Andy S said…
I believe the loblolly pine forest is a good indicator of long-term climate trends. They and their long tap roots are sensitive to long term soil moisture levels. The lost pines of Bastrop are there because it’s an island of sandy soil that is permissive so that more of the region’s rainfall is available for tree growth versus becoming surface runoff. [more]
I was contemplating pointing out how there really hasn’t been an “ordinary” recession for thirty years in the US: how employment recovers has been much slower since the early 80s. I guess it was in the air, because I came across somebody else (“mikekr”) making the same point (with convenient graphics). [more]
My classmate Jon Foley has an interesting presentation, and it’s mostly true and important, so admittedly everything actually should be said at least twice.
So he does.
I wonder about the presentation. Which is more effective, the twelve minute talk with images or the four minute screed-toon without much evidence. [more]
An interesting article at Bloomberg’s on how insurance companies view climate change is, in my opinion, marred by this illustration of, well, sort of an equation from dreamland. Or possibly two. Hard telling.
Journal editor says Spencer paper arguing low climate sensitivity should not have passed peer review, resigns.
Peer-reviewed journals are a pillar of modern science. Their aim is to achieve highest scientific standards by carrying out a rigorous peer review that is, as a minimum requirement, supposed to be able to identify fundamental methodological errors or false claims. [more]
One delayer tactic is to demand “proof” of “global warming” before advocating “hugely expensive actions”. (*)
This comes down to “burden of proof” arguments. Much though we might wish people understood Bayesian reasoning better, it appears that people are primed to a sort of naive absolutism by the legal system:
I was mugged once some years ago and was called in for a line up. [more]
We presume as given that the energy consumption of the world must reach a finite limit, and consider whether the economy can maintain the imperative for growth. Prominent blogger Matt Yglesias comes up with some feeble handwaving that says it can. Yglesias is wrong.
Physics Prof Tom Murphy puts the endless growth conundrum through its paces and ends up in familiar places. [more]
Thanks to reader MM for pointing out John Nielsen-Gammon’s latest posting at the Houston Chronicle site. It is very much worth a read if you are interested in climate or in Texas. (It happens that I am obsessed with both, as readers probably know.)
I’ll steal just one of the stunning graphics as a teaser:
Climate change is now, folks, and this is what it looks like. [more]
I’ve been asked to comment on William Happer’s “The Truth about Greenhouse Gases“, and finding no competent discussion of it anywhere on the first three pages of hits have agreed to take it on.
To give you an idea of the tenor of the document, it starts off modestly, like this:
“The object of the Author in the following pages has been to collect the
most remarkable instances of those moral epidemics which have been
excited, sometimes by one cause and sometimes by another, and to
show how easily the masses have been led astray, and how imitative and
gregarious men are, even in their infatuations and crimes,” wrote Charles
Mackay in the preface to the first edition of his Extraordinary Popular
Delusions and the Madness of Crowds. [more]
My sub-Arctic hometown took some damage from my wife’s tropical storm namesake. Sort of odd from my point of view but probably not worth your attention. However, I did think a conversation from the comments to that report was worth noting:
What sickens me is how every time there is a storm thousands (in the U.S. [more]
Austin got plugged by a 44 today. Celsius that is. Hottest damn day of my life. And tied for the hottest ever in Austin. But apparently they didn’t cancel the hot sauce festival in Waterloo Park.
Here are a couple of tastes of Texas shotgun lyrics for Steve Bloom, who picked up on the Texas resonances of the number. [more]
MORE SO THAN WITH MOST STORMS…THE WINDS WITH IRENE INCREASE
SHARPLY WITH HEIGHT ABOVE THE SURFACE. AS IRENE MOVES THROUGH
AREAS WITH HIGH-RISE STRUCTURES…THESE BUILDINGS COULD EXPERIENCE
WINDS SIGNIFICANTLY STRONGER THAN THE SURFACE WINDS. WINDS AT THE
30-STORY LEVEL WILL LIKELY BE 20 PERCENT HIGHER THAN AT THE SURFACE
…AND WINDS 80-100 STORIES UP COULD BE ABOUT 30 PERCENT HIGHER
THAN AT THE SURFACE. [more]
Thanks to Joe Romm for displaying my schematic of the distribution of informed opinion from the podium at the Schneider symposium during his excellent (scary) talk.
I can’t repay the favor in any comparable proportion but let me at least display my favorite slide from his talk.
We need to talk about what the infamous “deficit model” means. [more]
It’s peculiar that Judith Curry is criticizing the IPCC and climate community for understressing uncertainty. It’s something one can imagine from the Wattses and McIntyres with their narrow focus on data, but it’s incomprehensible from a member of the community.
It’s hard to avoid this thought popping up as I watch the Schneider Symposium; probably over half the speakers have talked at length about uncertainty, and how to treat it in interfacing with the public and the policy sector. [more]