Bananas.org

Welcome to the Bananas.org forums.

You're currently viewing our message boards as a guest which gives you limited access to participate in discussions and access our other features such as our wiki and photo gallery. By joining our community, you'll have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload photos, and access many other special features. Registration is fast and simple, so please join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Go Back   Bananas.org > Other Topics > Tiki Hut
Register Photo Gallery Classifieds Wiki Chat Map Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Tiki Hut All other posts go here. Banana jokes, travel stories, anything else you would like to chat about.


Members currently in the chatroom: 0
The most chatters online in one day was 17, 09-06-2009.
No one is currently using the chat.

Reply   Email this Page Email this Page
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 01-28-2012, 09:06 AM   #21 (permalink)
I think with my banana ;)
 
Jack Daw's Avatar
 
Location: BA, SK, CEU
Zone: Dfa (Köppen-geiger) <-> 7b/8a? (USDA)
Name: Jack
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 3,525
BananaBucks : 188,242
Feedback: 2 / 100%
Said "Thanks" 2,771 Times
Was Thanked 2,456 Times in 1,352 Posts
Said "Welcome to Bananas" 383 Times
Default Re: NASA Temperature Data: 1880-2011

Quote:
Originally Posted by harveyc View Post
The article is referring to one person: Ivar Giaever and "Although the number of publicly dissenting scientists is growing, many young scientists furtively say that while they also have serious doubts about the global-warming message"
- now what I've learnt to do with the mass media is to cut off the part that is not really a particular statement and cannot be verified - a general phrase without any proofs, such as "many young scientists".

Now for the Ivar Giaever. As much as I agree that he's a Nobel Prize-winning physicist, what does he have to do with all of this?

Quote:
In September, Nobel Prize-winning physicist Ivar Giaever, a supporter of President Obama in the last election, publicly resigned from the American Physical Society (APS) with a letter that begins: "I did not renew [my membership] because I cannot live with the [APS policy] statement: 'The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring. If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth's physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now.'

So he based his letter on a fact that he cannot live with that... That's ok. But what is he actually his field of expertise? Let's have a look at the Nobel Prize description biography:
Ivar Giaever - Biography

Quote:
Giaever emigrated to Canada in 1954 and after a short period as an architect's aide he joined Canadian General Electric's Advanced Engineering Program. In 1956, he emigrated to the USA where he completed the General Electric Company's A, B and C engineering courses. In these he worked in various assignments as an applied mathematician. He joined the General Electric Research and Development Center in 1958 and concurrently started to study physics at Rensselaer Polytechnical Institute where he obtained a Ph.D. degree in 1964.

From 1958 to 1969 Dr. Giaever worked in the fields of thin films, tunneling and superconductivity. In 1965 he was awarded the Oliver E. Buckley Prize for some pioneering work combining tunneling and superconductivity. In 1969 he received a Guggenheim Fellowship and thereupon spent one year in Cambridge, England studying biophysics. Since returning to the Research and Development Center in 1970, Dr. Giaever has spent most of his effort studying the behavior of protein molecules at solid surfaces. In recognition of his work he was elected a Coolidge fellow at General Electric in May, 1973.

Dr Giaever is a member of the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers, and the Biophysical Society, and he is a Fellow of the American Physical Society. Dr. Giaever has served on committees for several international conferences and presently he is a member of the Executive Committee of the Solid State division in the American Physical Society.
Where exactly did he get his qualification in Climatology? That's a question. Maybe I didn't find it. But what authority does he have in that field?
__________________
Thnx to Marcel, Ante, Dr. Chiranjit Parmar and Francesco for the plants I've received.



Zeitgeist - Corporatocracy 101 (~2hrs)

Zeitgeist - Moving Forward (~2.5hrs)
Jack Daw is offline   Reply With Quote Send A Private Message To Jack Daw
Old 01-28-2012, 09:19 AM   #22 (permalink)
Been nuts, gone bananas
 
harveyc's Avatar
 
Location: Isleton, Calif
Zone: 9b
Name: Harvey
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 5,116
BananaBucks : 198,783
Feedback: 5 / 100%
Said "Thanks" 6,020 Times
Was Thanked 4,451 Times in 1,893 Posts
Said "Welcome to Bananas" 1,785 Times
Default Re: NASA Temperature Data: 1880-2011

Jack, on what basis of expertise do you ignore the piece being signed by 16 scientists?

Claude Allegre, former director of the Institute for the Study of the Earth, University of Paris; J. Scott Armstrong, cofounder of the Journal of Forecasting and the International Journal of Forecasting; Jan Breslow, head of the Laboratory of Biochemical Genetics and Metabolism, Rockefeller University; Roger Cohen, fellow, American Physical Society; Edward David, member, National Academy of Engineering and National Academy of Sciences; William Happer, professor of physics, Princeton; Michael Kelly, professor of technology, University of Cambridge, U.K.; William Kininmonth, former head of climate research at the Australian Bureau of Meteorology; Richard Lindzen, professor of atmospheric sciences, MIT; James McGrath, professor of chemistry, Virginia Technical University; Rodney Nichols, former president and CEO of the New York Academy of Sciences; Burt Rutan, aerospace engineer, designer of Voyager and SpaceShipOne; Harrison H. Schmitt, Apollo 17 astronaut and former U.S. senator; Nir Shaviv, professor of astrophysics, Hebrew University, Jerusalem; Henk Tennekes, former director, Royal Dutch Meteorological Service; Antonio Zichichi, president of the World Federation of Scientists, Geneva.
__________________
harveyc is offline   Reply With Quote Send A Private Message To harveyc
Old 01-28-2012, 10:36 AM   #23 (permalink)
un-Retired
 
Richard's Avatar
 
Location: Vista, CA
Zone: USDA 10b
Name: Richard
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 9,674
BananaBucks : 319,172
Feedback: 9 / 100%
Said "Thanks" 3,636 Times
Was Thanked 12,530 Times in 4,716 Posts
Said "Welcome to Bananas" 1,685 Times
Default Re: NASA Temperature Data: 1880-2011

The article Harvey has provided spurns a connection between CO2 and greenhouse effects in the last century and the first 50 years of the present century. It does not refute the measurements of global warming in terms of 1C rise per century since 1400 -- the definition that the scientific community has for global warming. Nor does it refute evidence of climate change -- an upward shift in global temperatures over the last 50 years.

The author's discussion is largely concerned with efforts to curb CO2 emissions from mechanical sources. There is some merit to this view since humans and domesticated animals are the largest sector of contributors. However, the article does not address this fact or the unpleasant remedy of population reduction.

The view that global warming and climate change are occurring is held by 97% of the members of the American Physical Society.
__________________
Doodling along at tangentvectors.org
Richard is offline   Reply With Quote Send A Private Message To Richard
Old 01-28-2012, 12:00 PM   #24 (permalink)
I think with my banana ;)
 
Jack Daw's Avatar
 
Location: BA, SK, CEU
Zone: Dfa (Köppen-geiger) <-> 7b/8a? (USDA)
Name: Jack
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 3,525
BananaBucks : 188,242
Feedback: 2 / 100%
Said "Thanks" 2,771 Times
Was Thanked 2,456 Times in 1,352 Posts
Said "Welcome to Bananas" 383 Times
Default Re: NASA Temperature Data: 1880-2011

I'm not ignoring them. It however seems that the rest of the APS does. And I guess it isn't only 16 scientists.

Membership 50,000
src: American Physical Society - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Actually 16/50000 = 0.00032%
I mean, even if it was 10%, the VAST majority of the scientists is of another opinion.

I was just asking what relevance does mentioning of THAT particular scientist had, since he didn't even have specialization in Climatology. The only relevance was, that he was most probably the only Nobel Prize winner and thus his mentioning there would put some more weight to his claims in an layman's view. Even though I doubt I would find any succesful climatology paper he wrote.

And come on... some of these people can't even pretend to be specialized in climatology:
Quote:


Harrison H. Schmitt - a geologist

Why don't they leave this to real Climatologists?

And some REAL paperwork on the status quo of the scientific consensus on Global warming, Climate change and man-made global warming:
http://tinyurl.com/dehjun
Expert credibility in climate change
__________________
Thnx to Marcel, Ante, Dr. Chiranjit Parmar and Francesco for the plants I've received.



Zeitgeist - Corporatocracy 101 (~2hrs)

Zeitgeist - Moving Forward (~2.5hrs)
Jack Daw is offline   Reply With Quote Send A Private Message To Jack Daw
Said thanks:
Old 01-28-2012, 12:18 PM   #25 (permalink)
un-Retired
 
Richard's Avatar
 
Location: Vista, CA
Zone: USDA 10b
Name: Richard
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 9,674
BananaBucks : 319,172
Feedback: 9 / 100%
Said "Thanks" 3,636 Times
Was Thanked 12,530 Times in 4,716 Posts
Said "Welcome to Bananas" 1,685 Times
Default Re: NASA Temperature Data: 1880-2011

The one thing about those 16 people we could all sympathize with: perhaps they just want a warmer climate so they can grow edible bananas outdoors year-round in their location!

__________________
Doodling along at tangentvectors.org
Richard is offline   Reply With Quote Send A Private Message To Richard
Said thanks:
Old 01-28-2012, 12:41 PM   #26 (permalink)
I think with my banana ;)
 
Jack Daw's Avatar
 
Location: BA, SK, CEU
Zone: Dfa (Köppen-geiger) <-> 7b/8a? (USDA)
Name: Jack
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 3,525
BananaBucks : 188,242
Feedback: 2 / 100%
Said "Thanks" 2,771 Times
Was Thanked 2,456 Times in 1,352 Posts
Said "Welcome to Bananas" 383 Times
Default Re: NASA Temperature Data: 1880-2011

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard View Post
The one thing about those 16 people we could all sympathize with: perhaps they just want a warmer climate so they can grow edible bananas outdoors year-round in their location!

They are not the only ones.
This Siberian front has brought the first below 25F temps this entire winter. Or, shall I say... it will bring. Here I was hoping for northern Adriatic Italian winter... well. Still, as far as we are in the winter, statistically it's the warmest winter on record here.
__________________
Thnx to Marcel, Ante, Dr. Chiranjit Parmar and Francesco for the plants I've received.



Zeitgeist - Corporatocracy 101 (~2hrs)

Zeitgeist - Moving Forward (~2.5hrs)
Jack Daw is offline   Reply With Quote Send A Private Message To Jack Daw
Old 01-28-2012, 08:18 PM   #27 (permalink)
Been nuts, gone bananas
 
harveyc's Avatar
 
Location: Isleton, Calif
Zone: 9b
Name: Harvey
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 5,116
BananaBucks : 198,783
Feedback: 5 / 100%
Said "Thanks" 6,020 Times
Was Thanked 4,451 Times in 1,893 Posts
Said "Welcome to Bananas" 1,785 Times
Default Re: NASA Temperature Data: 1880-2011

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Daw View Post
I'm not ignoring them. It however seems that the rest of the APS does. And I guess it isn't only 16 scientists.

Membership 50,000
src: American Physical Society - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Actually 16/50000 = 0.00032%
I mean, even if it was 10%, the VAST majority of the scientists is of another opinion.

I was just asking what relevance does mentioning of THAT particular scientist had, since he didn't even have specialization in Climatology. The only relevance was, that he was most probably the only Nobel Prize winner and thus his mentioning there would put some more weight to his claims in an layman's view. Even though I doubt I would find any succesful climatology paper he wrote.

And come on... some of these people can't even pretend to be specialized in climatology:
Quote:


Harrison H. Schmitt - a geologist

Why don't they leave this to real Climatologists?

And some REAL paperwork on the status quo of the scientific consensus on Global warming, Climate change and man-made global warming:
http://tinyurl.com/dehjun
Expert credibility in climate change
Well, as far as I know, they haven't taken a confidential poll to ask what the other 49,984 members think.

At one time, the vast majority of scientists believed that Earth was flat and also that the universe rotated around Earth. Didn't make it right, just popular. My primary problem with all of this is questions about the accuracy of weather stations, appropriateness of weather station locations, and bias placed on the analysis of data. This has been gone discussed enough in the past.

I think the inclusion of a geologist is to appease folks that are "mining" for the truth. Some of the scientists signing onto that opinion piece do appear qualified based on their titles, but that could be misleading as well.

Who do "real" climatologists work for? Are they all entirely objective and independent?

I'm sure not qualified to know who to believe.

Jack, please know that if you feel attacked in any way by me asking these questions, that is not my intent. Just some open and somewhat light-hearted discussion.
__________________
harveyc is offline   Reply With Quote Send A Private Message To harveyc
Old 01-28-2012, 08:58 PM   #28 (permalink)
un-Retired
 
Richard's Avatar
 
Location: Vista, CA
Zone: USDA 10b
Name: Richard
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 9,674
BananaBucks : 319,172
Feedback: 9 / 100%
Said "Thanks" 3,636 Times
Was Thanked 12,530 Times in 4,716 Posts
Said "Welcome to Bananas" 1,685 Times
Default Re: NASA Temperature Data: 1880-2011

Quote:
Originally Posted by harveyc View Post
Well, as far as I know, they haven't taken a confidential poll to ask what the other 49,984 members think.
Yes, the results made national news so I suppose it is on their web site somewhere. My point was that it is more interesting to look at rates (percentage) than quantities of individuals.

Again, notice that in the article you provided the author embraces the idea of global warming in his opinion that it will be good for the planet over the next 50 years. What he calls into question are mechanical CO2 emissions as a cause for the observed increase.
__________________
Doodling along at tangentvectors.org
Richard is offline   Reply With Quote Send A Private Message To Richard
Said thanks:
Old 01-29-2012, 12:43 AM   #29 (permalink)
Been nuts, gone bananas
 
harveyc's Avatar
 
Location: Isleton, Calif
Zone: 9b
Name: Harvey
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 5,116
BananaBucks : 198,783
Feedback: 5 / 100%
Said "Thanks" 6,020 Times
Was Thanked 4,451 Times in 1,893 Posts
Said "Welcome to Bananas" 1,785 Times
Default Re: NASA Temperature Data: 1880-2011

My pitaya and bananas sure would look nicer if we didn't have 28 days of frost like this year. I won't depend on warmer weather right away but will try to get a cover over them before next winter.
__________________
harveyc is offline   Reply With Quote Send A Private Message To harveyc
Old 01-29-2012, 03:59 AM   #30 (permalink)
I think with my banana ;)
 
Jack Daw's Avatar
 
Location: BA, SK, CEU
Zone: Dfa (Köppen-geiger) <-> 7b/8a? (USDA)
Name: Jack
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 3,525
BananaBucks : 188,242
Feedback: 2 / 100%
Said "Thanks" 2,771 Times
Was Thanked 2,456 Times in 1,352 Posts
Said "Welcome to Bananas" 383 Times
Default Re: NASA Temperature Data: 1880-2011

Quote:
Originally Posted by harveyc View Post
At one time, the vast majority of scientists believed that Earth was flat and also that the universe rotated around Earth. Didn't make it right, just popular. My primary problem with all of this is questions about the accuracy of weather stations, appropriateness of weather station locations, and bias placed on the analysis of data. This has been gone discussed enough in the past.
Actually, the idea of Earth being flat had a dogmatic origin and most of the real scientists of any era opposed this idea... all the way from the old Greece up to Kopernikus and Galileo. The most important difference is that back then such people not only might have been, but often were publicly prosecuted, many important figures of scientific world were simply executed and proper scientific methods weren't taken into considerations.
Catholic church haS been the most significant scientific retardant in the history of the mankind in a way it supressed the most brilliant scientists of an entire era to express their "not beliefs", but observations. I disagree with you however that people always thought that the Earth was flat. Whilest relatively uneducated populus of the then known world certainly might have thought so, for instance old American Indians knew much more about the astronomy much earlier than anybody in the Europe and were aware of some cosmic processes way before the Europeans even dared to look at the skies. It is the society with freedom of scientific progress, that reaches the higher point.

As for the weather stations, I don't really know what that's about. Frankly this topic doesn't interest me that much at all. Although from the model I saw in the first post it's safe to guess that reliable (according to the scientists) weather stations are located all over the planet and the measurments are combined with the satelitte measurments.



Quote:
Originally Posted by harveyc View Post
Who do "real" climatologists work for? Are they all entirely objective and independent?

I'm sure not qualified to know who to believe.
Every real scientist works only to expand his knowledge (as opposed to the "popular scientists that only wnat to be seen and heard without actually having anything to say" - this is what a real scientist looks like and his contributions to the science will live as long as the mathematical apparatus that he worked with Grigori Perelman - Mind over money - YouTube ). Most of the real scientists don't even need that much money and acknowledgment - actually the more you see some scientist in the public and at the shows, interviews and the more he goes for the big money... the less objective work he is likely to do.

As you can see, through 1 publication the entire public was capable of identifying a talented mathematician that moved the maths one step further. Whereas there might mbe hundreds mathematicians that do not contribute to math as much and their publications are through the scientific evaluation processes valued less, if they deal with the same problems yet are unsuccesful in finding solutions and methods for them.

That is maybe inconceivable to you coming from the western world, but as for the rest of the world, being a scientist has always meant only the personal evolution and pride, especially when many of the scientists on this planet don't even work in conditions you (as a nation) would find workable.
One doesn't become a scientist to earn vast amounts of money. One becomes scientist, because it really is a calling for gaining and expanding your knowledge. Modern scientific methods and especially publishing methods have been created to ensure impartiality, objectivness..

I don't really have the time and this isn't the place, but the topic of scientific researching and publishing methods is so vast that it is dedicated a significant portion of time during the latter postgradual studies at the university.

The same techniques apply to ALL the scientific fields and ensure that the real contributors to the science are seen and the "talkers with hunches of how something might be" are labeled as such, unless they bring some evidence to their claims...

Again. I'm not expert in this field and don't even need to be. I do believe those 90%+ of scientists that what they actually observe and measure and claim is true. And I don't even dare to interfere with their observations and measurments just as I wouldn't want them to start interfering with the technological progress of computers or virology. They simply aren't qualified to solve these types of issues, that bother virologists...

And neither is the general public qualified to evaluate the work of the scientists. That's the real issue. Nobody would dare claim something to a virologist and want him to alter his techniques based on a marginal .00032% opinion in the virology and a general public opinion (needless to say how that might end). But the same doesn't apply to the climatology obviously.

And that's what I was claiming the previous post. If you click the first link to the REAL scientific publication from my previous post that set its role of defining how big the consensus really is, you will see a picture there. As you can see in the picture, the less qualified people are to talk about this matter, the less they claim Yes on the question... With public being the most unqalified and less saying yes, whilest the most qualified scientists (ACTIVELY PUBLICATING Climatologists) are in consensus as to what's going on by claiming Yes to the question.


Quote:
Originally Posted by harveyc View Post
Jack, please know that if you feel attacked in any way by me asking these questions, that is not my intent. Just some open and somewhat light-hearted discussion.
No, I like constructive debates. As long as they are truly debates and are constructive.


Scientific method explained easy:
10 - The Scientific Method Made Easy - YouTube
__________________
Thnx to Marcel, Ante, Dr. Chiranjit Parmar and Francesco for the plants I've received.



Zeitgeist - Corporatocracy 101 (~2hrs)

Zeitgeist - Moving Forward (~2.5hrs)

Last edited by Jack Daw : 01-29-2012 at 04:06 AM.
Jack Daw is offline   Reply With Quote Send A Private Message To Jack Daw
Said thanks:
Old 01-29-2012, 11:57 AM   #31 (permalink)
Been nuts, gone bananas
 
harveyc's Avatar
 
Location: Isleton, Calif
Zone: 9b
Name: Harvey
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 5,116
BananaBucks : 198,783
Feedback: 5 / 100%
Said "Thanks" 6,020 Times
Was Thanked 4,451 Times in 1,893 Posts
Said "Welcome to Bananas" 1,785 Times
Default Re: NASA Temperature Data: 1880-2011

Okay, this is wandering off-topic, but I'll acknowledge what I was taught in public school in the 1960s about the one time widespread belief of a flat earth was not correct.

Jack, in keeping this discussion constructive, I believe it is necessary to correct you in an area that I am quite sensitive to. You appear to be ignorant of the true facts around the history of the Catholic church and science. The Catholic Church did not spread the belief that the earth was flat.

See Where Did the Idea of a Flat Earth Originate?

Your retardant comment regarding the Catholic Church far from the truth. I suggest you read The Galileo Controversy | Catholic Answers on a common controversy where some of the church's historical influence with science is accurately described.

This site also has information and references to the church's involvement in the modern scientific method and development of the college system: http://pseudo01.hddn.com/vod/cchvide...Epic_proof.pdf
__________________
harveyc is offline   Reply With Quote Send A Private Message To harveyc

Join Bananas.org Today!

Are you a banana plant enthusiast? Then we hope you will join the community. You will gain access to post, create threads, private message, upload images, join groups and more.

Bananas.org is owned and operated by fellow banana plant enthusiasts. We strive to offer a non-commercial community to learn and share information. Receive all three issues from Volume 1 of Bananas Magazine with your membership:
   

Join Bananas.org Today! - Click Here


Sponsors

Old 01-29-2012, 12:12 PM   #32 (permalink)
I think with my banana ;)
 
Jack Daw's Avatar
 
Location: BA, SK, CEU
Zone: Dfa (Köppen-geiger) <-> 7b/8a? (USDA)
Name: Jack
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 3,525
BananaBucks : 188,242
Feedback: 2 / 100%
Said "Thanks" 2,771 Times
Was Thanked 2,456 Times in 1,352 Posts
Said "Welcome to Bananas" 383 Times
Default Re: NASA Temperature Data: 1880-2011

Quote:
Originally Posted by harveyc View Post
Okay, this is wandering off-topic, but I'll acknowledge what I was taught in public school in the 1960s about the one time widespread belief of a flat earth was not correct.

Jack, in keeping this discussion constructive, I believe it is necessary to correct you in an area that I am quite sensitive to. You appear to be ignorant of the true facts around the history of the Catholic church and science. The Catholic Church did not spread the belief that the earth was flat.

See Where Did the Idea of a Flat Earth Originate?
As for the flat Earth - I said it had dogmatic origins, not Catholic! Careful about mixing those together.


Quote:
Originally Posted by harveyc View Post
Your retardant comment regarding the Catholic Church far from the truth. I suggest you read The Galileo Controversy | Catholic Answers on a common controversy where some of the church's historical influence with science is accurately described.

This site also has information and references to the church's involvement in the modern scientific method and development of the college system: http://pseudo01.hddn.com/vod/cchvide...Epic_proof.pdf
I won't be discussing religion and religious institutions. I believe in everybody's free choice in this matter, but I can respond to your links with this link:
Catholic Church and science - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is supposed to be without any bias and was edited by many people from what I can gather in the discussion section. As for me, the Catholic Church (and other religious institutions) topic is closed.
__________________
Thnx to Marcel, Ante, Dr. Chiranjit Parmar and Francesco for the plants I've received.



Zeitgeist - Corporatocracy 101 (~2hrs)

Zeitgeist - Moving Forward (~2.5hrs)
Jack Daw is offline   Reply With Quote Send A Private Message To Jack Daw
Old 01-29-2012, 12:32 PM   #33 (permalink)
Been nuts, gone bananas
 
harveyc's Avatar
 
Location: Isleton, Calif
Zone: 9b
Name: Harvey
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 5,116
BananaBucks : 198,783
Feedback: 5 / 100%
Said "Thanks" 6,020 Times
Was Thanked 4,451 Times in 1,893 Posts
Said "Welcome to Bananas" 1,785 Times
Default Re: NASA Temperature Data: 1880-2011

Okay, even the dogmatic comment is not correct. Most church leaders and scientists taught that the earth was a sphere and I can only find where individuals with religious affiliations had theories that the earth was flat with no official church teaching (dogma) on the matter.

I read the Wikipedia article and didn't find anything that contradicted the information in the sources I posted, though my sources included more examples of church involvement in science. The Wikipedia article, however, does appear to be much a work in progress document as many statements are still in need of a citation.
__________________
harveyc is offline   Reply With Quote Send A Private Message To harveyc
Old 01-29-2012, 01:19 PM   #34 (permalink)
Muck bananas
 
Nicolas Naranja's Avatar
 
Location: Pahokee, FL
Zone: 10
Name: Nick
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,217
BananaBucks : 397,926
Feedback: 7 / 100%
Said "Thanks" 66 Times
Was Thanked 5,655 Times in 1,562 Posts
Said "Welcome to Bananas" 7 Times
Send a message via AIM to Nicolas Naranja
Default Re: NASA Temperature Data: 1880-2011

I'll state again that there is a great risk in extrapolating trends. Climatologists did this in the early 70s and they probably thought that we would keep getting colder. If you took the trend line from 1980-2000 you would find out that we are far below where we should be according to that trend line. It's also important to note that as the atmosphere warms there is necessarily an increase in CO2. Here's the question you need to ask yourself. The causes of increased CO2 are largely anthropogenic, but the increase in CO2 only explains at most 25% of the increase in temperature during the industrial era. So what explains the other 75%?
__________________
Some people go bananas, I went plantains.
Weather Underground PWS KFLCANAL7
Nicolas Naranja is offline   Reply With Quote Send A Private Message To Nicolas Naranja
Said thanks:
Old 01-29-2012, 09:11 PM   #35 (permalink)
un-Retired
 
Richard's Avatar
 
Location: Vista, CA
Zone: USDA 10b
Name: Richard
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 9,674
BananaBucks : 319,172
Feedback: 9 / 100%
Said "Thanks" 3,636 Times
Was Thanked 12,530 Times in 4,716 Posts
Said "Welcome to Bananas" 1,685 Times
Default Re: NASA Temperature Data: 1880-2011

Ok Nicholas, I agree that there is a great danger in extrapolating trends. And likewise I don't find much merit in statistical studies that seem to be jumping on the bandwagon to show something is true or false. I think you are also aware that the paper that started this thread topic is a discussion of what was measured between 1880-2011, how reliable the measurements where, and what the measurements show. The authors conclude that for the continental U.S. there is no trend one way or another in average yearly temperatures. The continental U.S. is of course a minor portion of the global average temperature referred to in "global warming" studies.

I don't think about climatology in terms of statistics at all, but instead in terms of complicated interacting dynamical systems. Over the years I have developed a high respect for some of the teams involved in these kinds of studies. When these folks say "there is a problem" I think more people should take notice. This is why over the last two decades the consensus in the scientific community towards "global warming" and "climate change" has gone from the low twenty percentile to well over ninety percent.
__________________
Doodling along at tangentvectors.org

Last edited by Richard : 01-29-2012 at 09:13 PM. Reason: minor
Richard is offline   Reply With Quote Send A Private Message To Richard
Sponsors

Old 01-30-2012, 02:26 AM   #36 (permalink)
Been nuts, gone bananas
 
harveyc's Avatar
 
Location: Isleton, Calif
Zone: 9b
Name: Harvey
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 5,116
BananaBucks : 198,783
Feedback: 5 / 100%
Said "Thanks" 6,020 Times
Was Thanked 4,451 Times in 1,893 Posts
Said "Welcome to Bananas" 1,785 Times
Default Re: NASA Temperature Data: 1880-2011

Forget global warming - it's Cycle 25 we need to worry about (and if NASA scientists are right the Thames will be freezing over again) | Mail Online
__________________
harveyc is offline   Reply With Quote Send A Private Message To harveyc
Old 01-30-2012, 12:00 PM   #37 (permalink)
un-Retired
 
Richard's Avatar
 
Location: Vista, CA
Zone: USDA 10b
Name: Richard
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 9,674
BananaBucks : 319,172
Feedback: 9 / 100%
Said "Thanks" 3,636 Times
Was Thanked 12,530 Times in 4,716 Posts
Said "Welcome to Bananas" 1,685 Times
Default Re: NASA Temperature Data: 1880-2011



Harvey -- you're aware that DailyMail is a UK tabloid?
__________________
Doodling along at tangentvectors.org
Richard is offline   Reply With Quote Send A Private Message To Richard
Old 01-30-2012, 12:46 PM   #38 (permalink)
Been nuts, gone bananas
 
harveyc's Avatar
 
Location: Isleton, Calif
Zone: 9b
Name: Harvey
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 5,116
BananaBucks : 198,783
Feedback: 5 / 100%
Said "Thanks" 6,020 Times
Was Thanked 4,451 Times in 1,893 Posts
Said "Welcome to Bananas" 1,785 Times
Default Re: NASA Temperature Data: 1880-2011

Yeah, but I think it was fun to read. And it did quoting folks that seemed to have some expertise but I posted it mostly because it made me smile.

I also posted it without any comment and correctly predicted you'd be the first to respond.
__________________
harveyc is offline   Reply With Quote Send A Private Message To harveyc
Old 01-30-2012, 01:07 PM   #39 (permalink)
Been nuts, gone bananas
 
harveyc's Avatar
 
Location: Isleton, Calif
Zone: 9b
Name: Harvey
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 5,116
BananaBucks : 198,783
Feedback: 5 / 100%
Said "Thanks" 6,020 Times
Was Thanked 4,451 Times in 1,893 Posts
Said "Welcome to Bananas" 1,785 Times
Default Re: NASA Temperature Data: 1880-2011

I still say how can I take any of this very seriously. Al Gore has been the biggest promoter of having to take drastic actions. However, while he's proposed big government action he's set a terrible example of taking personal responsibility with his huge mansion and use of a private jet. Also, I was also in a group that once promoted an international conference about dealing with global warming and the conference fee include a charge for carbon impact fees. I saw no reason why they just didn't hold an online video conference. These are mostly folks just trying to justify their jobs, IMO.
__________________
harveyc is offline   Reply With Quote Send A Private Message To harveyc
Old 01-30-2012, 02:30 PM   #40 (permalink)
Muck bananas
 
Nicolas Naranja's Avatar
 
Location: Pahokee, FL
Zone: 10
Name: Nick
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,217
BananaBucks : 397,926
Feedback: 7 / 100%
Said "Thanks" 66 Times
Was Thanked 5,655 Times in 1,562 Posts
Said "Welcome to Bananas" 7 Times
Send a message via AIM to Nicolas Naranja
Default Re: NASA Temperature Data: 1880-2011

I'm not going to disagree with climate change or global warming. Climate changes and the world is definitely warmer than it was 100 yrs ago. I do have a problem with the people who insist that CO2 is the driver of this change. I've had 2 climatology classes over my education, both taught by men in their 60s, that basically said that CO2 cannot explain all the warming. And explained the chemistry behind their assertion.

So what do I think.

I think you have a group of scientist who have figured out their gravy train. Scare people with thoughts of coastal flooding, mega-hurricane and dead polar bears and your grants get funded. Then you get a marketing team to figure out how to make money on it. Finally, you dismiss skeptics as lunatics.

People have an impact on the planet, what do you want to do about it. A plowed field heats up more than a forest or grassland, concrete holds heat, and when you add up the effects of each and every little thing that we do the only way to stop global warming is to stop having children and start killing people. We can compost the bodies and use them in our organic garden.

Eat a plant based diet, ride your bike to work, buy carbon credits and pray to Al Gore for salvation. An explanation to the warming based on sun spots or natural ENSO cycles just doesn't sell movies and books, so to hell with them. Just hope that this warming last long enough so that we can make emeritus status before it goes bust.
__________________
Some people go bananas, I went plantains.
Weather Underground PWS KFLCANAL7
Nicolas Naranja is offline   Reply With Quote Send A Private Message To Nicolas Naranja
Said thanks:
Reply   Email this Page Email this Page






Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Fall 2011 trebor Main Banana Discussion 1 09-23-2011 12:21 PM
seed temperature willy1der Banana Seed Germination Forum 3 12-07-2009 12:53 AM
Soil Temperature vs. Air Temperature? Help Please! jpfloors Banana Seed Germination Forum 7 03-19-2008 03:32 PM
Humidity and temperature NanaNut2 Main Banana Discussion 0 02-02-2008 02:01 AM
Temperature Gard Species Bananas 6 09-22-2006 08:12 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:17 AM.





All content © Bananas.org & the respective author.