In my rapid skim of the junk that the Independent put out, I missed the classic I've just used as a headline. Hat tip to Coby for actually reading the stuff. To quote Coby: It makes James Inhofe sound reasonable. And that's no small feat!
Stoat
Taking science by the throat...
Search this blog
Profile
I am a Dragon. I emerge from my Egg. More...
Recent Posts
- Hot air
- Joke
- How overfed are we?
- Another trail of twaddle
- When will they learn?
- On morality
- incredibots.com
- Polar orbiters and the testing of sci-fi
- Divorced - for having an affair in Second Life
- Nierneberg, concluded: Oreskes is wrong
Recent Comments
- CW on How overfed are we?
- Magnus W on How overfed are we?
- Nicolas Nierenberg on Hot air
- Dunc on How overfed are we?
- Dunc on On morality
- James Annan on Hot air
- Adam on Hot air
- Munin on Joke
- Badger3k on Joke
- Magnus W on Hot air
Archives
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
Blogroll
- Back Seat Driving
- Bryan's Blog
- CIP
- Climate Feedback (Nature)
- QS/DA
- Deltoid
- Eli t Rabett
- FPA: climate change
- Framing Science
- Jeb
- John Fleck
- Only In It For The Gold
- Reality Check
- Real Climate
- RP Sr
- RP Jr
- Sagredo
- Some are Boojums
Other Information
| Co-moderator of globalchange mailing list | Subscribe to globalchange |
| Browse at groups.google.com | |
Subscribe via Email
Stay abreast of your favorite bloggers' latest and greatest via e-mail, via a daily digest.
« Why do Science in Antarctica? | Main | AR4 SPM sea level proves more interesting than expected »
Methane fireballs tear across the sky
Category: fun
Posted on: February 5, 2007 5:43 PM, by William M. Connolley
Send this entry to:
Email this entry to a friend
View the Technorati Link Cosmos for this entry
TrackBacks
(TrackBack URL for this entry: )
Comments
He's got a book to sell, Lovelock-stylee. In fact it seems like a straight rip-off, judging from the "few struggling groups of embattled survivors clinging to life near the poles".
So that's why he was on R4 recently (Today prog interview) being gutted by some septic. With "friends" like these...
Posted by: James Annan | February 5, 2007 6:17 PM
To be fair to Mark.....a 6.4 C rise in temperature would be pretty alarming (especially with polar amplification etc). I also listened to Mark versus the sceptic agricultural economist on Radio 4 and thought he came out of it quite well. The economist was sounding like he was a prime mover in the climate science when it's clear he didn't have a clue.
Posted by: stephan harrison | February 6, 2007 11:25 AM
Well, anyone who wants to can listen again. It seemed 9 parts ad-hom to me. As Mike Hulme put it,
and especially funny to hear Lynas encouraging us all to wait for the AR4 when he then immediately exaggerated it so grossly when it came out.
Of course it is clear to those in the know that Avery is a sceptic crank. But I suspect that the disengaged and sceptical members of the audience got quite a different take-home message.
Posted by: James Annan | February 6, 2007 5:52 PM
Thanks for the link and I listened to it again. I agree there were lots of ad-homs, but isn't that what you would expect in a debate like that? I also don't understand Hulme's point about biologists and historians discussing climate change....I would have thought that understanding climate change requires a whole host of voices (biologists, historians, Quaternary scientists, climatologists, chemists etc).
Posted by: stephan harrison | February 7, 2007 6:00 AM
Especially Quaternary scientists, specifically, mid Pleistocene palaeoecologists (its where the fundings at!)
Anyway, I'll see you all in the polar refuge!
Posted by: SteveF | February 7, 2007 8:12 AM
The Independent piece was written by Mark Lynas. I have had the pleasure that this Gentleman has posted several similar quality "contributions" to my blog. If you can't live without these deep analyses of the hell on Earth, go to marklynas.org. I am very happy that you are slowly starting to see that James Inhofe is very reasonable. Sincerely Yours, Lubos
Posted by: Lubos Motl | February 7, 2007 11:54 AM
"I would have thought that understanding climate change requires a whole host of voices (biologists, historians, Quaternary scientists, climatologists, chemists etc)."
They were talking about physics, though. At least, in principle.
Posted by: James Annan | February 7, 2007 5:50 PM
The "methane fireballs" line sounds as if it should come from an up-dated Lucy In The Sky... with Methane Fireballs. Would play hell with the newspaper taxis.
Posted by: Gareth | February 9, 2007 3:36 PM
In another context, methane fireballs are quite interesting: as they may relate to earthquakes.
Former Cornell Physicist Thomas Gold proposed a theory that oil, natural gas and other hydrocarbons are regularly out-gassed by the earth and not fossil fuel (as traditionally described).
One of the things that Gold was interested in was the apparent association of earthquakes with out-gas events. He thought the former might be caused by the latter in some circumstances.
Posted by: Larry | February 21, 2007 1:45 PM