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 > A Stern review > Comments

A Stern review : Comments

By Andrew Hewett, published 6/11/2006

The debate about whether climate change is occurring is over. The question now is how do we respond?

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. All
Iain,


A Google Advance Scholar search for Christopher Monckton provides no evidence of your expert's expertise (see below).

If he is an enthusiastic amateur, then he is on the same footing as myself, though it appears that his boots are brighter polished.

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?num=100&hl=en&lr=&q=+%22C+Monckton+%22&btnG=Search

"C Monckton "
Tip: Try removing quotes from your search to get more results.

[CITATION] An investigation into the spatial structure of error in digital elevation data

“Shoe-fit”-a computerised shoe print database

[CITATION] Last days in New Guinea

[CITATION] AnInvestigationintotheSpatialStructureofErrorinDigitalElevationData

[CITATION] Progress towards standards for spatial metadata

[CITATION] An Investigation into the Spatial Structure of Error in

Digital Elevation Data, Innovations in GIS

Prenylation-dependent Association of Protein-tyrosine Phosphatases PRL-1,-2, and-3 with the Plasma … -

Burial Ceremonies of the Attah of Idah: Part I

HIV transmitted by kissing

Burial Ceremonies of the Attah of Idah: Part II

BURIAL CEREMONIES OF THE ATTAH OF IDAH

A Useful Cover-slip Container.

[BOOK] European Monetary Union: Opportunities and Dangers

[CITATION] The effect of kallikrein on platelet aggregation

A slide method for demonstrating soluble haemolysin. -

CONTRACTION BANDS AT SHORT SARCOMERE LENGTH IN CHICK MUSCLE -

Regulation of protein tyrosine phosphatase 4a1, B-cell translocation gene 2, nuclear receptor …

SARCOLEMMAL SCALLOPING AT SHORT SARCOMERE LENGTHS WITH INCIDENTAL OBSERVATIONS ON THE T TUBULES -

Interaction of Farnesylated PRL-2, a Protein-tyrosine Phosphatase, with the β-Subunit of … -

Running title: Association of the PTP PRL-2 with Rab βGGT II

New lessons from knockout mice: the role of serotonin during development and its possible … -

Serotonin-Induced Increases in Adult Cell Proliferation and Neurogenesis are Mediated Through … -

Mutational Analysis of the Serotonergic System: Recent Findings Using Knockout Mice -

5-HT1A Receptors, Gene Repression, and Depression: Guilt by Association -

" Shakespeare" and the Codes of Empire in India
N Bhatia - Alif: Journal of Comparative Poetics, 1998 - JSTOR
... 18 C. Monckton, an Englishman and a student at Fort William College at Calcutta,
did the first translation of Shakespeare into Bengali. ...
Web Search

Well Iain, which C Monckton is your man?
Posted by Sir Vivor, Tuesday, 7 November 2006 2:26:49 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
“Put simply - climate change has gone mainstream. Something else has happened too - the debate about whether climate change is occurring is over.”

Agreed Andrew.

However the nature of the changes are still wide open to conjecture.

The question is now how do we respond?”

Well, I don’t think there is much of a question here at all....

You say; “All Australian companies and organisations - including my own - need to act now … and promote sustainable development and growth.”

Absolutely! (although I think sustainable growth is a nonsensical term).

No matter what the nature of climate change, even if it has no discernible impact, the broad direction that we must steer ourselves in is surely the same; directly towards sustainability, and away from the continuous growth paradigm.

Sustainability is the essential bottom line. Weaning ourselves off of our fossil fuel addiction is important, but far less so.

.
Owen, Grey, Maximus and others

Have you seen ‘An Inconvenient Truth’? Have you any intention of doing so? It is absolutely not to be missed, for anyone even remotely interested in climate change.
Posted by Ludwig, Tuesday, 7 November 2006 3:20:48 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
Ludwig,

Before you recommend that people take the Gore movie seriously, if that is indeed what you are recommending, it might be a good idea to check out the following review:

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=4938

In essence, Mr Gore's movie is not what many people think it is. Like the Stern report, the movie is much more propaganda than science.

Kathy
Posted by Cathy, Tuesday, 7 November 2006 3:34:22 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
Cathy

If you can call ‘An Inconvenient Truth’ propaganda, I think you could brand just about anything propaganda.

The whole movie is about the factual basis behind the conclusions, about explaining where the evidence is for climate change, and just what that evidence really means.

Now of course Bob Carter was going to poo-poo it. We would have expected nothing less from him.

You’ve got to wonder just where Carter is coming from. I mean, he admits that the raw data that Gore chooses is “mostly correct”, and of an elementary nature, put in such a manner that practically anyone can understand.

The receding ice shelves of the Antarctic, ice sheets of Greenland and glaciers around the world, are hard data indicative of a very big change afoot, as are many other things that Gore presents.

Anyway, as I said last time, no matter what the nature of climate change, even if it has no discernible impact, the broad direction that we must steer ourselves in is surely the same; directly towards sustainability, and away from the continuous growth paradigm.

Sustainability means living well within the limitations of our resource base and well within the limitations of our planet to absorb and recycle our waste products without leading adverse consequences.
Posted by Ludwig, Tuesday, 7 November 2006 11:12:06 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
Part I

I'm a little concerned about the quality of research being conducted on this post.

"Sea levels have not been rising around Australia or anywhere else in the Pacific except as a result of normal plate and volcanic dynamics.
Tuvalu is certainly not sinking and ."

A bold statement, given that numerous studies of the islands' sea level have been made in recent years. The current estimates indicate that the sea level has risen 20cm over the past century, and various sources give the rise in sea level at between 1-2mm per year. According to an Australian/Canadian study (which claim to be the most accurate) gives a rate rise of 1.8mm/year plus or minus 0.3mm.

http://www.agiweb.org/geotimes/sept04/NN_sealevelrise.html

I don't want to be presumptuous and state that this is due to global warming, but to say that there is no observed sea level rise contradicts observations.

Wikipedia actually has a good summary on sea level rise:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_level_rise

There is also a strong case for stateing that at least SOME of the observed rise is due to global warming. This is included in abridged form in the IPCC report. A very in depth discussion on it is given at
http://www.agu.org/revgeophys/dougla01/dougla01.html

If you've got the time, I suggest reading it.

"Tuvaluans are not migrating to NZ"
Yet.
http://www.tuvaluislands.com/warming.htm

Now:
"The Earth's climate is variable. In the Jurassic and Cretaceuous periods the world was a lot warmer and wetter than it is today. There were no ice caps for example".

While true, this statement is misleading. This is primarily because the warming to the mesozoic period occured over geological time scales. From the antartic ice core project (and to a lesser extent the Greenland ice core project) the fastest observed warming was about 1 degree per millenia. Today, we face a rate 30 times faster than this (at best). Most of this analysis is found in the Weather Makers
and Jones et al (2001, Nature).
Posted by ChrisC, Wednesday, 8 November 2006 12:01:13 AM
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
Part II

Now onto Christopher Monckton. He is not a climate scientist (for the record, neither am I). However, his primary claim to fame is the development of a (very clever) puzzle.

My first critism is that he doesn't seem to understand the definition of consenus. From dictionary.com:

1. majority of opinion.
2. general agreement or concord; harmony.

Is there consensus? I point specifically to the now famous essay by Naomi Oreskes, who surveyed 928 scientific articles (keyword:climate change) from 1993-2003, and found that 75% dealt with the topic, and 100% of them supported the consensus view. Now, I will point out that her study was flawed in many ways (not cross referencing for example). But the fact that the support of the man-made global warming theory was so high, it is quite telling.

Now, consensus does not mean that other avenues are not explored. It does not mean that science is perfect. What it does indicate, is the current paradigm in research at the time.

Monckton also seems to harp on about the sun a fair bit. All well and good. I spent a good deal of time in a solar physics department, and I like the sun. However, as shown by Thomas Crowley(2001)
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/short/289/5477/270

the sun can not account for all of the observed warming. In fact, Crowley deduces, based on models, that the temperature of the planet should have cooled were natural forces only in play. Since 1950, there has been little to no increase in the average solar activity (this from real climate):

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=153

The global situation is more complicated. Both the sun and CO2 are causing the planet to warm. Not one or the other, but both in tandem

Now, finally, a quick note on the tale of two graphs. The second graph (non-hockey stick) is from the IPCC in 1990. It is purely qualitiative and is not based on paleo climatic reconstructions. It was included in the IPCC pack in 1990 as a schematic in order to show the trend known as the medievil warm period.

Phew! I'll leave everyone in peace now.
Posted by ChrisC, Wednesday, 8 November 2006 1:03:46 AM
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. Page 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. All

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