The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Climate change, science and cricket > Comments

Climate change, science and cricket : Comments

By Michael Rowan, published 7/3/2011

Uncontroversial concepts in cricket are hotly denied in the climate change debate.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. Page 5
  7. All
Something else on point which I have just come across is this email. Note the novel peer review process - much like I have been suggesting, an it's an email from Michael's university!

From: James Ward [mailto:James.Ward@unisa.edu.au]
Sent: Wednesday, 9 March 2011 9:15 AM
To: Blanked out
Subject: Fossil fuel constraints to climate change - discussion



Colleagues,



You may be interested in our open discussion paper in Hydrology & Earth System Sciences:

http://www.hydrol-earth-syst-sci-discuss.net/8/2627/2011/hessd-8-2627-2011.html



We have reviewed the literature on fossil fuel production and greenhouse gas emissions, and conclude that high emissions scenarios are probably unrealistic for use in climate change projections, and basic “limits to growth” will most likely see us following the low emissions pathway (carbon tax or no carbon tax!).



Two things may be of interest to you:

1. The controversial argument itself, which (if accepted) has widespread implications for research into climate change impacts

2. The open access peer review process, where the discussion paper will be available for scientific comment until 3rd May, before revision and final publication in the main journal (ERA ranking: A). All review comments and author replies remain online and publicly accessible.



I intend to direct my 3rd year Environmental Engineering students to the discussion, so that they can witness the peer review process “live”.



Feel free to distribute this among your networks.



Cheers,



James Ward

Lecturer, Water & Environmental Engineering

School of Natural & Built Environments, Room P2-35

University of South Australia

Phone: 61 8 8302 3128

Fax: 61 8 8302 5082
Posted by GrahamY, Wednesday, 9 March 2011 9:46:02 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The authors analogy is misleading.

Simply a cricketers performance and form is analysed over a very short term ... hours and days to maybe a maximum of 10 years.

To be a fair analogy the author needs to specify the time periods for which he analyses and compares weather and climate.

That's quite an impossible task!
Posted by keith, Thursday, 10 March 2011 3:51:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Keith, "climate" is the trend in "weather" over time periods that filter the noise (e.g. natural variability) from the signal (unnatural variabilty) - in context this is about 30 years. Why do you think this is an impossible task?
Posted by bonmot, Thursday, 10 March 2011 4:23:45 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Way way to many variables.

Take the latest cyclone season in Queensland. It was supposed to have had 6 cyclones. Predicted by the BOM

We had a traditional moonsoon even ( not predicted by the BOM), common 30 years ago, three rain depressions (Not predicted by the BOM) and (evidence now shows) a cat 3 cyclone (Predicted to be a cat 5 by the BOM). Wooohooo big deal, nothing has really changed in the last 30 years.

We've also seen off one of the biggest droughts (not predicted by the BOM) in our recordrd history. A drought you alarmists a little while ago were saying was evidence of climate change.

We've pretty well always had extremes of wet and dry up here in Qld.

Now tell me is what has occured in Qld in the past 30 years a weather trend or form indicating climate change? Would you need a longer period to determine that and how long a period?

Now if you can answer those questios you'll be better than all the supposed weather and climate experts in the BOM ... cos they won't even attempt it!
Posted by keith, Friday, 11 March 2011 7:46:39 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Bonmot, after more than US$100 billion and 20 years of searching, scientists and others have not succeeded in filtering out and measuring the unnatural variability. In fact, they will not be able to even after 30 years, as there is no compelling scientific evidence that validates the IPCC's AGW hypothesis.
Posted by Raycom, Friday, 11 March 2011 8:12:53 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. Page 5
  7. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy