[LINK] Scientists offered cash to dispute climate study

[Kim Holburn]

On 2007/Feb/05, at 4:50 AM, Stewart Fist wrote:
> We need to be careful with terminology in this discussion, because  
> misuse of
> words is often distorting real scientific objections. There's still  
> plenty
> of room for scientific disputes.
>
> • Climate change doesn't just mean global warming. It has many  
> different
> aspects.
> 1. Temperature - warming, cooling, or staying the same
> 2. Stability - is the climate change of the kind we can adapt to,  
> or does it
> change month by month
> 3. Predictable -  does the current trend predict the future
> 4. Rainfall - do higher temperatures mean greater or less rainfall,  
> and
> where.
> 5. Ocean levels.

You forgot Ocean ph levels.

Also as the world gets filled up any change to things like food  
production and disease vectors can affect a lot of people.

> Most climatologists would say that, despite the current trend to  
> warming,
> that cooling had the potential for the greatest impact.

They just haven't thought it through.  Warming always seemed like it  
wouldn't be so bad.

> Stability is also disputed: the Vikings in small open boats made their
> greatest voyages during a period of 4 degrees of global warmth.
>
> Rainfall. Some scientist still appear to be saying that (provided the
> Antarctic continent remains well below freezing) that extra warmth  
> in the
> tropics will increase evaporation and result in greater snow  
> deposits in
> Antarctica. Others say it will be less.
>
>  And remember that the loss of floating ice makes no difference to sea
> levels

No but it makes a difference to warming.  Ice covered oceans absorb  
much less light.  (Of course that has less effect at the poles.)  I  
believe the biggest part of sea level rise is said to be due to  
thermal expansion of the ocean not ice melting. <http://www.grida.no/ 
climate/vital/19.htm>  The disappearance of ice caps and glaciers is  
a significant indication of warming though.

> The main risk appears to be the potential for changing the flow of  
> the Gulf
> Stream which would seriously effect North Europe (it probably  
> caused the
> Little Ice Ages)

Yes, turning off the ocean conveyor belt is predicted to have  
dramatic effects.

> • Global Warming doesn't mean Greenhouse.
> The Greenhouse effect is clearly one factor, but the consensus  
> still appears
> to be that one-third or so comes from other sources. They can't  
> agree on
> what, or how, as far as I can see.  Over the last few thousand  
> years before
> CO2 became a major factor we've had changes of temperature upwards  
> by about
> 4 degrees C, and down by about the same amount.

Not usually so suddenly, although the "year without winter" was  
pretty sudden.

> I think we've always got to be careful about uncritically accepting  
> ideas
> that are currently fashionable.  But I also believe strongly in the
> precautionary principle.

Yes but it also pays to watch the money-trail of global warming deniers.

Kim

--
Kim Holburn
IT Network & Security Consultant
Ph: +39 06 855 4294  M: +39 3342707610
mailto:kim at holburn.net  aim://kimholburn
skype://kholburn - PGP Public Key on request

Democracy imposed from without is the severest form of tyranny.
                           -- Lloyd Biggle, Jr. Analog, Apr 1961