Comments on: The climate science translation guide http://www.darkoptimism.org/2008/09/03/the-climate-science-translation-guide/ A better future for a troubled world Sun, 07 Mar 2010 12:57:08 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Toby http://www.darkoptimism.org/2008/09/03/the-climate-science-translation-guide/comment-page-1/#comment-9690 Toby Mon, 11 Jan 2010 23:02:37 +0000 http://www.darkoptimism.org/?p=53#comment-9690 Ever heard of Beer–Lambert law ? If you have, guess you forgot to mention it. If not, please look it up. Ever heard of Beer–Lambert law ? If you have, guess you forgot to mention it. If not, please look it up.

]]> By: Transition Times :: Transition Times » Blog Archive » Heroes and Villains in Copenhagen, and Beyond http://www.darkoptimism.org/2008/09/03/the-climate-science-translation-guide/comment-page-1/#comment-9635 Transition Times :: Transition Times » Blog Archive » Heroes and Villains in Copenhagen, and Beyond Sun, 10 Jan 2010 16:37:25 +0000 http://www.darkoptimism.org/?p=53#comment-9635 [...] below, but to cut a long story short, nothing was agreed that comes remotely close to addressing the scale of our climate challenge. Indeed, as I and many others have been pointing out for months, an agreement in line with climate [...] [...] below, but to cut a long story short, nothing was agreed that comes remotely close to addressing the scale of our climate challenge. Indeed, as I and many others have been pointing out for months, an agreement in line with climate [...]

]]> By: Shaun Chamberlin http://www.darkoptimism.org/2008/09/03/the-climate-science-translation-guide/comment-page-1/#comment-8700 Shaun Chamberlin Mon, 14 Dec 2009 18:40:19 +0000 http://www.darkoptimism.org/?p=53#comment-8700 @David: Indeed. The trend line fit issue is nicely described at: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/10/a-warming-pause/ - <i>"Even the highly “cherry-picked” 11-year period starting with the warm 1998 and ending with the cold 2008 still shows a warming trend of 0.11 ºC per decade (which may surprise some lay people who tend to connect the end points, rather than include all ten data points into a proper trend calculation)"</i> @jojoba: Water vapour: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2005/04/water-vapour-feedback-or-forcing/ @wayne: We all know the carbon trading schemes have little to do with addressing climate change, and a great deal to do with making money, so I don't imagine that they'd change at all. But then of <a href="http://www.thecornerhouse.org.uk/pdf/document/carbonDDlow.pdf" rel="nofollow">all the problems with carbon trading</a>, that one ain't too likely to come up. One cool year does not a trend reversal make: <img src="http://i148.photobucket.com/albums/s17/Shaunus4/Used%20pictures/GlobalTempMyLifetime.jpg" alt="My Lifetime" width=440px/> @Joe Jenkins: Yes, perhaps it is intuitively surprising, but it is easily testable, and has been repeatedly confirmed. For a nice replicable greenhouse gas test see: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8394168.stm (you'll have to try it yourself to see the difference in effect with different concentrations) It is perhaps just as counter-intuitive that hydrogen cyanide at a concentration of 3500 ppm will kill a human in around a minute, but nonetheless, it will. Don't try that one yourself! http://xkcd.com/675/ @David: Indeed. The trend line fit issue is nicely described at: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/10/a-warming-pause/ – “Even the highly “cherry-picked” 11-year period starting with the warm 1998 and ending with the cold 2008 still shows a warming trend of 0.11 ºC per decade (which may surprise some lay people who tend to connect the end points, rather than include all ten data points into a proper trend calculation)”

@jojoba: Water vapour: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2005/04/water-vapour-feedback-or-forcing/

@wayne: We all know the carbon trading schemes have little to do with addressing climate change, and a great deal to do with making money, so I don’t imagine that they’d change at all. But then of all the problems with carbon trading, that one ain’t too likely to come up. One cool year does not a trend reversal make:
My Lifetime

@Joe Jenkins: Yes, perhaps it is intuitively surprising, but it is easily testable, and has been repeatedly confirmed. For a nice replicable greenhouse gas test see:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8394168.stm (you’ll have to try it yourself to see the difference in effect with different concentrations)
It is perhaps just as counter-intuitive that hydrogen cyanide at a concentration of 3500 ppm will kill a human in around a minute, but nonetheless, it will. Don’t try that one yourself!
http://xkcd.com/675/

]]> By: Joe Jenkins http://www.darkoptimism.org/2008/09/03/the-climate-science-translation-guide/comment-page-1/#comment-8669 Joe Jenkins Mon, 14 Dec 2009 02:08:51 +0000 http://www.darkoptimism.org/?p=53#comment-8669 Does 350 ppm mean that there are 3.5 CO2 molecules for every 10,000 air molecules. If so, it seems odd that 3.5 molecules out of 10,000 would have any appreciable effect on our climate. Answer please. Does 350 ppm mean that there are 3.5 CO2 molecules for every 10,000 air molecules. If so, it seems odd that 3.5 molecules out of 10,000 would have any appreciable effect on our climate. Answer please.

]]> By: wayne http://www.darkoptimism.org/2008/09/03/the-climate-science-translation-guide/comment-page-1/#comment-8482 wayne Tue, 08 Dec 2009 13:43:15 +0000 http://www.darkoptimism.org/?p=53#comment-8482 Woops. Typo, global not gobal. Does anyone know how this is to be adjusted, or no adjustment at all? Woops. Typo, global not gobal.

Does anyone know how this is to be adjusted, or no adjustment at all?

]]> By: wayne http://www.darkoptimism.org/2008/09/03/the-climate-science-translation-guide/comment-page-1/#comment-8481 wayne Tue, 08 Dec 2009 13:36:42 +0000 http://www.darkoptimism.org/?p=53#comment-8481 What will happen if gobal temperature does not rise in the next 30 years as CO2 climbs higher? Adjustments by U.N. to the markets? What will happen if gobal temperature does not rise in the next 30 years as CO2 climbs higher?

Adjustments by U.N. to the markets?

]]> By: Green Media Environments | Engaging across blogging divides http://www.darkoptimism.org/2008/09/03/the-climate-science-translation-guide/comment-page-1/#comment-3581 Green Media Environments | Engaging across blogging divides Thu, 21 May 2009 07:07:38 +0000 http://www.darkoptimism.org/?p=53#comment-3581 [...] kicked into gear. It seems that her article (or possibly some comments from Doc Bud on a post from Dark Optimism) were picked up by Australia’s Herald Sun columnist Andrew Bolt, and an Englishman’s [...] [...] kicked into gear. It seems that her article (or possibly some comments from Doc Bud on a post from Dark Optimism) were picked up by Australia’s Herald Sun columnist Andrew Bolt, and an Englishman’s [...]

]]> By: jojoba http://www.darkoptimism.org/2008/09/03/the-climate-science-translation-guide/comment-page-1/#comment-1597 jojoba Sat, 28 Feb 2009 14:08:10 +0000 http://www.darkoptimism.org/?p=53#comment-1597 well, u assume sun radiation is constant and water vapour figures NOT as a greenhouse gas clouds are there only as a cooling factor, that is albedo, reflecting solar radiation back into space. riding my bicicle to the job every morning, i can FEEL the difference between a cloudy night and a cloud free night sky. it is BIG so, back to the drawing board, and try to establish what could cause variation in the H2O concentration in the athmosfere my 2c well, u assume sun radiation is constant
and water vapour figures NOT as a greenhouse gas
clouds are there only as a cooling factor, that is albedo, reflecting solar radiation back into space.
riding my bicicle to the job every morning, i can FEEL the difference between a cloudy night and a cloud free night sky.
it is BIG

so, back to the drawing board, and try to establish what could cause variation in the H2O concentration in the athmosfere

my 2c

]]> By: David / PlanetThoughts http://www.darkoptimism.org/2008/09/03/the-climate-science-translation-guide/comment-page-1/#comment-1551 David / PlanetThoughts Thu, 19 Feb 2009 09:40:19 +0000 http://www.darkoptimism.org/?p=53#comment-1551 Just found this article. I have noticed in a number of discussions from a number of people that they all use very similar phrases and say that the world has been cooling since 1998. Clearly it is based on truncating the starting and ending points to show a net drop in the sine-wave-like patterns of global temperature. But the fact that they have studied the same false science and take it for reality is clear. Those who care enough to be open to truth would quickly understand the need for a best-fit line, or some of the other analyses about time intervals to use for accuracy in looking at trends. But I think at that point of intellectual challenge, they would be capable of handling it but with mental stress - which is where the propoganda comes and takes over as it is easier to deny than to grapple with the details of the science and what they imply. Just found this article. I have noticed in a number of discussions from a number of people that they all use very similar phrases and say that the world has been cooling since 1998. Clearly it is based on truncating the starting and ending points to show a net drop in the sine-wave-like patterns of global temperature. But the fact that they have studied the same false science and take it for reality is clear. Those who care enough to be open to truth would quickly understand the need for a best-fit line, or some of the other analyses about time intervals to use for accuracy in looking at trends. But I think at that point of intellectual challenge, they would be capable of handling it but with mental stress – which is where the propoganda comes and takes over as it is easier to deny than to grapple with the details of the science and what they imply.

]]> By: Shaun Chamberlin http://www.darkoptimism.org/2008/09/03/the-climate-science-translation-guide/comment-page-1/#comment-1498 Shaun Chamberlin Wed, 21 Jan 2009 20:17:22 +0000 http://www.darkoptimism.org/?p=53#comment-1498 Thanks Skeptic, I quite agree, which is why I stopped a couple of months back. I don't believe that DocBud was interested in uncovering the truth, and I figured anyone with a genuine interest can by now see easily enough that his claims (e.g. that in terms of global temperature "we are back to where we were in the 1980s") evaporated as soon as evidence was supplied. Thanks Skeptic, I quite agree, which is why I stopped a couple of months back. I don’t believe that DocBud was interested in uncovering the truth, and I figured anyone with a genuine interest can by now see easily enough that his claims (e.g. that in terms of global temperature “we are back to where we were in the 1980s”) evaporated as soon as evidence was supplied.

]]>