[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [riskanal] Re: FW: [Fwd: WHAT'S NEW Friday, 8 Aug 03]
By Dukelow's Corollary to Monty Python's First Law of Epistemology, the excerpt from heatisonline that Maury gives does take the edge off the story of von Storch's resignation as editor of Climate Research. Shows what I get for believing the WSJ.
The point remains that von Storch and his two thought it important to get the story about the, from his point of view, failed peer review process at the journal out in time to influence the debate. Cf. Twain's remark about a half-truth getting halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes. von Storch's political goals do not invalidate his scientific position.
I made the point, perhaps in a posting to RADSAFE, that Senator Inhofe, in his white paper and floor speech, list several supports of the scientific consensus that humans have made a demonstrable impact on climate, as Climate Experts who support his position.
He also lists Freeman Dyson, who wrote a review of Vaclav Smil's The Earth's Biosphere: Evolution, Dynamics, and Change in the 15 May 2003 NY Review of Books. I have had a chance to reread the Dyson review. His position is partial agnosticism, but he does write:
'The last chapter, with the title "Civilization and the Biosphere," begins with the quotation [from Vernadsky] "Man alone, violates the established order [and by cultivation, upsets the equilibrium]."'
'The physical effects of carbon dioxide are seen in changes in rainfall, cloudiness, wind strength, and temperature, which are customarily lumped together in the misleading phrase "global warming." This phrase is misleading because the warming caused by the greenhouse effect of increased carbon dioxide is not evenly distributed. In humid air, the effect of carbon dioxide on the transport of heat by radiation is less important, because it is outweighed by the much larger greenhouse effect of water vapor. The effect of carbon dioxide is more important where the air is dry, and air is usually dry only where it is cold. The warming mainly occurs where the air is cold and dry, mainly in the arctic rather than in the tropics, mainly in the winter rather than in summer, and mainly at night rather than in daytime.'
He summarizes what is known about the effects of CO2 on plant life and biomass in general, what is know about sea level rise and about the possibility of a shift into a new ice age. He closes the review with:
'The main conclusion of Vernadsky's thinking, and the main conclusion of Smil's book, is that life is complicated and any theory that attempts to describe its behavior in simple terms is likely to be wrong.'
"Climate Sceptics" might understand this as a criticism of climate modelling, but the coupled atmosphere/ocean models with sub-models to describe the carbon cycle, sea ice, atmospheric chemistry, the effects of land use, and the interrelationships between all of these, are immensely more complicated than the simple Just-So stories of the dissidents from the climate consensus.
Best regards.
Jim Dukelow
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
Richland, WA 99352
jim.dukelow@pnl.gov
These comments are mine and have not been reviewed and/or approved by my management or by the U.S. Department of Energy.
<snip>s inserted in the original message to keep listserver from complaining -- nothing actually removed.
-----Original Message-----
From: maury [mailto:maury@webtexas.com]
Sent: Sun 8/10/2003 4:49 AM
To: Mailing List for Risk Professionals
Cc:
Subject: [riskanal] Re: FW: [Fwd: WHAT'S NEW Friday, 8 Aug 03]
Jim, the organization and the link below clearly advocate a position
that global warming is significantly anthropogenic. Thus, I was
surprised to read this account of the Storch resignation episode. I
wonder if you knew that he resigned because he was not permitted to
accelerate publication of his editorial so that the editorial would
appear prior to a congressional hearing rather than following the normal
publication schedule. Interesting so-called science.
Cheers,
Maury
=================
<snip>
http://www.heatisonline.org/contentserver/objecthandlers/index.cfm?id=4361&method=full
Extract:
".... Dr. Mann and 13 colleagues published a critique of Dr. Soon's
paper in Eos, a publication of the American Geophysical Union, this
month. They said the Harvard team's methods were flawed and their
results "inconsistent with the preponderance of scientific evidence."
Then, last week Dr. von Storch was contacted by Sen. Jeffords's staff,
which was looking into the paper in preparation for Tuesday's hearing,
where Dr. Soon and Dr. Mann were scheduled to appear. After hearing from
Sen. Jeffords, Dr. von Storch says he decided to speed an
editorial into print criticizing publication of the paper.
But publisher Otto Kinne blocked the move, saying that while he favored
publication of the editorial, Dr. von Storch's proposals were still
opposed by some of the other editors. "I asked Hans not to rush the
editorial," Mr. Kinne said in an e-mail.
That is when Dr. von Storch resigned, followed by two other editors.
...."
************************************************************************
You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,
send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu Put the text "unsubscribe
radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.
You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/