Randy Isaac wrote:
> Don,
> This is a good time to remind everyone of the difference between
> climate and weather. No climate model will predict the weather for any
> month. One monthly fluctuation says nothing about climate.
> You say you don't trust any global climate model. I recently
> summarized the oceanic data that showed rather convincingly independent
> from any of the global climate models that we have an anthropogenic
> source of doubling of atmospheric carbon and that the equilibrium global
> temperature is about 3C warmer than we have it today. Skepticism of
> models is no longer an excuse for being a GW skeptic.
>
Randy
OK I think most of us agree that a month's average weather is not
climate. My question is how long a period is required before the
average would be considered to be climate? One season (3mths), a year,
five years, ten years?
Did you post the summary on oceanic data? I looked for it over the last
few months and did not find anything.
I assume in your last sentence that you mean:
"Skepticism of models is no longer an excuse for being a skeptic that GW
is mainly caused by anthropogenic effects."
GW can be detected simply by looking at climate records and is totally
independent of the models. The models only have to do with determining
the cause(s).
Don
As I have argued before on the list, even if you are skeptical about
anthropogenic causes of GW, that many of the remediations in any
sensible scheme are shared with reducing use of oil/energy and with
reducing pollution in cities.
Dave W (CSCA)
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Feb 29 09:50:41 2008
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Feb 29 2008 - 09:50:41 EST