[ RadSafe ] Keeping an open mind Are we keeping an open mind?

[Jim Darrough]

Very rich if you can get funding.

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
[mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Jeff Terry
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 10:44 AM
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Keeping an open mind Are we keeping an open mind?

Hi All, 

I think that everyone can accept that the climate changes. I am composing
this message from a spot that was at one time under approximately 1 km of
ice. I live in spot that was underwater. Climate changes, topography
changes, etc., for most of the lifetime of the earth these changes were
clearly not driven by anthropogenic sources. 

That does not mean that future changes cannot be driven by anthropogenic
sources. There are plenty of examples of human caused environmental
destruction, for example, see deforestation due to acid rain. 

However, the current global warming controversy is highly politicized.
Science is never settled. Newtonian Mechanics ruled for 200 years before it
was shown to be incomplete. Relativity is constantly being tested by science
as is the theory of Quantum Mechanics. IMO, if someone makes statements of
the fact that the science is settled, it smacks of bad science. 

Grandiose claims require overwhelming evidence. It the Global
Warming/Climate Change people would like me to take them serious, they could
start by:

1.) Release the code for their computer models - all the computer code that
I use is either freely available or is available for purchase. That allows
me to search for flaws and more importantly to test for flaws. It is never
good to wait or Russian hackers to release your code with comments
paraphrased as I have no idea what this line does but if we take it out the
temperature doesn't increase. 
That said I use this code as an example in my computational physics course
as an example of bad programming.
2.) Stop practicing Hollywood science - we all have egos and I suppose we
all like to see ourselves on television but there is a reason that the
shortest scientific presentations are 10 minutes long. It is really
difficult to discuss science in sound bites. This type of science dilutes
the brand name.
3.) Leave the politics to the politicians - describe the science and let the
judgments be made.  Leave that posturing to the politicians. Just because
you have the background to study the climate does not make you an expert on
the social science of effects. Don't make pronouncements to these effects,
this goes beyond the Global Warming crowd. Grandiose posturing that you know
best is rarely effective to the public. 

Bad science is like pornography, I know it when I see it. 

One does not necessarily need to be a climate change expert to see some/many
of the flaws in the work. 

Of course, having flaws in the methodology and large egos amongst the
players, does not mean that ultimately their projections are incorrect.
Anthropogenic climate change may very well be an important effect in the
future or even in the present, but the evidence for ACC/AGW is not currently
overwhelming and is a very rich area for study. 

Jeff


Jeff Terry
Asst. Professor of Physics
Life Science Bldg Rm 166
Illinois Institute of Technology
3101 S. Dearborn St. 
Chicago IL 60616
630-252-9708
terryj at iit.edu




On Oct 19, 2010, at 12:43 PM, Bernard L. Cohen wrote:

> There have been periods in the Earth's early history where global warming
by CO2 is universally (or at least widely) accepted by geologists as an
important cause of elevated temperatures.
> 
> On 10/19/2010 10:41 AM, Brent Rogers wrote:
>> I lack the competence to debate climate science (other than to note that
they strongly correlate with one's political views) but if you really find
it "completely false" that increased levels of CO2 increases temperature may
I suggest you redirect your wikipedia to the planet of Venus?
>> 
> 
> --
> Bernard L. Cohen
> Physics Dept., University of Pittsburgh Pittsburgh, PA 15260
> Tel: (412)624-9245  Fax: (412)624-9163
> e-mail: blc at pitt.edu  web site: http://www.phyast.pitt.edu/~blc
> 
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
> 
> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and 
> understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at: 
> http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
> 
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings 
> visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu

_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list

Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the
RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit:
http://health.phys.iit.edu