JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for ENVIROETHICS Archives


ENVIROETHICS Archives

ENVIROETHICS Archives


enviroethics@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ENVIROETHICS Home

ENVIROETHICS Home

ENVIROETHICS  2000

ENVIROETHICS 2000

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: Global Warming

From:

Steve <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

This list has been established to provide a discussion forum, and informati" <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 30 Nov 2000 15:49:25 -0800

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (174 lines)

Well I was going to respond with a one liner...but where is the fun in
that.


--- John Foster <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> It has a lot to do with ethics. I think that the issue is being
> completely
> clouded by debate with 'hacks' and the 'contrarians' employed by the oil
> and
> coal industry, obviously. The facts are simple enough, there is a

Damn, good thing I don't work for either.



[snip]


> The issue is extremely important to ethics because of the allegations
> and
> charges by person's on this list like Steve, and Jim Tantillo, who are
> insisting that the real problem in this world is 'environmentalists' who
> are
> yelling at the top of their lungs: "the sky is falling, the sky is
> falling,
> etc."

Actually this is incorrect.  I don't think Jim has ever said that.  Also,
I think that part of the problem is junkscience, i.e. people who have a
preconceived notion and look for data to support it.  There is a
considerable amount we still don't know about the climate and its
dynamics.



> The forum that Steve enjoys the most is 'trash talk' where guys with
> very
> little scientific training can listen to some 'credible' person mollify
> them
> about some thing that is a real hazard and risk.

Actually we have several scientists who post there.  One is Mike Syvanen,
check out his publications on PubMed

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=10664601&dopt=Abstract

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=10471904&dopt=Abstract

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=9432128&dopt=Abstract




> You notice how Steve jumps from the topic of climate science to the
> economics of alternative energy. He behaves like he is an expert on
> climate
> science, yet has no science degree, but rather an economics degree

And you have yammered on about economics, but you have no degree in that
field.  Also, you don't have a degree in climatology either, hey maybe we
are both full of BS.


> [social
> science] so is it any wonder he fails to understand basic climatology?
> But
> he protrays himself as an expert on the topic of 'global warming' on the
> 'trash talk' forum. He talks about 'coefficients' of determination,
> etc., to
> other people that don't even know what is meant by regression analysis.
> Then

Actaully, while you are correct that I don't have a degree in atmospheric
physics, I have spent many years studying statistics both formally and
informally.


> he makes the error of wondering what total solar irradience is measured
> in.

Actually no, I made an oversight in reading another posters comment on
that topic.  Try not to distort the facts too much John.



> He presents data on the total solar irradience outside the atmosphere
> that
> begins in 1900 and does not understand that the data are proxy, that the
> data could not actually come from a satellite in 1900. The next funny

Actually this is funny considering that first you said I was using made up
data on solar irradience and then I corrected you and pointed out it was
derived from proxy sources.  Sheesh.



> thing
> is that he applies regression analysis without considering the curve of
> the
> graph of irradience over time. As anyone can see over the last 20 years
> there has been a decline in solar irradience, but during the same time
> there
> has been a very significant increase in global surface temperatures. Not
> only that but fitting a curve without considering the shape of the curve
> is
> bad science. The curve is not linear, therefore why is he applying
> linear
> estimation techniques to a phenomenon that does not protray a linear
> trend,
> but rather one that is curvilinear {looks like a negative exponential}

And here we see a stellar example of John's ignorance of statistics (and
know you know why it is important to discuss this stuff otherwise people
could be bamboozled by John).  The linear part of linear regression means
that the regression is linear in the coefficients.  That is we can fit
non-linear data by taking simple transformations such as logarithms,
exponents, square roots, etc.

For those of you that are really intersted in this check out this link

http://www.cfis.org/ubb/Forum2/HTML/000234-3.html

Note my post on 10/25/00 at 1:11 PM.  Clearly the data in the graphs is
non-linear yet I estimated the regression line using simple linear
regression.

You can also see the graph by clicking this link

http://www.geocities.com/recursive_1/pics/TrashTalkPics/Seasonal_Model.gif



> He even makes the absurd statement that the temperatures in the polar
> regions are not warming up on average more than other parts of the
> earth.
> What an absurd statement to make. The Canadian Arctic is experiencing
> temperatures that are drastically warmer than experienced on average for
> the
> entire planet. Yes the northwest passage has been open for sea going
> vessels

Wow, we just spent alot of time discussing Hudson Bay at Trash Talk.  Two
of the posters there, Canadians, disputed the notion of Global Warming as
the reason for the Hudson Bay being more open to traffic.

Here is the link

http://www.cfis.org/ubb/Forum2/HTML/000241.html


> The term absurd is a mathematical term. It refers to a proposition that
> does
> not function. That is what the kind of statements that Steve is making,
> absurd statements about the science of climate change, and to top it off
> he
> is ignoring the evidence.

What branch of mathematics defines and uses the word absurd.  Hmmm, not in
my books on functional analysis, not in my books on probability theory,
not in my books on set theory...lets see nope, not in my book on numerical
analysis, nor in my book on linear and non-linear programming.  Can you
give me a clue John?

Steve

=====
"In a nutshell, he [Steve] is 100% unadulterated evil. I do not believe in a 'Satan', but this man is as close to 'the real McCoy' as they come."
--Jamey Lee West

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products.
http://shopping.yahoo.com/

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

May 2024
April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
May 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
February 2018
January 2018
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
September 2016
August 2016
June 2016
May 2016
March 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
October 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
November 2012
October 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
July 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
October 2008
September 2008
July 2008
June 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
October 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
February 2007
January 2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager