From: john@anasazi.com (John R. Moore)
Subject: Re: Media bias
Reply-To: john@anasazi.com
Organization: Anasazi Inc, Phoenix AZ USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 16:39:16 GMT

Keywords: 

In article <1992Jul23.031313.26992@seq.uncwil.edu> session@seq.uncwil.edu (Zack C. Sessions) writes:
]kjun@typhoon.atmos.colostate.edu (Pat Fitzpatrick) writes:
]
]>As an atmospheric scientist, I feel compelled to comment on this. 
]>Personally, I feel the Greenhouse Effect is a hoax. However, many
]>other colleagues will do everything and anything to prove it is
]>happening. Why? Lots of research money and grants, which is how
]>scientists survive. 
]
]You may be an atmospheric scientist, I don't know, but you sure don't
]sound like you are. The Greenhouse Effect is science which is pretty
]hard to refute. It has been proven in numerous laboratory experiments.
]All you say is you "feel" that it is a "hoax" and offer no evidence to
]back up such a claim other than the typical anti-research claim that
]all research opinions are driven by desires to continue funding. Try
]refuting the claim with some REAL science and not some OPINIONS.

Look, no one thinks the greenhouse effect is a hoax. Obviously this
gentleman was referring to the global warming hypothesis.

]Check out Climatic Change, Vol 16, pp 1-4. While it is true that Global
]Warming is in dispute, the Greenhouse Effect is NOT. And what is in
]dispute on Global Warming is not whether or not the Earth is warming,
]it is. The dispute is how much hotter it will probably get and what
]the possible consequences are.

There is considerable dispute about whether that warming is anthropogenic
or whether it is part of a natural trend.

]>In fact, this has caused my profession a credibility problem. There is a
]>fellow a few years ago who did research "proving" that an Ice Age was
]>coming (anyone remember this?) Suddenly, he's done an about face and
]>now says that global warming will occur. He swings with the current
]>doomsayer's!!! He also makes quite a bit of money on the lecture
]>circuit.
]
]You seem to be putting words in people's mouths. I know of no one who
]claimed ever to "PROVE" that an Ice Age was coming. If you are truely
]an atmospheric scientist then you'd be aware of two things: 1) that
]there have been several Ice Ages in the past at intervals of several
]tens of thousands of years, and 2) wild changes in climate which can
]be caused by other gradual climate changes can cause almost anything
]to happen, including BOTH an ice age and radical global warming.

There was a scare, similar to the global warming scare, about a new
ice age coming.

]
]>The main problem with Global Warming is that most of the conclusions
]>are based on computer simulations, or "models." A model APPROXIMATES
]>the equations of motion (in Calculus form) that describes the main
]>features of the atmosphere. There are numerous problems with models:
]
]Sorry, but you seem to be misinformed. While a large part of the Global
]Warming theory does rely on various models, the models are but one part
]of the equation. Other parts are 1) the Greenhouse Effect IS an obserseved
]phenomena, 2) man's production of known Greenhouse Gases has been increasing
]for the past 100 years, 3) observed levels of CO2 have been increasing
]ever since they have been measured, and 4) the average global temperature
]has been rising since it has been observed, over 100 years.

(1) The greenhouse effect may be observed, but whether anthropogenic global 
warming has been observed is a matter of dispute.

(2) yes, man's production of greenhouse gasses has been increasing for the
past 100 years.

(3) observed levels of CO2 have been increasing.

(4) average global temperature has NOT been rising over 100 years. If you
look at the temperature trend lines, and compare them to the CO2 concentrations,
the correlation is very poor. If you take what the models say about the last
100 years, they forecast far more warming than actually took place.

]You seem to be saying that climatologists are not capable of predicting
]future climates based on the failure of meteorologist's failure to accuratly
]predict the weather. Consider this analogy. Owners of a casino cannot
]predict which player will win the jackpot in a single game. However, they
]can accurately predict the percentage of the gamers waging will go to the
]house. Predicting weather is analogous to predicting the outcome of a single
]wager. Predicting climate changes is more like predicting the percentage
]of the house's long-term take. The ability (or lack of) to accurately
]predict short term weather is not a indicator to the ability to predict
]climate changes. There are different factors involved.

Sorry, but this is simply not true. Climate prediction is much more difficult
than you imply. There are powerful feedback effects that are poorly understood,
so in general prediction is extremely suspect. Notice that the global warming
models, as they have been refined, have greatly reduced the amount of warming
that they predict. Climate prediction is subject to effects that are just
as hard to model as local weather is, and is subject to similar limits on
its predictability. Climate modellers hope that some day, they will be
able to make some reasonable predictions. Today, it is all very
experimental.

]Sorry, but the temperature measurements of a single area like Mississippi
]are not enough to make valid conclusions of global warming. FWIW, the
]temperature where I live in NC has been increasing. Our temps are more
]in line with the observed average global temperatures. The first two
]years of the 1990s were the hottest years on record EVER recorded not
]only in NC, but in the world average also.

Don't forget that urban heat island effects have biased most of the
reporting stations in the northern hemisphere. When you subtract
out all the biases, you get perhaps a .5 degree C warming over the
last 100 years. Virtually all models predict quite a bit more. Furthermore,
as I said before, that warming did not correspond well to the CO2
concentrations.

-- 
John Moore NJ7E, 7525 Clearwater Pkwy, Scottsdale, AZ 85253  (602-951-9326)
john@anasazi.com ncar!noao!asuvax!anasaz!john anasaz!john@asuvax.eas.asu.edu
 - - Comment too controversial for management - Deleted :-) -
 - - Support ALL of the bill of rights, INCLUDING the 2nd amendment! - -
Newsgroups: alt.activism.d,soc.motss,talk.politics.misc,alt.individualism