altitude....

< Message edited by Phydeaux -- 9/25/2013 5:08:40 PM >

(in reply to Hillwilliam)
Profile   Post #: 15
RE: One Paper in toto is what the theory of global warm... - 9/25/2013 8:10:01 PM   
Hillwilliam


Posts: 19394
Joined: 8/27/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

Hey Hill

1. I think your quibble is a bit symantecs. If the theory hinges (critically) on one value derived from one paper - thats a terrible weakness. Should be easy to disprove his allegation. Show where that value has been verified by others. I have a completely open mind on this . If not admit that Monkton is right.

2. Broadly, I know Monkton's background. Doesn't matter. 1000 people can say the world is flat. Consensus and pedigree matter not one whit if you're wrong. And the IPCC 2007 global warming report was clearly and spectacularly.. wrong.

3. Regarding CO2. Its wrong to say that global warming depends solely on the physical properties of CO2. Nasa latest research which i pointed to earlier, says that the net effect of carbon depends on its altitude and concentration. Other studies have confirmed that troposhperic co2 is migrating to the exosphere. Nasa's research said (paraphrasing) the net greenhouse effect of CO2 is much less than expected.

Think about it. The volumetric arc decreases with altitude....

I did not quibble on semantics.

The theory hinges on the absorption curve of certain gasses. This is immutable. The models hinge on certain constants derived in a paper which, according to the article, was supported by others.
Please take time to learn the difference between theory and predictive computer models.

As for Monckton's background, as I stated earlier, he is about as qualified to comment on planetary meteorology as I am to comment on the history of Arthurian literature. (actually, I may be more qualified as I once studied it)
Unfortunately, he has one of those British 'hereditary titles' so that makes him acceptable to the masses as an 'expert' because he has a "Degree from Cambridge" (In letters).

Remember what I said earlier. Searching for data in biased sources (I believe this originated in the Drudge Report) leads to biased results.

Biased results are useless.

_____________________________

Kinkier than a cheap garden hose.

Whoever said "Religion is the opiate of the masses" never heard Right Wing talk radio.

Don't blame me, I voted for Gary Johnson.

(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 16
RE: One Paper in toto is what the theory of global warm... - 9/25/2013 8:29:25 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

Hey Hill

1. I think your quibble is a bit symantecs. If the theory hinges (critically) on one value derived from one paper - thats a terrible weakness. Should be easy to disprove his allegation. Show where that value has been verified by others. I have a completely open mind on this . If not admit that Monkton is right.

Grotesque lack of knowledge of how science works. Of course the constant is based on a single paper. How else could it be? Do you think dozens of researchers independently performed the same research and published simultaneously? Of course. One paper got published and a bunch of others verify the data and use that constant in their own work and it works which is enough confirmation for all but lying asshole Lords getting rich by selling snake oil to rubes.


quote:

3. Regarding CO2. Its wrong to say that global warming depends solely on the physical properties of CO2. Nasa latest research which i pointed to earlier, says that the net effect of carbon depends on its altitude and concentration. Other studies have confirmed that troposhperic co2 is migrating to the exosphere. Nasa's research said (paraphrasing) the net greenhouse effect of CO2 is much less than expected.

A tiny amount of CO2 rises into and above the stratosphere. The rest stays low in the atmosphere. Since CO2 holds heat and then reradiates some of it the huge amount lower in the atmosphere completely trumps the tiny quantity at the top of the atmosphere.

And no research by NASA says that the net greenhouse effect is less than expected. Present a link to NASA or it is simply a lie.


< Message edited by DomKen -- 9/25/2013 8:30:41 PM >

(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 17
RE: One Paper in toto is what the theory of global warm... - 9/25/2013 10:51:55 PM   
tweakabelle


Posts: 7522
Joined: 10/16/2007
From: Sydney Australia
Status: offline 		It's good to see that the venerable old English tradition of the aristocratic-half-wit-in love-with-the-sound-of-their-own-voice is still alive and kicking in the form of Monkton. His true role in life lies in bit parts in "Carry On" movies. In another couple of years I can see him graduating to playing Colonel Blimp characters ....

Any one who thinks that this moronic nutcase has anything to offer the debate (apart from providing comedy relief and excellent parody material ) needs to think again.

< Message edited by tweakabelle -- 9/25/2013 10:53:49 PM >

_____________________________



(in reply to Hillwilliam)
Profile   Post #: 18
RE: One Paper in toto is what the theory of global warm... - 9/26/2013 1:15:38 PM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

Hey Hill

1. I think your quibble is a bit symantecs. If the theory hinges (critically) on one value derived from one paper - thats a terrible weakness. Should be easy to disprove his allegation. Show where that value has been verified by others. I have a completely open mind on this . If not admit that Monkton is right.

Grotesque lack of knowledge of how science works. Of course the constant is based on a single paper. How else could it be? Do you think dozens of researchers independently performed the same research and published simultaneously? Of course. One paper got published and a bunch of others verify the data and use that constant in their own work and it works which is enough confirmation for all but lying asshole Lords getting rich by selling snake oil to rubes.


quote:

3. Regarding CO2. Its wrong to say that global warming depends solely on the physical properties of CO2. Nasa latest research which i pointed to earlier, says that the net effect of carbon depends on its altitude and concentration. Other studies have confirmed that troposhperic co2 is migrating to the exosphere. Nasa's research said (paraphrasing) the net greenhouse effect of CO2 is much less than expected.

A tiny amount of CO2 rises into and above the stratosphere. The rest stays low in the atmosphere. Since CO2 holds heat and then reradiates some of it the huge amount lower in the atmosphere completely trumps the tiny quantity at the top of the atmosphere.

And no research by NASA says that the net greenhouse effect is less than expected. Present a link to NASA or it is simply a lie.



Three times I have asked that anyone provide a fact that ANYONE has verified (and published) a paper on that constant. To shut me up all you need do is present that paper and I will happily conclude that monk is wrong. (in his claim that it rests on the work of a single paper).

Bloviation is all that ensues. So I presume monk's criticism valid.


< Message edited by Phydeaux -- 9/26/2013 1:16:14 PM >

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 19
RE: One Paper in toto is what the theory of global warm... - 9/26/2013 1:40:03 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline 		So I presume monk's criticism valid.

To presume unvalidated research is true would seem consistant for some.

< Message edited by thompsonx -- 9/26/2013 1:49:03 PM >

(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 20
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> One Paper in toto is what the theory of global warming is based on Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.141