[ RadSafe ] since we're talking about climate change

[Karen Street]

For more explanation as to what this is about. Includes updates which link to explanations of how some in the media misunderstood what this is about, somehow believed that this is about more than the trees in northern Finland and Sweden, between June and August. As per social scientists, the media misinterpreted the studies as supporting ideas they found more congenial than scientific consensus.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2012/07/tree-rings-and-climate-some-recent-developments/

> FYI:
> 
> http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/fig_tab/nclimate1589_F2
> .html 
> http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/images/nclimate1589-f2.
> jpg 
> 
> http://www.uni-mainz.de/eng/15491.php 
> Climate in northern Europe reconstructed for the past 2,000 years: Cooling
> trend calculated precisely for the first time 
> Calculations prepared by Mainz scientists will also influence the way
> current climate change is perceived / Publication of results in Nature
> Climate Change
> 09.07.2012
> 
> Jaro
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
> [mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Dimiter Popoff
> Sent: July-24-12 4:40 PM
> To: radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] since we're talking about climate change
> 
> I'll see what I can do once you bother to provide the data you are basing
> your claims on, like in
> 
>>> Don't tell us "everybody says so", give us the data.
>>> 
>>> Like the temperature logs from the stations you use to substantiate 
>>> your "global warming" claim, please.
>>> 
>>> Just as I do not expect a customer to buy our spectrometers just on 
>>> my claim on better resolution and throughput - so I have to at least 
>>> show some real spectra (though it usually takes a "hands on" test) - 
>>> the people you want to sell the "global warming"
>>> claim to would expect to see your data, not your thoughts on what you 
>>> have read (like the rest of us) in the media.
> 
> Don't have any data? I thought so.
> 
> Dimiter
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Dimiter Popoff               Transgalactic Instruments
> 
> http://www.tgi-sci.com
> ------------------------------------------------------
> 
>> From: Karen Street <Karen_Street at sbcglobal.net>
>> Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2012 13:31:29 -0700
>> To: "The International Radiation Protection \(Health Physics\) Mailing 
>> List" <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
>> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] since we're talking about climate change
>> 
>> Dimiter,
>> 
>> Thank you for your answer. Can you link to a science source (eg, NASA/NOAA)
> with graphs to communicate that Earth is cooling?
>> 
>> What is the mechanism that explains the cooling?
>> 
>> I will only respond to one of your comments, on data. NCDC provides access
> to climate data. So do a lot of other sites.
>> 
>> http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/ncdc.html
>> 
>> http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/data-sources/
>> 
>> etc
>> 
>>> 
>>>> I am curious as to what you do believe. 
>>> 
>>> The beliefs in this context are irrelevant.
>>> 
>>> What matters are data to support such a claim.
>>> 
>>> So far all people are fed about the "global warming" (which 
>>> incidentally is cooling since over a decade IIRC) is religious 
>>> babble.
>>> 
>>>> Is Earth warming, and at what rate (in °C/decade)?
>>> 
>>> No. I have no data on the rate of cooling but I am well aware of the 
>>> news from all over the planet last few winters reporting disastrous 
>>> cold weather, last winter in the US being the only exception I can 
>>> think of in 5 years or so.
>>> 
>>>> ... Don't use the word natural, but give particular ...
>>> 
>>> Don't tell us "everybody says so", give us the data.
>>> 
>>> Like the temperature logs from the stations you use to substantiate 
>>> your "global warming" claim, please.
>>> 
>>> Just as I do not expect a customer to buy our spectrometers just on 
>>> my claim on better resolution and throughput - so I have to at least 
>>> show some real spectra (though it usually takes a "hands on" test) - 
>>> the people you want to sell the "global warming"
>>> claim to would expect to see your data, not your thoughts on what you 
>>> have read (like the rest of us) in the media.
>>> 
>>> Dimiter
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>> Dimiter Popoff               Transgalactic Instruments
>>> 
>>> http://www.tgi-sci.com
>>> ------------------------------------------------------
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> From: Karen Street <Karen_Street at sbcglobal.net>
>>>> Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2012 12:12:15 -0700
>>>> To: "The International Radiation Protection \(Health Physics\) 
>>>> Mailing List" <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
>>>> Subject: [ RadSafe ] since we're talking about climate change
>>>> 
>>>> In the past and just now, people on this list who don't accept 
>>>> climate change have posted that they don't accept climate change.
>>>> 
>>>> I am curious as to what you do believe. 
>>>> 
>>>> Please avoid explaining that the overwhelming number of scientists 
>>>> are wrong or read this or that this great scientist thinks other 
>>>> scientists are wrong.
>>>> 
>>>>  Is Earth warming, and at what rate (in °C/decade)?
>>>> 
>>>>  What is the cause? Don't use the word natural, but give 
>>>> particular mechanisms, such as Earth is moving closer to the sun.  
>>>> When I ask climate skeptics/deniers these questions, it feels like 
>>>> pulling teeth to get answers other than, "you're wrong, you child of 
>>>> Satan." Or the ones about natural or scientists are just wrong or 
>>>> here is my scientist (inject name of novelist or journalist) who
> disagrees.
>>>> 
>>>> I really am curious.
>>>> 
> 
> 

--
Best wishes, 
Karen Street
Friends Energy Project
blog http://pathsoflight.us/musing/index.php