editorial
illconsidered | November 2, 2010Really great essay here, by Stephan Lewandowsky, on scientific uncertainty and manufacturing doubt.
illconsidered | October 5, 2010A few days ago, an environmental organization from England released what can charitably be called an appaling video in support of their campaign to reduce carbon emission 10% per year starting now, in 2010. The group is called 10:10 and the page originally containing the video, now containing an apology, is here. It was removed very quickly following very negative reactions from across the spectrum of environmental ideologies.
The video is a very graphic depiction of various people chosing not to go along with the 1010 campaign being blown to bits, replete with blood and gore spattered on…
illconsidered | August 25, 2010So over at Keith Kloor's place, we see Keith read a comment of Michael Tobis', (read it for your self here) in which he says: "Adaptation is crucial" and "adaptation and mitigation are not a tradeoff. They are two faces of the same coin." along with a whole bunch of, typical for Tobis, nuanced and intelligent points.
What does Keith want his readers to take away from that? That Michael Tobis is a hypocrite who does not really care about suffering humanity and his whole schtick is "the typical zero-sum talking point, that mitigation (curbing carbon emissions) has to take precedence over…
illconsidered | August 2, 2010This, from adelady, is so well put I just had to highlight it. It is a response to the usual "we'll just deal with whatever climate change throws at us later" inactivist argument:
The one thing we do have in our favour is our astounding intelligence - it's also astounding how we fail to use that intelligence intelligently. As far as dealing "with any changes that occur", why on earth would we not use our wits to ensure that changes are minimised or directed in a way that best suits us? Cleverness, innovation, imagination - these are not mysterious, magical properties that will emerge in…
illconsidered | July 31, 2010A few random items on expertise, elitism and credibility.
The first is from an interview with the late Stphen Schneider about the recent PNAS paper on the relative expertise of "convinced" and "unconvinced" climate science activists, an interesting read:
About the 'elitist' part: Scientists are really stuck. It's exactly the same thing in medicine, it's the same thing with pilot's licenses and driver's licenses: We don't let just anyone go out there and make any claim that they're an expert, do anything they want, without checking their credibility. Is it elitist to license pilots and doctors…
illconsidered | July 30, 2010An excellent article by Michael, again, and an interesting comment thread underneath. I have rarely seen RPJr more forthcoming and clear about his whole angle in the climate policy debate. I also have to confess I see very little value in the "honest broker" concept as he defines and advocates it (Eli is quite right) and no justification for his distasteful attacks on Real Climate and Jim Hansen.
illconsidered | July 13, 2010Corexit was a big news topic at the beginning of this tragic Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the gulf of Mexico but it seems little talked about now.
There is no question that BP's calculation in its decision to use so much of this toxic chemical prioritizes the cosmetics of the situation over ecological impact and the health of cleanup crews. So much more important is PR that BP has not just refused to provide respirators to displaced fisherman labour crews, they threaten them with firing if they use their own!.
They don't care where the oil-dispersant mixture goes or what it harms as long…
illconsidered | May 3, 2010A = $6.08 billion
B = $75 million
Profits for the single last quarter for BP were 6.08 Billion dollars. Under current US law, their total liability for non-cleanup and containment damages is .075 Billion dollars.
Would any free market supporters like to defend this thinly veiled example of corporate welfare?
See also Things Break for some early estimates of how bad the worst case scenario could get, including implications for the entire US economy.
Like Katrina, global warming did not cause this disaster. But also like Katrina, it is an excellent illustration of issues relating to risk…
illconsidered | April 14, 2010Climate denialists are fond of arguments regarding the falsifying of hypotheses. There are two main thrusts they use here, (ironically enough mutually exclusive thrusts**). The first is that global warming is an "unfalsifiable" theory and therefore not a true scientific construct. I don't recall any good example essays making this point to link to (maybe someone can post a link in the comments?), but I believe the idea comes mostly from the all too common conflation of the actual science and the mainstream reporting of the science. They say that the IPCC claims that extreme warmth and…
illconsidered | April 8, 2010One more reason Barack Obama should change his slogan from "Change you can believe in" to "Token gestures and nice words so you can shut up for a while."
Sorry, but he is a monumental and tragic disappointment who has squandered a truly historic oportunity.
IMO
illconsidered | April 8, 2010Here is a fascinating exchange between George Monbiot and Steve Easterbrook exploring the larger issues behind the recent Swifthacking of CRU email (aka ClimateGate).
Steve makes an excellent presentation of the case for what happens to be my personal view on this mess, namely that the media has failed in a major and tragic way and that this is a tale of a successful propaganda campaign not scientific corruption. In my opinion, Monbiot seems to understand Steve's points but still does not get the real story.
Have a read:
The computer scientist Steve Easterbrook wrote an interesting critique…
illconsidered | March 2, 2010Unfortunately for an unscientifically inclined mind, one bitter cold winter is worth many mountains of research in the quest for the truth about climate change. And unfortunately for our choking biosphere, political action will likely remain an impossibility until we are well and truly past the alledged cessation of warming.
I received an apparently sincere comment that expressed what must be a common feeling in the general public:
You guys are so far scientifically over my head that it is impossible
for me to participate in this conversation. But consider that most
people are like me,…
illconsidered | February 3, 2010ONCE TWO SCIENTISTS--it hardly matters what sort--were walking before dinner beside a pleasant pond with their friend, a reporter for the Dispatch, when they happened to notice a bird standing beside the water.
"I am a skeptic," said the first scientist. "I demand convincing evidence before I make an assertion. But I believe I can identify that bird, beyond all reasonable doubt, as a duck." The journalist nodded silently at this assertion.
"I also am a skeptic," said the second, "but evidently of a more refined sort, for I demand a much higher standard of evidence than you do. I see no…
illconsidered | December 1, 2009If you do not know what climategate refers to you probably got here via some odd typo in a google search. If you do but have not yet read Real Climate's post on it, you should do so. It is too late to rename the whole affair, but I thing "Swifthack" would have been more apropos.
Climategate is big news and not just in the climate blogosphere, all the major newspapers have opined. Here in cyberland, I have seen a doubling of traffic without really writing a thing about it or having a high traffic site link to me, I am assuming general interest in the story is the reason. Most of what I…
illconsidered | October 16, 2009There is an overwhelming consensus supporting the basic tenets of anthropogenic global warming theory. Those tenets are that CO2 levels are rising, this rise is caused by human activity, this rise is causing a rapid warming trend and this trend will continue unless CO2 levels stabilise. Contrarians still like to deny this, but the existence of this consensus is an indisputable fact.
Additionally, but with much less certainty, the general picture emerging from scientific research is that the kinds of temperature changes that may be in the near future (~50 years) will cause problems ranging…
illconsidered | October 15, 2009Check out WAG's simple, yet quintessential message on his Blog Action Day post, aptly titled "The only thing you need to know about global warming"
On a slightly related note, Matt Nisbet gets a guest post on C&L to talk about getting the public involved. And how does he use his brief chance to reach a very large audience of progressive minded but non-scienceblogy audience? He takes a cheap swipe at Chris Mooney and PZ Meyers as part of a long running in-fight and rambles on in jargon filled scientific mumbo-jumbo about "dimensions of knowledge".
Hmm..."those who can't, teach"...?
illconsidered | August 11, 2009At least this is the standard if you are Roger Pielke Jr and the accused is a member of Real Climate. When pressed as to how he knew an accusation of plagarism he was leveling was really true, in his own words:
if the authors provide evidence [...] I'll stand corrected. [...] Meantime, I am perfectly comfortable with the views expressed in this post.
This is how he defends his very serious accusation of plagarism against a commenter who expresses surprise at Pielke leveling such a charge with admitted lack of anything more than circumstantial evidence.
maybe they were alerted by one or more…
illconsidered | July 7, 2009Marc Morono (sick) breathlessly announces that Gavin Schmidt has finally admitted that weather is chaotic and GCMs can not model it.
And yes, that is about as shocking an admission as water is wet.
Here is the incriminating quote:
"The problem with climate prediction and projections going out to 2030 and 2050 is that we don't anticipate that they can be tested in the way you can test a weather forecast. It takes about 20 years to evaluate because there is so much unforced variability in the system which we can't predict -- the chaotic component of the climate system -- which is not…
illconsidered | June 26, 2009This has been an open tab in Firefox for a long time now, so I figure I had better just point people to it and be done with it...
James Hrynyshyn (love that last name, but only because computers have copy and paste!) has an interesting comparison of two interviews on Island of Doubt (note to self: add this to the blogroll). The first is Gavin Schmidt of RealClimate fame (oh yeah, he also works for some outfit called NASA GISS or something) being interviewed at Salon a few weeks ago. The second is an interview with Freeman Dyson on Yale's Environment 360.
Go have a look for some excerpts and…
illconsidered | June 3, 2009So nicely coinciding with a period in which I have no time, I have had a burst of over 100 comments in the last week, lately on the temperature record reliability attack article. (Yeah, I know it no PZ Meyers level of activity, but it is all relative, right?)
For the first time in my illustrious blogging career I have not even read them! (which I regret).
Did I miss anything interesting?