| Science Forum Index » Environment Forum » Ron Bailey says: "Betting on Climate Change: It's time to pu |
|
Page 1 of 1 |
|
| Author |
Message |
| James Annan |
 Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 8:27 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Ron Bailey has written an article in Reason.com about the "betting on
climate change" idea. It was an earlier article by the same author
which originally publicised Lindzen's "challenge".
http://www.reason.com/rb/rb060805.shtml
Despite his obvious embarassment at the reluctance of the sceptics to
pony up, he still tries to give the article a sceptical spin, and in
doing so makes a few mistakes. I've written some commentary at
http://julesandjames.blogspot.com/2005/06/reason-betting-on-climate-change-its.html
Despite the obvious bias in his article, I can't criticise his call for
the septics to "put up or shut up". I look forward to the flood of
offers :-)
James |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| David Ball |
| Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 9:27 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On 8 Jun 2005 19:27:38 -0700, "James Annan"
<still_the_same_me@hotmail.com> wrote:
[quote:aff50d239a]Ron Bailey has written an article in Reason.com about the "betting on
climate change" idea. It was an earlier article by the same author
which originally publicised Lindzen's "challenge".
http://www.reason.com/rb/rb060805.shtml
Despite his obvious embarassment at the reluctance of the sceptics to
pony up, he still tries to give the article a sceptical spin, and in
doing so makes a few mistakes. I've written some commentary at
http://julesandjames.blogspot.com/2005/06/reason-betting-on-climate-change-its.html
Despite the obvious bias in his article, I can't criticise his call for
the septics to "put up or shut up". I look forward to the flood of
offers :-)
No doubt Schulin is running out to the bank machine at this[/quote:aff50d239a]
very moment in an attempt to find out how many shekels he can lay on
the line to back up his position. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Athiest 4 Bush |
| Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 9:29 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
James Annan wrote:
[quote:62d023ceee]Ron Bailey has written an article in Reason.com about the "betting on
climate change" idea. It was an earlier article by the same author
which originally publicised Lindzen's "challenge".
http://www.reason.com/rb/rb060805.shtml
Despite his obvious embarassment at the reluctance of the sceptics to
pony up, he still tries to give the article a sceptical spin, and in
doing so makes a few mistakes. I've written some commentary at
http://julesandjames.blogspot.com/2005/06/reason-betting-on-climate-change-its.html
Despite the obvious bias in his article, I can't criticise his call for
the septics to "put up or shut up". I look forward to the flood of
offers 
[/quote:62d023ceee]
It's interesting for me to note that in your blog you site
temperature rise for the next century of
..1 to .2 C/decade -- 1C per century at the low end.
Strangely enough, Lindzen has indicated that he believes CO2 doubling
would lead to a temperature increase of around 1.3C.
http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/reg15n2j.html
So despite your bluster ( and Lindzen's ) you are willing to bet
that global warming will be even less than Lindzen indicates.
--
When the Rapture comes, can I have your car?
When global warming comes, can I have your coat? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| James Annan |
| Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 9:55 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Athiest 4 Bush wrote:
[quote:1251085174]It's interesting for me to note that in your blog you site
temperature rise for the next century of
.1 to .2 C/decade -- 1C per century at the low end.
[/quote:1251085174]
No I don't. The IPCC (which I quote, and agree with) says that
"anthropogenic warming is likely to lie in the range of 0.1 to 0.2°C
per decade over the next few decades". Beyond "the next few decades",
it depends on how much CO2 and other GHGs etc change. If we pump out a
lot more CO2 and don't also shade the earth with aerosols or some
convenient volcanoes (like El Chichon annd Pinatubo) then we can
certainly expect accelerated warming later on. But for now, while
people still try to deny the significant warming that will happen on
the decadal time scale, it seems sensible to pluck the low-hanging
fruit first.
[quote:1251085174]Strangely enough, Lindzen has indicated that he believes CO2 doubling
would lead to a temperature increase of around 1.3C.
http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/reg15n2j.html
So despite your bluster ( and Lindzen's ) you are willing to bet
that global warming will be even less than Lindzen indicates.
[/quote:1251085174]
Equilibrium response to CO2 doubling is not the same thing as a 100
year forecast! CO2 is only rising at about 0.5% pa, and the climate
response lags that due to thermal inertia.
Lindzen is already on record as saying that he thinks cooling v warming
on the 20 year time scale is about a 50-50 chance, and he seems to have
reaffirmed that view in the new Reason.com article. If you can
reconcile that with demands for 50:1 odds on a warming v cooling bet,
you are better at doublethink than I am, that's for sure.
James |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Roger Coppock |
| Posted: Thu Jun 09, 2005 12:31 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
The current slope of the GISS land and sea global mean
temperature is .2 K/Decade. This Is is up from .04 K/Decade
120 years ago, with most of the acceleration since
1940. Dr. Lindzen, at 1.3 K per century, is predicting
decelerating trends.
The fossil fools embarrass themselves. They are willing
to bet the future of the planet, but not their own money,
on their lies. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Thu Jun 09, 2005 2:51 am |
|
|
|
|
James Annan <still_the_same_me@hotmail.com> wrote:
[quote:b00a999e7e]Ron Bailey has written an article in Reason.com about the "betting on
climate change" idea. It was an earlier article by the same author
which originally publicised Lindzen's "challenge".
http://www.reason.com/rb/rb060805.shtml
Despite his obvious embarassment at the reluctance of the sceptics to
pony up, he still tries to give the article a sceptical spin, and in
doing so makes a few mistakes.
[/quote:b00a999e7e]
One of which is to say:
"when British Antarctic Survey climate modeler William Connelley came
across Lindzen while traveling in Europe, he asked him about the bet.
Lindzen told Connelley that I had misquoted him."
So apart from misspelling my name (which everyone does...) this is
completely wrong. I've never met L (I heard him talk about Iris at EGU
a few years back, but thats it).
Following the trail of blogs from Bailey, it looks like he has read QS
in a bit of a hurry.
-W.
--
William M Connolley | wmc@bas.ac.uk | http://www.antarctica.ac.uk/met/wmc/
Climate Modeller, British Antarctic Survey | Disclaimer: I speak for myself
I'm a .signature virus! copy me into your .signature file & help me spread! |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
