Food for Thought From a Meteorologist!

Discussion in 'Gold' started by Tony, Feb 10, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. ---Nemo---

    ---Nemo--- Striker

    A further response from Vincent. I have copies of all references and graphs if required.

    Despite the changes happening faster than they imagined "There is still time". Now that's what I call a precise prediction and what a stroke of luck, still time to donate. :lol:
     
  2. Floyd

    Floyd Midfield

     
  3. Pancho

    Pancho Striker Staff Member Contributor

    As has been pointed out by another poster on here, this can be one of my many failings.

    However, at least you can say by starting this thread you have learned something.

    It would appear that you've got the quote button sorted.

    ;)
     
  4. Tony

    Tony Guest

     
  5. Pancho

    Pancho Striker Staff Member Contributor

    Spoke too soon.;)
     
  6. Tony

    Tony Guest

    Seriously! Are we to understand from that remark that you disagree with my opinion regarding the excellence of Floyd's post?

    Again very seriously, (because this is important), if that is the case, in what way do you disagree?
     
  7. no, he was taking the piss about your quoting :lol:

    someone needs to plant 24 trees to offset the electricity needed to generate this thread anarl
     
  8. Medulla

    Medulla Striker

    The graph he shows does not by any means prove this; no figures on statistical significance are reported which are necessary to determine whether cooling is continuing. Viewing the whole pattern of data and fitting a trend-line to it would, I'm confident, result in a steady cooling trend.

    In fact, from the very people producing that graph: "The zonally averaged trends show that the maximum warming within the troposphere has occurred in the Northern Hemisphere over recent years. Above the troposphere the stratosphere has been cooling. This general pattern matches the expected results of greenhouse gases and ozone-depleting substances, and this has been used to attribute recent climate change to human influences in work carried out at the Met Office Hadley Centre." :cool:

    Why choose 1998? Is it because it was a year in which temperature was anomalously high due to a significantly large El Nino that year, hence making every subsequent year appear to demonstrate 'falling' temperatures despite an actual upwards trend? This trend can be seen by the fact that 2005 is the second warmest year on record after 1998, followed by 2003, 2002, 2004, 2001 as shown in this paper by the (Met Office and Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia and in graphs produced through research by GISS Surface Temperature Analysis - NASA and this recent piece of peer-reviewed published research.

    A good approximation of the data, which marks on both the period of the El Nino and the correlated 'spike' in temperatures in 1998 that resulted, which makes Dr Gray's choice of reference to conclude 'falling' temperature dubious:
    [​IMG]

    Co-author on that paper is one Fred Singer who's financial ties to the fossil-fuel industry have been well documented. However, beyond this, the paper cited received significant criticism here, arguing that there is no clear model-data discrepancy when systematic uncertainties in data and models are better accounted for, as shown in this 2007 paper by 10 researchers from the Hadley Centre for Climate Change and the Program for Climate Model Diagnosis and Intercomparison in the USA.

    Well as 'successful' is entirely subjective, this provides an easy get-out. However, no comment was made on the performance of the model produced in 1988 and evaluated in the 2006 Hansen et al paper (PNAS), from which the graph was produced.

    Most-likely modelled increase: 0.24+/- 0.06 deg C per decade
    Observed increase: 0.24 (+/- 0.07) (station data) or 0.21 (+/- 0.06) deg C per decade (Land+Ocean data)

    I'd leave judgement over how successful that is to others.

    Moreover, Dr Gray raised his criticism about no successful predictions ever deriving from models (page 81, comment #8-712) whilst he was reviewer on the IPCC report, and was pointed in the direction of Figure 1 of Chapter 1 of the IPCC report for an example comparing projections from 1990, 1996 and 2001 with observed temperatures.

    These points address the following comment:

    --------
    I'm not sure if this comment is in reference to the success of the 1988 temperature predictions, but the point about simulation being easy is unclear. Taken literally, it is correct (I can simulate Bob Dylan in the car;)). Simulating well however, is manifestly not, and the measure of this is concordance of the climate models with observed data on, say, patterns of precipitation or global temperature.

    If models can successfully reproduce the pattern observed in the past then there can be reasonable confidence that it is a good model (not perfect however, and always open to correction and improvement with developing knowledge of climate dynamics). The ability to model data collected in years subsequent to its creation, as in the examples cited, only adds to their utility and climatologist's confidence.

    Is he saying the climate is merely following a natural cycle? If so: peer reviewed research that illustrates this purported correlation and bolsters this theory?

    The point in bold makes no sense as far as I can tell(?).

    But I think his basic claim is that temperature leads and CO2 'lags' rather than the converse, presumably implied to be the 'orthodox' position. However this is somewhat disingenuous and has been dealt with by climate scientists (Joe touched upon it earlier in response to Nemo's query); according to the records, temperature did increase first which then caused CO2 release, though this CO2 itself effects subsequent temperature increase and hence CO2 is both a cause and effect.

    As if a fire was melting a plastic petrol canister - the fire causes the release in petrol, though the petrol causes a larger fire and more likelihood of other canisters being melted, petrol being released, greater fire and so on. I'm sure it's obvious why saying the fire is the cause of the situation is misleading, and hence why it's vital to stop throwing on more petrol (i.e. releasing CO2).

    One final point: Though I'm happy to read a response, I've taken up these points as best I can given that I am - nor is Dr Gray - a climate modeller and a number of technical claims he makes I can't cast a critical eye over. I do know, however, that those with the expertise will critique the theories and models that he criticises because of the standards inherent in the scientific method; rigorous peer review, the desire to uphold the repute of the journal, open peer commentary and - in the case of research into climate change - further critical debate and classification of the quality of the evidence within the IPCC process.

    Has Dr Gray lost faith in the scientific method so much that he has taken to trying to defeat a layman on a football messageboard? Would his time not be better spent debating these points in the literature, putting his critiques forward for scrutiny by experts to push forward science and afford his views more credibility?
     
    Last edited: Feb 17, 2008
  9. Tony

    Tony Guest

    FAO Nemo. This is why I was surprised that Vincent gave you permission to publish his responses to you on this Board. Ignorance is bliss but outright ignorant behaviour is inexcusable no matter how well it's disguised as educated disdain.
     
  10. Tony

    Tony Guest

    OH!

    You try quoting Floyd's post then and compare the result to mine. You just contributed a branch to the thread for no purpose as far as I can see but no matter if it made you feel good. :lol:
     
  11. Medulla

    Medulla Striker

    Nemo wasn't responding to Dr Gray's comments, I was. What 'ignorant behaviour' are you referring to?

    Have I called anyone a 'pisspot'? Told them to 'piss off'? Made up a nickname like 'Sexual Intellectual' (seriously, what were you on when that seemed a good idea)?
     
  12. Tony

    Tony Guest

    Your disdainful remark at the end of your latest dissertation is what I was referring to. Dr. Gray exhibited unusual courtesy when he gave Nemo permission to publish his replies (greatly to my surprise). He did not deserve the smart ass comment from you, as smart as you might be.

    As for your other question, perhaps you have never been provoked enough.
     
  13. Medulla

    Medulla Striker

    I've answered his points at length without wholesale copy-and-pasting and refrained from vulgar insults Tony. I hardly think you're in a position to discuss respect.:lol:

    Tony, you'd try a saint.
     
  14. you asked a question, I answered it,I realise it's not a process you're familiar with

    I live in a country with the very worst emissions per head of population in the world so I'm saying nowt, still if bucknuts are daft enough to buy oil off "us" at $100 a barrel we'll no doubt carry on
     
  15. ---Nemo---

    ---Nemo--- Striker

    I have my doubts that Dr Gray is attempting to defeat anyone in particular, more a case of him holding opposing views to some of the contributors to this thread and when offered the chance to respond he was kind enough to do so.
     
  16. Joe Public

    Joe Public Striker

    Please quote the part of this thread in which I have provoked you or used any personal insults toward you. You have done it throught this and all the other threads we have "discussed" this issue on. For a man of your age, who believes he deserves respect, you clearly have none for others.
     
  17. Tony

    Tony Guest

    I have never claimed any moral or otherwise superior position on this board because of my age and prior to your appearance as a contributor I delighted in being treated as an equal with other participants in our enjoyment of being Sunderland supporters. Being involved in the repartee with people much younger than myself was one of the daily joys of my Internet browsing.

    But your dismissal of some of my contributiions as being the ramblings of a dribbling old man and enjoinders from you to "get out of the way old man" or words to that effect have not been taken kindly by me. And finally to be told by a self-centred, big-headed 29 year old paper boy from South Shields (who has publicly stated that favourite pastime was playing with his scrotum), that "I have no understanding of climate, environment and anything about the world we live in" who now has the unbelievable arrogance to suggest that he has never insulted me, in my book is sufficient provocation to justify what in my opinion (under the circumstances) was a rather mild rebuke.
     
  18. Joe Public

    Joe Public Striker


    Please state where i have done this on this thread. The only time I have became personal with you was in response to some of your rude postings quite some time ago, i learned by my mistakes that personal abuse weakens serious discussion, something which you have still not obviously managed to do.


    Paper boy. :lol: I employ 7 people and have two businesses, but cheers for more personal abuse, keep it up.

    Its one of them, perhaps not my favorite though.

    That was not personal abuse, it was in response to your question about why is it such a bad thing if the earth was warming. If you claim to have a knowledge of the topic any further than the man in the street, then you should certainly know the answer to that most basic question.

    Its a shame this thread has ended this way like, you've dragged it down to base level when the going got a little tough.

    The shite thing is Tony, is that we would probably get on quite well in real life, I wish you no harm and i very much doubt you are in real life how you come across on here. I sincerely hope i have my mental faculties about me as you do at your age, although i'd hope to try to put them to better use. ;)


    Now I have to spend the next 4 hours doing some engineering work before getting up at 7.30am to do my paper round, the joys of being self employed i suppose.
     
  19. Tony

    Tony Guest

    Lazy bugger! Stopping in bed until half past seven in the morning. Bloody hell, half the day's gone by then! :lol:
     
  20. Floyd

    Floyd Midfield

    U can tell about the personal abuse Joe, well done mate (I'm not taking the piss by the way).

    Also regarding ur point about the way the thread has "ended" it's still been the best yet on the subject. I must say I've thoroughly enjoyed the contributions by Medulla and Vincent Gray, great stuff.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page