tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524070301101240472.post6525021723736642703..comments2023-09-28T08:13:11.489-07:00Comments on Only In It For The Gold: Chris Mooney Responds to Will in Washington PostMichael Tobishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08229460438349093944noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524070301101240472.post-89618926356025865522009-03-25T14:17:00.000-07:002009-03-25T14:17:00.000-07:00It's amazing that the rubes are still clueless abo...It's amazing that the rubes are still clueless about how <A HREF="http://rabett.blogspot.com/2006/10/rtfwr-or.html" REL="nofollow">Honest Jim Hansen did it. </A> RTFR clownsEliRabetthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07957002964638398767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524070301101240472.post-12413257606559510192009-03-24T23:38:00.000-07:002009-03-24T23:38:00.000-07:00Strictly, Hansen didn't give forecasts but gave so...Strictly, Hansen didn't give forecasts but gave some scenarios.<BR/><BR/>The different scenarios a had different emissions and volcano activities.<BR/><BR/>http://cce.890m.com/hansens-88-scenarios/<BR/><BR/>Scenario B turned out to reflect the real world quite well.<BR/><BR/>AFAIK, probably the model had too high sensitivity since it had 4.2 C for doubling.<BR/><BR/>http://cce.890m.com/hansen88/images/forcings.jpgAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524070301101240472.post-90079908800465416372009-03-24T09:04:00.000-07:002009-03-24T09:04:00.000-07:00Always happy to be corrected, Bi, so Hansen didn't...Always happy to be corrected, Bi, so Hansen <I>didn't</I> make a forecast?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524070301101240472.post-40388290393278096862009-03-23T04:58:00.000-07:002009-03-23T04:58:00.000-07:00"And by the way, I also read some of his recent re..."And by the way, I also read some of his recent remarks"<BR/><BR/>Gish Gallop. Don't do that.<BR/><BR/>"Well, 'Bi', I did read all about his, er, 20-year 'forecast'"<BR/><BR/>"Read all about"? What's that supposed to mean? Do you mean to say you read about James Hansen's scientific work from lots of people who are <I>not</I> James Hansen?<BR/><BR/>-- <A HREF="http://frankbi.wordpress.com/" REL="nofollow">bi</A>bi -- International Journal of Inactivismhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03030282249404084578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524070301101240472.post-73064104939692932192009-03-23T02:46:00.000-07:002009-03-23T02:46:00.000-07:00Well, 'Bi', I did read all about his, er, 20-year ...Well, 'Bi', I did read all about his, er, 20-year 'forecast' for global temperatures which turned out to be, how may I put it politely, wrong? - innacurate? - grossly exaggerated? - alarmist? - I leave it to you to choose. To paraphrase, 'by their forecasts shall ye know them'!<BR/><BR/>And by the way, I also read some of his recent remarks concerning <I>his</I> views on people who disagree with him and how he thinks the state should treat them. Indicative, I would say.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524070301101240472.post-67007418852648097802009-03-22T23:40:00.000-07:002009-03-22T23:40:00.000-07:00David Duff:"For example, how high would Profs. Han...David Duff:<BR/><BR/>"For example, how high would Profs. Hansen, Mann and Jones score in such a test, I wonder?"<BR/><BR/>Or, paraphrased: 'I've not read James Hansen's scientific works, so I'll just throw out some silly questions them to show you how much I've refused to read them.'<BR/><BR/>Maybe Duff doesn't realize it, but that's exactly the mindset that Mooney is up against.<BR/><BR/>-- <A HREF="http://franki.wordpress.com/" REL="nofollow">bi</A>bi -- International Journal of Inactivismhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03030282249404084578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524070301101240472.post-39452646949920655452009-03-22T18:42:00.000-07:002009-03-22T18:42:00.000-07:00Although Mooney raises good points, it is a really...Although Mooney raises good points, it is a really poorly written piece. It could have been much more powerful.Nosmohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18276735115398361316noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524070301101240472.post-16009403461824666802009-03-22T10:36:00.000-07:002009-03-22T10:36:00.000-07:00"following up on sources, taking scientific knowle..."<I>following up on sources, taking scientific knowledge seriously rather than cherry-picking misleading bits of information, and applying critical thinking to the weighing of evidence</I>."<BR/><BR/>As my old mother used to say, "<I>If wishes were horses beggars would ride</I>". For example, how high would Profs. Hansen, Mann and Jones score in such a test, I wonder?<BR/><BR/>And what is one to do as a non-scientific outsider when another huge professorial brainbox by the name of Akasofu writes this:<BR/><BR/>"<I>It is advised that the IPCC recognize at least the failure of their prediction even during the first decade of the present century; a prediction is supposed to become less accurate for the longer future</I>.<BR/><BR/>I suppose the only intelligent thing to do is to read as much as you can from both sides and then <I>use your judgment</I>. Well, it's what I did and I'm really, really intelligent - my old mum used to tell me so - and as a result I would triple-check Hansen if he told me the time!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524070301101240472.post-50622268991738496742009-03-21T22:14:00.000-07:002009-03-21T22:14:00.000-07:00Thanks Arthur,That isn't a site I generally go to....Thanks Arthur,<BR/><BR/>That isn't a site I generally go to. I have no idea what Pielke was even getting at with that post.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524070301101240472.post-42941076248193229432009-03-21T21:30:00.000-07:002009-03-21T21:30:00.000-07:00Completely off topic... you might be interested th...Completely off topic... you might be interested that Roger Pielke Jr. has a completely ridiculous post up in the last day or so. I won't give him the benefit of a link, but the title is "Comparing Annual Absolute Growth in Carbon Dioxide Concentrations with GDP", and the central graph stupidly compares the annual increment in atmospheric CO2 with the annual *change* in world GDP.<BR/><BR/>As if current CO2 levels were in equilibrium with current world GDP, or something? Doesn't the guy understand the difference between integral and differential quantities? Of course the dots are all over the map, naturally. What a surprise. I really should quit dropping in on his site to avoid the stupidity, but just couldn't let this one go, oh well.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06216730408962280205noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524070301101240472.post-7696887291496053502009-03-21T20:07:00.000-07:002009-03-21T20:07:00.000-07:00Selection bias is a powerful tool to maintain the ...Selection bias is a powerful tool to maintain the relevance of your self-identity. Chris doesn't call this out explicitly, but it is there. We are just beginning to study the effects of such selection bias (ask me some day about the story of the postdoc studying this phenomenon), and have a long way to go to counter it. Will we respond in time? Don't look to history if you want optimism.<BR/><BR/>Best,<BR/><BR/>DDanohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03709762632849004871noreply@blogger.com