Comments on: Heartland Climate Conference Summary http://wmbriggs.com/blog/2008/03/05/heartland-climate-conference-summary/ "All manner of statistical analyses cheerfully undertaken." Fri, 04 Jul 2008 19:20:38 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.2 by: TCO http://wmbriggs.com/blog/2008/03/05/heartland-climate-conference-summary/#comment-4802 Mon, 05 May 2008 01:55:26 +0000 http://wmbriggs.com/blog/2008/03/05/heartland-climate-conference-summary/#comment-4802 The editorial states a lot of positions without developing the supports. But at least you're clear that it is an editorial. I'm so bummed that you were at Heartland. What did you think of the old warhorses? How many had a spark of genius? How many would you follow into examination of a difficult problem with no political overtones (say an engineering examination of a new phenomenon)? How many had publication practices and how many were blog warriors like Watts? (Segue) What is your over/under on temp sensativity of doubling CO2? IOW, the value at which you are indifferent which side of the bet you get stuck with? The editorial states a lot of positions without developing the supports. But at least you’re clear that it is an editorial.

I’m so bummed that you were at Heartland. What did you think of the old warhorses? How many had a spark of genius? How many would you follow into examination of a difficult problem with no political overtones (say an engineering examination of a new phenomenon)? How many had publication practices and how many were blog warriors like Watts?

(Segue) What is your over/under on temp sensativity of doubling CO2? IOW, the value at which you are indifferent which side of the bet you get stuck with?

]]> by: Larry Barr http://wmbriggs.com/blog/2008/03/05/heartland-climate-conference-summary/#comment-1369 Mon, 17 Mar 2008 13:49:54 +0000 http://wmbriggs.com/blog/2008/03/05/heartland-climate-conference-summary/#comment-1369 Having a background in statistics (B.S. Business Probability and Statistics and some postgrad work) I am all to familiar with the "layman's" acceptance of model output as fact. But my main reason for commenting relates to your second paragraph. I have attempted on many occasions to point out to certain alarmists that a person's sources of funding does not, in and of itself, mean the person's positions were "bought" or are wrong. It becomes even more annoying when you attempt to put the shoe on the other foot and question the financial sources of the "alarmists", which, for some reason, seems to have no relevence what so ever to their followers. Thank you for the article. Cheers! Having a background in statistics (B.S. Business Probability and Statistics and some postgrad work) I am all to familiar with the “layman’s” acceptance of model output as fact.

But my main reason for commenting relates to your second paragraph. I have attempted on many occasions to point out to certain alarmists that a person’s sources of funding does not, in and of itself, mean the person’s positions were “bought” or are wrong. It becomes even more annoying when you attempt to put the shoe on the other foot and question the financial sources of the “alarmists”, which, for some reason, seems to have no relevence what so ever to their followers.

Thank you for the article. Cheers!

]]> by: Frank O'Dwyer http://wmbriggs.com/blog/2008/03/05/heartland-climate-conference-summary/#comment-1114 Sat, 08 Mar 2008 17:59:09 +0000 http://wmbriggs.com/blog/2008/03/05/heartland-climate-conference-summary/#comment-1114 "It is absolutely clear that mankind is responsible for a portion of the carbon dioxide increase. What most people—not climatologists, but others—do not know is that this portion is only a fraction of the increase." What? That statement could use some support, since climatologists say that mankind is responsible for all of the increase. For example see <a href="http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=160" rel="nofollow">here</a>. “It is absolutely clear that mankind is responsible for a portion of the carbon dioxide increase. What most people—not climatologists, but others—do not know is that this portion is only a fraction of the increase.”

What? That statement could use some support, since climatologists say that mankind is responsible for all of the increase. For example see here.

]]> by: Briggs http://wmbriggs.com/blog/2008/03/05/heartland-climate-conference-summary/#comment-1091 Fri, 07 Mar 2008 12:42:37 +0000 http://wmbriggs.com/blog/2008/03/05/heartland-climate-conference-summary/#comment-1091 Bernie, No, I didn't. In fact, just yesterday afternoon I downloaded his paper from the Q.J. of the Hungarian Meteorological Service. Haven't read it yet, but will soon. Matt Bernie,

No, I didn’t. In fact, just yesterday afternoon I downloaded his paper from the Q.J. of the Hungarian Meteorological Service. Haven’t read it yet, but will soon.

Matt

]]> by: Bernie http://wmbriggs.com/blog/2008/03/05/heartland-climate-conference-summary/#comment-1090 Fri, 07 Mar 2008 12:10:08 +0000 http://wmbriggs.com/blog/2008/03/05/heartland-climate-conference-summary/#comment-1090 Matt: Did you hear Dr. Miskolczi's talk? He was kind enough to send me a copy of his presentation, but alas the math is beyond me. However, the point he makes seems to be stunning: Is the standard CO2 forcing estimate really based on a mis-specified equation from 1926 that nobody until he has re-examined? Can you comment? Matt:
Did you hear Dr. Miskolczi’s talk? He was kind enough to send me a copy of his presentation, but alas the math is beyond me. However, the point he makes seems to be stunning: Is the standard CO2 forcing estimate really based on a mis-specified equation from 1926 that nobody until he has re-examined? Can you comment?

]]> by: Johnny Lucid http://wmbriggs.com/blog/2008/03/05/heartland-climate-conference-summary/#comment-1082 Fri, 07 Mar 2008 02:45:04 +0000 http://wmbriggs.com/blog/2008/03/05/heartland-climate-conference-summary/#comment-1082 A measured and therefore splendid editorial, Mr. Briggs. Given the uncertainties of AGW and "climate change," i read your essay as a call for greater humility about how much "we" do NOT know. Well done and best of luck to you, sir. A measured and therefore splendid editorial, Mr. Briggs. Given the uncertainties of AGW and “climate change,” i read your essay as a call for greater humility about how much “we” do NOT know. Well done and best of luck to you, sir.

]]> by: John Lang http://wmbriggs.com/blog/2008/03/05/heartland-climate-conference-summary/#comment-1079 Fri, 07 Mar 2008 01:00:34 +0000 http://wmbriggs.com/blog/2008/03/05/heartland-climate-conference-summary/#comment-1079 The hurricane people (some of them that is) will be coming after you hard when your paper is published. Just a warming if you needed one. The hurricane people (some of them that is) will be coming after you hard when your paper is published. Just a warming if you needed one.

]]> by: Mike Bentley http://wmbriggs.com/blog/2008/03/05/heartland-climate-conference-summary/#comment-1068 Thu, 06 Mar 2008 16:04:21 +0000 http://wmbriggs.com/blog/2008/03/05/heartland-climate-conference-summary/#comment-1068 Well written and well reasoned. As a retired telephone engineer and instructor I've often talked about "engineering arrogance". It seems the same illness infects those dealing with climates. The problem is this is not the explosion of a space shuttle or the sinking of a ship, it is the death (if some comments are correct) of thousands of people and the impoverishment of those that would help them. I suppose all we can do is continue to explore the subject, hope our pre-conceived notions are validated, and continue to do good science and math. Well written and well reasoned. As a retired telephone engineer and instructor I’ve often talked about “engineering arrogance”. It seems the same illness infects those dealing with climates. The problem is this is not the explosion of a space shuttle or the sinking of a ship, it is the death (if some comments are correct) of thousands of people and the impoverishment of those that would help them.

I suppose all we can do is continue to explore the subject, hope our pre-conceived notions are validated, and continue to do good science and math.

]]> by: Whispers in the airstreams » Blog Archive http://wmbriggs.com/blog/2008/03/05/heartland-climate-conference-summary/#comment-1051 Wed, 05 Mar 2008 22:22:10 +0000 http://wmbriggs.com/blog/2008/03/05/heartland-climate-conference-summary/#comment-1051 [...] 2008 International Conference on Climate Change was formed to take a look at the anthropogenic global warming question. Since it did not toe the line on the political hysteria, it was itself a stimulant of interesting behaviors. A statistician provides his summary from attending the conference. Too many people are too confident about too many things. That was the simple message of the Heartland conference, and one that I hope sinks in. - Wm Briggs. [...] […] 2008 International Conference on Climate Change was formed to take a look at the anthropogenic global warming question. Since it did not toe the line on the political hysteria, it was itself a stimulant of interesting behaviors. A statistician provides his summary from attending the conference. Too many people are too confident about too many things. That was the simple message of the Heartland conference, and one that I hope sinks in. - Wm Briggs. […]

]]> by: Sylvain http://wmbriggs.com/blog/2008/03/05/heartland-climate-conference-summary/#comment-1046 Wed, 05 Mar 2008 19:25:44 +0000 http://wmbriggs.com/blog/2008/03/05/heartland-climate-conference-summary/#comment-1046 Pierre For the moment alarmist wish to put your money where their mouth is. Alot safer this way. Pierre

For the moment alarmist wish to put your money where their mouth is. Alot safer this way.

]]>