

Embarrassing Questions On Global Warming - quoderat
http://tamino.wordpress.com/2009/06/26/embarrassing-questions/

======
michael_dorfman
A nice use of data visualizations to get the point across (repeatedly). It's
easy to cherry-pick the data and graph-type to demonstrate your point on one
graph-- but to show the same trend on a number of different graph types, with
a number of different data sources, over a variety of different periods--
well, that's harder to argue with.

------
jasonkester
I gave up after the 3rd paragraph. So much anger. It just sets the reader up
to expect that the rest of the article will be biased.

Why write an article this way? If the data is really on your side, just
present it.

~~~
j_baker
I think that saying that the author will be biased towards a view of man-made
global warming is a bit like saying someone will be biased against the world
being flat or that the sun rotates around the earth.

~~~
krschultz
Except that the world has been experimentally (and later observed to be)
proven to be round, and we have experimentally (and later observed to be)
rotating around the sun. There are no experiments proving global warming, and
no observations that match the predictive models well. So it is just a theory.
Theories have been wrong many times before. It may be right, but comparing it
to rock solid facts like those is simply ignorant of the state of the science.
It is probably right, but we don't know that for sure.

~~~
jamesbritt
"So it is just a theory."

As in Theory of Evolution, or Theory of Gravity? I _think_ you meant
"hypothesis" or "conjecture".

I don't want to put words in your mouth; I'm frustrated by the widely varying
possible meanings of the word "theory" that makes some discussion more
confusing than need be.

~~~
viggity
I don't call it the theory of gravity, I call it the Law of Gravity. Or the
Newtonian Laws of Physics.

A theory, in the general sense of the word, is an analytic structure designed
to explain a set of observations.

A Law is a generalization that describes recurring facts or events in nature

Laws are predicated on reproducible experiments. An idea is a theory before
the experimental evidence is amassed and confirmed.

------
cousin_it
If you're interested in winning, you will destroy your opponents' arguments.
But if you're interested in the truth, you will fix their arguments for them
to the best of your ability, and then set out to update your position
accordingly.

To make an impression on _me_ , don't go looking for easily dismantled
arguments. Pick your most formidable intellectual opponents. Try arguing
successfully against the best available brand of "denialism" (what a word!) -
the blog Climate Audit. For example, explain to me this:
<http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=5902> .

------
krschultz
Yesterday I read this report written by the Environmental Protection Agency
<http://cei.org/cei_files/fm/active/0/DOC062509-004.pdf>. In 98 pages they
basically show that the science IS NOT conclusive. It may well be C02, it may
not. Having worked with the EPA before, they find pretty much every excuse to
ban or regulate something so when they say it is NOT doing what others say, I
listen.

Interestingly one of the main factors they contribute to their differing
results from the IPCC report is that the IPCC report closed its paper
submission windows in early 2006 even though it was published in 2007, so the
work is 3 years out of date. This paper was written in the last 2 months and
cites dozens of papers over the last 3 years that contradict the IPCC's
"findings".

------
biotech
Anybody know who _Tamino_ is? Specifically, I was curious if he has some
scientific background.

