Comments on: Misleading Headlines

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 28 Sep 2005 21:28:17 +0000

smokers

girls breast young tits preggo smoking black or white pregnant bikini latina ass voyeur video fat teen sex massive cocks latinas with huge tits and ass wired pussy hot anime girls nude babes mother son gay cum shot golden showers we live together anime...

By: odograph

odograph — Sat, 17 Sep 2005 20:26:44 +0000

I'm a big cynic these days. I don't think any specific measure of certainty is required in politics, just a quick check of the party's position.

By: Anderson

Anderson — Sat, 17 Sep 2005 18:57:54 +0000

I think a real scientist would attempt to describe the uncertainty. Only a âpolicy hogâ would be â¦ certain. We can say that scientists should never be "certain," but 99.999% probability is close enough for government work, as they say. The above reasoning resembles that by which "intelligent design" is inflicted upon students.

By: Deinonychus antirrhopus

Deinonychus antirrhopus — Sat, 17 Sep 2005 18:13:01 +0000

More on Hurricanes and Global Warming

In the comments to my post on the misleading headlines trying to tie Anthropogenic Global Warming to Hurricanes, there was a comment I wanted to address. Dean over at Today's Democracy has a post looking at data on hurricanes over time. He even has a ...

By: NIF

NIF — Sat, 17 Sep 2005 02:39:59 +0000

Constitution Day!

Today's dose of NIF - News, Interesting & Funny ... Consitution Day edition

By: Sherri

Sherri — Sat, 17 Sep 2005 02:26:38 +0000

Storm frenzy is not an anomaly, but a phase is kind of like the Chron's last part of the article, except that it goes into more detail about how they're checking past maritime temperatures, back to 1854, and also studying ancient tree rings: "Healthy weather produced wide tree rings. Drought or other trauma caused narrow rings", to come up with their 65-70 year AMO cycle theory. I guess it seems to make sense (I'm not a meteorlogist or climatologist though).

By: Dean

Dean — Sat, 17 Sep 2005 02:07:25 +0000

This is a crock..

I put this post together a week ago --
The Myth of Hurricanes and Global Warming

As much as anyone wants to try, it is not possible to link change in temp to hurricances.

Whether or not you are a believer in global warming, it is hard to connect recent or longer term environmental change to the number of hurricanes. There is actually a declining trend from 1950 to today. It seems pretty clear, unless you believe global warming has caused a decrease in frequency, (tongue firmly planted in cheek)

By: pragmatist

pragmatist — Sat, 17 Sep 2005 02:03:22 +0000

I would say there is growing concern in the scientific community that storms may be getting stronger due to global warming.

But it is at best a hypothesis not a theory. Certainly no one could say a specific hurricane was caused by global warming because the effect would be statistical.

I often feel alleged "environmentalists" are working for the Bush administration, just as in my sour moods I suspect the most vocal war supporters work for the terrorists in their frequent claims of "victory" that never quite pan out and demoralize the public, so much in the way of fact is sloppy.

The "Population Bomb" is celebrated blindly, though the issue is flaws in prediction. Today I read in the newspaper an activist claiming that when a smoker throws a butt on the ground it takes a century to compose, the real numbers are 1 to 10 years.

When people lie too much or engage in wild claims it eventually comes back. This is starting to happen to Limbaugh and the rest of the Republican Guard, it seems we could use this kind of discrediting for various interest groups on the other side.

By the way I believe global warming is a danger, that other enviromental issues are important, that some real cost and sacrifice will be necessary. But I have little trust in the lobbying groups which make most suggestions. Their failure to propose gas taxes insisting that it was all car company's fault was an example of the same kind of lazy, let's not upset people with costs that they feel that has directed the action of the current administration on terror and other things.

By: odograph

odograph — Fri, 16 Sep 2005 23:35:59 +0000

BTW, I saw the head of NOAA on TV during the run-up to Katrina. IIRC he flatly said there was no connection between Katrina and global warming. I think a real scientist would attempt to describe the uncertainty. Only a "policy hog" would be ... certain.

By: odograph

odograph — Fri, 16 Sep 2005 23:32:14 +0000

I think it is fairly simple. Generally, higher ocean temperature drives stonger hurricanes. We've had higher ocean temperature in the Gulf of Mexico recently, and with that stronger hurricanes. But, since you can never be sure if a local temperature is "local variation" or part of a long term trend until you plot the trend (over more time as you say), there is room for doubt.

I think it is fair to say stonger hurricanes are consistent with global warming, but certainly not a proof of global warming, or that global warming is driving these storms.

By: Anderson

Anderson — Fri, 16 Sep 2005 22:40:27 +0000

The hurricane's not global warming's fault, it's Bush's fault. Sheesh. Stay on message, people!