tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2973898083038311158.post8199343776356094814..comments2008-11-29T13:21:49.402-08:00Comments on Juicy Viewpoints from Jules: Global Warming or Global Wanking ?Juleshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10119193175145977768noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2973898083038311158.post-58439268438542302512008-05-31T02:04:00.000-07:002008-05-31T02:04:00.000-07:00Jules: to follow-up on Bellamy's 0.3%: if we assum...Jules: to follow-up on Bellamy's 0.3%: if we assume that the average global temp is 10 degrees Celsius, as you say, then a 0.3% variation in temperature would be equivalent to the following absolute temperature variations (all converted to degrees Celsius for comparison), depending on the units chosen for applying the percentage:<BR/><BR/>degrees Celsius: 0.03<BR/>degrees Fahrenheit: 0.083<BR/>Kelvins or Rankines: 0.85<BR/><BR/>There is a variation by a factor of nearly 30 between the values. I agree that an absolute variation of 0.03 degC or 0.083 degC is probably pretty insignificant, but surely 0.85 degC is not...<BR/><BR/>When arguing on the basis of scientific findings, one must be very careful to specify precisely the units of measurement and, if necessary, the reference point (as in this case: degC, degF and K/R have widely varying zero values in terms of actual temperature - and zero is by default the reference point when using percentages): obviously Bellamy wasn't that careful. Hence my skepticism of his argument.Marcushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18093621944553928061noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2973898083038311158.post-38703967346326332402008-05-29T09:55:00.000-07:002008-05-29T09:55:00.000-07:00I meant global ave temps fell in 2007 from 2006 le...I meant global ave temps fell in 2007 from 2006 levels.Juleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10119193175145977768noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2973898083038311158.post-43581227097034931082008-05-29T09:53:00.000-07:002008-05-29T09:53:00.000-07:00Hi marcus - Bellamy means 0.3 % of current Ave. Gl...Hi marcus - Bellamy means 0.3 % of current Ave. Global Temp (over 1 year) , I beleive. <BR/>This global average fell in 2008 compared to 2007 (global cooling for that yr).<BR/><BR/>0.3 % is very little of whatever figure.<BR/>I assume global ave temp is 10 degrees c or similar.<BR/><BR/>The Kyoto protocol, If fully aplied by all western countries is estimated by Lomborg to reduce temps by yr 2100 by 0.15 deg compared to the world without kyoto.<BR/>ie kyoto is a joke, and in addition, not a single signatory has been able to meet kyoto levels.Juleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10119193175145977768noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2973898083038311158.post-723007064991770012008-05-25T07:44:00.000-07:002008-05-25T07:44:00.000-07:00I forgot to mention my opinion of Michael Crichton...I forgot to mention my opinion of Michael Crichton’s viewpoint. If I remember correctly, he is the author I dropped some years ago after reading the first 10 pages or so of one of his novels when he maintained that releasing the compressed oxygen/air from some bottles housed inside a bathyscaphe (into the bathyscaphe airspace) would lighten the bathyscaphe, making it rise to the surface of the sea faster… For someone who appears to base most of his arguments on scientific principles, that’s pretty damn pathetic…Marcushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18093621944553928061noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2973898083038311158.post-66275043039188167712008-05-25T04:09:00.000-07:002008-05-25T04:09:00.000-07:00I was beginning to think that Bellamy's article wa...I was beginning to think that Bellamy's article was making sense. But he lost me here: <BR/><BR/><I>"If all the water vapour was removed from the atmosphere, the temperature would fall by 33 degrees Celsius. But, remove all the carbon dioxide and the temperature might fall by just 0.3 per cent."</I><BR/><BR/>If you want to argue the validity of a scientific theory in a written paper, you need to write in a scientific (as in an objective, concise, clear and unambiguous) manner. You DO NOT mix units of measurement (as in mixing degrees Celsius with percentages) and you DO specify what parameter you are referring to when talking about things like percentages (what was his 0.3 per cent referring to: percentage of degrees Celsius, percentage of degrees Fahrenheit or percentage of Kelvins? There is a considerable difference between the three...). What his crime is here is equivalent, from the layman’s point of view, to the typical American news channel’s crime when it quotes today’s closing market values thus: “Today the Dow Jones index fell by nearly 150 points, while the Nasdaq lowered by just under 1.3%...” So, which market index lost more today?? You tell me…<BR/><BR/>Bellamy’s argument lost a lot of its credibility when I read this section, as far as I am concerned. He suddenly started to sound like a snake-oil salesman.<BR/><BR/>However I do admit that the whole global warming affair is pretty dubious: since we only have detailed climatic records going back for the last couple of hundred years or so, long-term trends are difficult to identify with any accuracy; so it is quite plausible that the climate phase we are in is simply part of a natural cycle...Marcushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18093621944553928061noreply@blogger.com