Re: [asa] Re: Confirmation bias among GW dissenters, but ...

Fred wrote

> I was curious, in the interest of understanding how much credence to give
> any of the dissenters’ claims: do the temporary flat-to-cooling mean global
> temperatures asserted by Swanson and Tsonis square with anything put out by
> the IPCC? Is this temporary global cooling (or at least “lukewarmness”)
> generally accepted?
>
I would tend to doubt it. I have reviewed the resumes of the
contributors to realclimate.org and they seem to be mainly atmospheric
scientists (I need to look more thoroughly at a couple of them)
Consequently they concentrate on the CO2 concentration. (I haven't yet
looked at the resumes of the IPCC members -- that's a much bigger job)
There is another line of analysis that gives more attention to solar
irradiance. In particular periods of increased sunspot activity
contribute to rising temperatures in the atmosphere. Glenn Morton has
pointed out that there has been very little sunspot activity for a
number of years, and that seems to correspond to a cooling cycle.
Geologists (some of them anyway) are not as likely to support AGW,
because there have been times in the past where CO2 concentration as
much higher than it is today. I posted a review on my blog of some
papers on an analysis that find resonant like behavior between the
sun and the earth that they claim has contributed much more to global
warming than the 0.1% variation in solar irradince. That review is at
www.bricolagia.blogspot.com. None of this is to say that AGW is not
happening -- just a warning that there re more factors at work than
are being typically discussed.

On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 5:18 PM, <fred@day-star.org> wrote:
> Thank you for the link to that Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Burgy.  Sorry I
> didn’t give a citation (other than the link) for the anti-IPCC claims: the
> email was composed by a conservative friend who apparently feels called to
> distribute colorful nuggets that support a number of items on his political
> agenda (to everyone on his email list).  Thanks to Janice for providing an
> example of the same.
>
> Burgy’s article link was helpful for my question.  The best I can piece
> together, to summarize:  At least some researchers (Tsonis and Swanson) see
> evidence for a temporary superposition of global cooling (with mean temps
> flat since 2001 and possibly dropping over the next few decades).  However,
> even they believe that the tremendous increase in human-produced carbon
> emissions is sure to have the greater, long-range effect on global
> temperatures.
>
> I was curious, in the interest of understanding how much credence to give
> any of the dissenters’ claims: do the temporary flat-to-cooling mean global
> temperatures asserted by Swanson and Tsonis square with anything put out by
> the IPCC?  Is this temporary global cooling (or at least “lukewarmness”)
> generally accepted?
>
> Fred
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [SPAM] Re: [asa] Confirmation bias among GW dissenters, but
> ...
> From: "John Burgeson (ASA member)" <hossradbourne@gmail.com>
> Date: Mon, April 27, 2009 12:56 pm
> To: fred@day-star.org
> Cc: asa@calvin.edu
>
> The report Fred is talking about is easily googled. Fred failed to
> give a citation, which is a common (but reprehensible) tactic of many
> in the anti-IPCC crowd.
>
> The researchers in this case, Tsonis and Swanson, have said publically
> that their work is being seriously mis-interpreted.
>
> Also, a spokesman for the libertarian Cato Institute said the
> organization is using the work of Swanson and Tsonis to buttress
> claims in an upcoming advertisement that says scientific debate over
> global warming is not settled. Apparently, scientific integrity is not
> a foundational principle of this particular organization.
>
> A link to one news report on this is at
>
> http://www.jsonline.com/news/wisconsin/41870692.html
>
> There are others.
>
> It does the anti-IPCC crowd no good to lie. It reminds me of some of
> the ICR tactics in the past.
>
> Burgy
>
> On 4/27/09, fred@day-star.org <fred@day-star.org> wrote:
>> The two things I know for sure about global warming are that it’s on the
>> minds of the educated public as a major problem demanding action, and that
>> there’s a large element of Christian conservatives who only take seriously
>> the evidence against it. How seriously can I take the following claims
>> that
>> “there has been no global warming for at least a decade,” and “we are in a
>> cooling trend” that is predicted to last another 20 or 30 years?
>>
>> Fred
>>
>>
>> Typical excerpt from a recent GW dissenter's mass email:
>> UK’s Christopher Monckton is a former science advisor to the Prime
>> Minister.
>> He was invited by the Republicans to speak after Al Gore’s testimony about
>> “Global Warming” last week. But at the last minute the Democrat majority
>> cancelled his appearance. No dissenting voice was to be permitted on Earth
>> Day. Monckton said,
>>
>> “Waxman knows there has been no 'global warming' for at least a decade.
>> Waxman knows there has been seven and a half years' global cooling. Waxman
>> knows that, in the words of the UK High Court judge who condemned Gore's
>> mawkish movie as materially, seriously, serially inaccurate, 'the
>> Armageddon
>> scenario that he depicts is not based on any scientific view”.
>>
>>
>> http://www.climatedepot.com/a/429/Report-Democrats-Refuse-to-Allow-Skeptic-to-Testify-Alongside-Gore-At-Congressional-Hearing
>>
>> The truth is, C02 is not enough of a tail to wag the climate dog. “Green
>> House Gases” are abundant in our atmosphere, the greatest is water vapor.
>> But there are many other factors to climate that together far outweigh any
>> C02 effect (not the least of which is cyclical changes in the Sun). Two
>> months ago the University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, released an in-depth
>> study on Global Warming. If any institution “wanted” there to be evidence
>> for global warming, this the one. Yet their report admitted we are in a
>> cooling trend, and further predicted that it will last another 20 to 30
>> years. They then claimed that after 30 years of cooling, global warming
>> would come back with a vengeance! But the truth is we’re cooling now, the
>> models predicting warming have been falsified, and these folks haven’t a
>> clue as to what the climate will be doing 3 decades from now.
>>
>> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with "unsubscribe
>> asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>
>
> --
> Burgy
>
> www.burgy.50megs.com
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with "unsubscribe
> asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

-- 
William E (Bill) Hamilton Jr., Ph.D.
Member American Scientific Affiliation
Austin, TX
248 821 8156
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.