This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

Comment

← Why the laws of physics make anthropogenic climate change undeniable

Ignorant Amos's Avatar Jump to comment 15 by Ignorant Amos

Comment 13 by Jos Gibbons

Indeed, having a third level qualification does not exempt one from ignorance on subjects they know next to feck all about. What it does do, is to give certain folk the air, pomp and circumstance of a know it all. As I said elsewhere, humility in the face of those who really do know about this stuff, is a worthwhile position to take.

In my position, I have to go with the consensus of greater minds than I, especially when that consensus is so overwhelmingly high in one direction. Regardless of any of this, even as a skeptic/denier, it is prudent to err on the side of caution, it has to be the rational way to go, rewinding to the start and changing ones mind is not an option in this debate. Being sceptical and wrong will be final.

Thank you, btw, for taking the time and effort to post this detail, hard work as it is for me to get through, it is much appreciated all the same.

Yesterday was spent reading the papers of the other sides argument or lack thereof, particularly those of Madhav L Khandekar, which jac proposed as something worth considering.....Khandekar readily admits that his 50 years expertise in the science, has been in the field of short term weather prediction.

My work, primarily in my career of more than 50 years, was with short-term weather forecasting, 12 hours, 24 hours, 1 – 3 days, never forecasting beyond a week. Now I am interested in seasonal predictions but sort of in a different technique than a computer model. I think computer models have a lot of inherent difficulties in simulating precisely the large-scale circulations of the atmosphere.

From an 2009 interview.

He has this to say in a 2004 paper.....

A few other studies have questioned the precise cause of the recent warming, whether the warming is due to anthropogenic CO2 increase or due to human activity on ground (urbanization etc.). There is a definite need to reassess the present state of the global warming science. A Climate Policy like Kyoto ratification and implementation must be based on a thorough understanding of the cause and consequence of global warming.

So 4 years later and mountains of data we might expect a change of heart, no chance. In 2008 he produced this....

This Document has examined about 70 peer-reviewed papers out of a much larger number that have appeared in various international Journals in the last six years. These papers cover a wide range of topics pertaining to the present debate on the GW science. Most of the papers listed above have questioned the present view of the GW science and when taken together, these papers and many others not listed here provide an emerging view of the science of global warming & climate change which is at odds with the prevailing view.

So he is using the peer reviewed papers of skeptics to produce a peer reviewed paper on the skepticism, I can see how that might work....a sort of consensus of skeptics to prove the skeptics position. I'm not sure that's how it should be done though. But wait, that's not what he is doing at all, he is cherry picking these peer reviewed papers and quote mining to fulfil his agenda.....somewhat egregious for such an esteemed meteorologist I'd say or perhaps he has an agenda.

2009 he has this to say....

So we have a raging debate about impending glacier melt-down because of sloppiness of some IPCC authors! Further, according to Kotlyakov, the present glacier area of some 500,000 km2 could shrink to 100,000 km2 and this could happen NOT in 2035 but in 2350, if the current rate of warming continues. Also this estimated glacier area and its shrinkage does not include internal drainage basin of central Asia with an estimated area of some 40,000 km2 .

Well that's alright then, no point in worrying at all seeing as that gives us plenty of time to do even more nothing. Except a picture paints a 1000 words.. This doesn't concern Khandekar.

The fact that the IPCC gave a "mistaken" date of 2035 appears to detract from the evidence. Glaciers are on the retreat all over the world, this doesn't concern this "expert", perhaps we should all be looking at the most recent data available though,'Research finds Greenland glacier melting faster than expected'.

The good Dr. Khandekar also said this...he has advised the Indian government ya know?

Future climate change impacts can be adequately sustained using suitable adaptation strategy. A useful adaptation strategy would be to develop and improve the present skill in seasonal prediction of summer monsoon with a lead time of few weeks to a few months. Improved skill in seasonal prediction will enable appropriate measures to be implemented which could minimise impacts of future droughts and floods in the Indian monsoon.

Covering his back a bit there.

Apologies for the protracted comment, I should have put this on the other thread, but this is a thread of information on the subject, it had degenerated over there to petty squabbling over non related forum etiquette. I didn't think it inappropriate to put on here and I hope jac will get to see it here just as well.

Tue, 30 Aug 2011 15:29:37 UTC | #865579