Re: [math-fun] When liberals do science...

16 Jan 2004

      In a UNESCO Science journal they have an article on volcanic activity from
about 1700
onwards. It (like the CO2 graph) shows a linear increasing line with time.
Examined carefully, we see that there is next to no activity for several
years after both 1914 and 1940. This suggests that the graph is related to
the adequacy of the observations being made.

John McKay

From:	IN%"math-fun@mailman.xmission.com"  "math-fun" 16-JAN-2004 16:45:45.52
To:	IN%"math-fun@mailman.xmission.com"  "math-fun"
CC:	
Subj:	RE: [math-fun] When liberals do science...

Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 13:33:38 -0800 (PST)
From: Eugene Salamin <gene_salamin@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [math-fun] When liberals do science...
In-reply-to: <6.0.1.1.2.20040116103315.02d5d008@pop.pipeline.com>
Sender: math-fun-bounces+mckay=vax2.concordia.ca@mailman.xmission.com
To: math-fun <math-fun@mailman.xmission.com>
Errors-to: math-fun-bounces+mckay=vax2.concordia.ca@mailman.xmission.com
Reply-to: math-fun <math-fun@mailman.xmission.com>
Message-id: <20040116213338.60545.qmail@web40710.mail.yahoo.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Precedence: list
Original-recipient: rfc822;mckay@vax2.concordia.ca

--- Henry Baker <hbaker1@pipeline.com> wrote:
...
Aside from the deceptive graphing (see Tutte), my
problem with these alarmist graphs is that we know
nothing about what they mean.  Since we have only
been gathering data for 30 years or so, we have no
idea what the "natural range" for this variable is.
In fact, we have no idea what the natural range of
temperatures for the Earth is -- e.g., do we really
know what the mean temperature during the Roman Empire
was?
Have a look at the paper "Environmental Effects of Increased
Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide" by Arthur Robinson et. al., on-line at

http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p36.htm

The paper has a plot showing that temperatures were warmer than they
are today back around 1000 AD, and warmer yet around 500 BC and 1000
BC.  It seems plausible that the causes of that warm temperature are
operative today, though not as strongly.

Another interesting plot shows a close correlation (from 1750 to 2000)
between average temperature and solar magnetic cycle length.  As there
is no conceivable way human activity could have the slightest influence
on the sun, this does seem to put a good part of the blame for global
temperature variation upon the sun.

This paper was the basis of a petition, which gathered 17000
signatures, opposing the Kyoto treaty.
...
We don't know where CO2 comes from, or where it is
stored.  A recent article indicated that the ocean
stores enormous amounts of CO2, CO and other gasses.
I bought gas saving cars for years, but then discovered
that all my liberal friends (big donors to the Sierra
Club) drove gas-guzzling SUV's.
One known environmental effect of increased atmospheric CO2 is a surge
in the growth rate of trees.  Experiments show that when the CO2
reaches 600 ppm (which is Robinson's guess), we may expect the growth
rate to triple.  What we are doing is taking this carbon, sequestered
underground for a hundred million years, and returning it to the
biosphere.  Why are the tree-hugging Sierra Clubbers not pleased by
this prospect?
...
Scientists are paid to be alarmist -- that's how they
get funding -- e.g., looking for asteroids that might
hit the Earth.  But that doesn't mean that I'm going
to drop everything every time they scream that the sky
is falling.  Scientists have cried wolf about 10^6 times
too often, and they've used up all their credibility.
They've become yet another political lobbying group --
just look at any issue of Scientific American for the
past 10 years or so.
Yes.  A while ago the American Physical Society moved its headquarters
from New York City to College Park MD.  I suspect the reason was to
locate their lobbyists closer to Congress.  Bully for the American
Mathematical Society; they've remained in Providence RI.
...
At 09:23 AM 1/16/2004, Ed Pegg Jr wrote:
...
Can you laugh away this graph?
http://www.cmdl.noaa.gov/ccgg/figures/co2obs.jpg
Eventually, we're going to find out what happens
when this graph hits 420, or higher.  A conservative,
in my mind, would be happy with the current levels
of carbon dioxide, and would not want to take the
risk of ever higher levels.
--Ed Pegg Jr.
--- Eugene Salamin <gene_salamin@yahoo.com> wrote:
...
This little chuckle pales in comparison to the damage done by the
pervasive belief that nuclear power is unsafe, or that human
activity
is casusing global temperatures increases.
Gene
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus

_______________________________________________
math-fun mailing list
math-fun@mailman.xmission.com
http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/math-fun

MCKAY＠vax2.concordia.ca

tags

participants (1)