Comments on: Comments, corrections, clarifications, and c*ckups http://www.crikey.com.au/2008/09/01/comments-corrections-clarifications-and-cckups/ now with extra source Tue, 24 Nov 2009 11:49:27 +1100 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Richard McGuire http://www.crikey.com.au/2008/09/01/comments-corrections-clarifications-and-cckups/#comment-25126 Richard McGuire Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-25126 Turn it up Mr K, it should have been obvious even to you that my references to CO2 were as a greenhouse gas. "Correlation of any two data sets does not mean causation can be inferred." I take the above statement to mean CO2 levels were not necessarily the driving force leading to the onset of past ice ages. Which is true up to a point. Milankovich's cycles, and the albedo effect, as ice sheets began to expand played a major part. It is however certain we would not have emerged from the last ice age had CO2 levels remained around 160-180 ppm. No MR K we would not all be dead if humans stopped pumping out CO2. Haven't you heard of the carbon cycle? That service provided by mother nature, that existed long before humans arrived on the scene. Now back to my original question. What atmospheric concentrations of CO2 "as a greenhouse gas" are you and other naysayers happy to inflict on future generations? Finally to The Kid From Bondi...........a perfect fitm ???? Turn it up Mr K, it should have been obvious even to you that my references to CO2 were as a greenhouse gas. “Correlation of any two data sets does not mean causation can be inferred.” I take the above statement to mean CO2 levels were not necessarily the driving force leading to the onset of past ice ages. Which is true up to a point. Milankovich’s cycles, and the albedo effect, as ice sheets began to expand played a major part. It is however certain we would not have emerged from the last ice age had CO2 levels remained around 160-180 ppm. No MR K we would not all be dead if humans stopped pumping out CO2. Haven’t you heard of the carbon cycle? That service provided by mother nature, that existed long before humans arrived on the scene. Now back to my original question. What atmospheric concentrations of CO2 “as a greenhouse gas” are you and other naysayers happy to inflict on future generations? Finally to The Kid From Bondi………..a perfect fitm ????

]]> By: Michael http://www.crikey.com.au/2008/09/01/comments-corrections-clarifications-and-cckups/#comment-25127 Michael Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-25127 What a hoot that some think Sarah Palin will draw the Hillary supporters. The opposite is more likely as Palin would have to be diametrically the complete polar opposite to Clinton in policy and just about everything else. This choice reeks of a desperate McCain boldly taking a chance. The same thinking also ignores the far better experience that Joe Biden carries. What was going to be an Obama walk-in has just become an impending landslide. What a hoot that some think Sarah Palin will draw the Hillary supporters. The opposite is more likely as Palin would have to be diametrically the complete polar opposite to Clinton in policy and just about everything else. This choice reeks of a desperate McCain boldly taking a chance. The same thinking also ignores the far better experience that Joe Biden carries. What was going to be an Obama walk-in has just become an impending landslide.

]]> By: Marilyn http://www.crikey.com.au/2008/09/01/comments-corrections-clarifications-and-cckups/#comment-25128 Marilyn Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-25128 What ugly sour grapes. Obama took on the well oiled and well funded Clinton super machine and thrashed them with smart campaigning, a sense of hope for the possible and he is the only one of them always against the Iraq war.<br /><br />He worked with the down trodden in Chicago when the Clinton's were committing one fraud after the other in Arkansas and Bill was sexually harassing any women he saw while Hillary kept supporting him.<br /><br />As for McCain - he was on his 23rd bombing flight to murder innocent Vietnamese citizens in an illegal invasion based on the lie of the Tonkin Bay "attack" and the insanity of the domino effect and the lies and paranoia about the spread of communism (which Menzies us brought into).<br /><br />He is up to his eyeballs in Abu Ghraib, Gitmo, torture, Iraq and the Keating scandals.<br /><br />Give me a break Martin Gordon.<br /><br />I would prefer a neophyte with a brain than McCain who is surely senile after choosing a running mate he doesn't know.<br /><br />A woman who is proud to condemn abortion even for rape and incest victims, who takes her little kids out to slaughter reindeer and is also up to her own neck in corruption in Alaska.<br /><br />And John reports have it that McCain spilt the beans after about 3 hours. What ugly sour grapes. Obama took on the well oiled and well funded Clinton super machine and thrashed them with smart campaigning, a sense of hope for the possible and he is the only one of them always against the Iraq war.

He worked with the down trodden in Chicago when the Clinton’s were committing one fraud after the other in Arkansas and Bill was sexually harassing any women he saw while Hillary kept supporting him.

As for McCain - he was on his 23rd bombing flight to murder innocent Vietnamese citizens in an illegal invasion based on the lie of the Tonkin Bay “attack” and the insanity of the domino effect and the lies and paranoia about the spread of communism (which Menzies us brought into).

He is up to his eyeballs in Abu Ghraib, Gitmo, torture, Iraq and the Keating scandals.

Give me a break Martin Gordon.

I would prefer a neophyte with a brain than McCain who is surely senile after choosing a running mate he doesn’t know.

A woman who is proud to condemn abortion even for rape and incest victims, who takes her little kids out to slaughter reindeer and is also up to her own neck in corruption in Alaska.

And John reports have it that McCain spilt the beans after about 3 hours.

]]> By: JamesK http://www.crikey.com.au/2008/09/01/comments-corrections-clarifications-and-cckups/#comment-25129 JamesK Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-25129 I expressed myself accurately Richard McGuire. If you would like to quote me then I will give you an even broader target to attack: correlation of any two data sets does not mean causation can be inferred. Furthermore inference becomes impossible if one set of data is unable to predict the other data set based on that past correlation. <br /><br />Physiologically concentrations of less than 0.5% inhaled CO2 are comfortable for a human. So you are in no immediate danger of anthropogenic CO2 poisoning global production on that basis at least!.......and in a closed environment you die from oxygen lack rather than CO2 poisoning, Marilyn, unless there is ongoing oxygen supply and no means of CO2 removal as on Apollo 14 for a period of time. <br /><br />CO2 like essentially all inert gases anaesthetises in sufficient concentration rather than a priori being poisonous. I expressed myself accurately Richard McGuire. If you would like to quote me then I will give you an even broader target to attack: correlation of any two data sets does not mean causation can be inferred. Furthermore inference becomes impossible if one set of data is unable to predict the other data set based on that past correlation.

Physiologically concentrations of less than 0.5% inhaled CO2 are comfortable for a human. So you are in no immediate danger of anthropogenic CO2 poisoning global production on that basis at least!…….and in a closed environment you die from oxygen lack rather than CO2 poisoning, Marilyn, unless there is ongoing oxygen supply and no means of CO2 removal as on Apollo 14 for a period of time.

CO2 like essentially all inert gases anaesthetises in sufficient concentration rather than a priori being poisonous.

]]> By: Marilyn http://www.crikey.com.au/2008/09/01/comments-corrections-clarifications-and-cckups/#comment-25130 Marilyn Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-25130 Perhaps Tamas could lock himself in a sealed room and if he survives tell us about the joyful effects of CO2 poisoning. Perhaps Tamas could lock himself in a sealed room and if he survives tell us about the joyful effects of CO2 poisoning.

]]> By: JamesK http://www.crikey.com.au/2008/09/01/comments-corrections-clarifications-and-cckups/#comment-25131 JamesK Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-25131 Richard McGuire says: "I take the above statement to mean CO2 levels were not necessarily the driving force leading to the onset of past ice ages"<br /><br />Why?...... although I agree.<br /><br />There is some new evidence to explain the poor temporal correlation between CO2 and ice ages but that as I understand it is not yet widely accepted.<br /><br />None of this mitigates the original point I made. <br /><br />Your last question is rather arrogantly loaded. It presupposes I could control atmospheric CO2.<br />Even if it were reasonably feasible(and it's not) and not prohibitively expensive (and it will be).....why would I want to?<br /><br /><br /><br /> Richard McGuire says: “I take the above statement to mean CO2 levels were not necessarily the driving force leading to the onset of past ice ages”

Why?…… although I agree.

There is some new evidence to explain the poor temporal correlation between CO2 and ice ages but that as I understand it is not yet widely accepted.

None of this mitigates the original point I made.

Your last question is rather arrogantly loaded. It presupposes I could control atmospheric CO2.
Even if it were reasonably feasible(and it’s not) and not prohibitively expensive (and it will be)…..why would I want to?

]]> By: Richard McGuire http://www.crikey.com.au/2008/09/01/comments-corrections-clarifications-and-cckups/#comment-25132 Richard McGuire Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-25132 "The problem is that correlation of CO2 and global temperature (and even that is controversial in scientific circles) does not equal causation." Is that so Mr K ? Then explain why CO2 levels during the last Ice Age were as low as 160-180 ppm. And what in the way of sea level rises and disappearing polar ice would it take for you and other naysayers to concede that maybe a correlation does exist ? And you haven't answered my question. What level of atmospheric CO2 would you be happy to see your kids, grandkids, nephews and nieces whatever, live with? Or do you believe we can keep pumping out CO2 and other greenhouse gasses in perpetuity? “The problem is that correlation of CO2 and global temperature (and even that is controversial in scientific circles) does not equal causation.” Is that so Mr K ? Then explain why CO2 levels during the last Ice Age were as low as 160-180 ppm. And what in the way of sea level rises and disappearing polar ice would it take for you and other naysayers to concede that maybe a correlation does exist ? And you haven’t answered my question. What level of atmospheric CO2 would you be happy to see your kids, grandkids, nephews and nieces whatever, live with? Or do you believe we can keep pumping out CO2 and other greenhouse gasses in perpetuity?

]]> By: JamesK http://www.crikey.com.au/2008/09/01/comments-corrections-clarifications-and-cckups/#comment-25133 JamesK Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-25133 Reasoned and reasonable remarks from Tamas Calderwood.<br /><br />The problem is that correlation of CO2 and global temperature (and even that is controversial in scientific circles) does not equal causation and this is certainly controversial within mainstream science. <br /><br />The political nature and unscientific language of the IPCC is in itself a disconcerting background to this 'scientific' debate Reasoned and reasonable remarks from Tamas Calderwood.

The problem is that correlation of CO2 and global temperature (and even that is controversial in scientific circles) does not equal causation and this is certainly controversial within mainstream science.

The political nature and unscientific language of the IPCC is in itself a disconcerting background to this ‘scientific’ debate

]]> By: JamesK http://www.crikey.com.au/2008/09/01/comments-corrections-clarifications-and-cckups/#comment-25134 JamesK Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-25134 Furthermore Richard McGuire if we stop "pumping out CO2 and other greenhouse gasses in perpetuity" know that at that point we shall all be dead......CO2 is essential for photosynthesis and life as we know it on this sacred planet! Furthermore Richard McGuire if we stop “pumping out CO2 and other greenhouse gasses in perpetuity” know that at that point we shall all be dead……CO2 is essential for photosynthesis and life as we know it on this sacred planet!

]]> By: Richard McGuire http://www.crikey.com.au/2008/09/01/comments-corrections-clarifications-and-cckups/#comment-25135 Richard McGuire Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-25135 If nothing else one has to give the climate change naysayers points for persistence. Tamas Calderwood is certainly in that league. "The only adverse effect a rise in CO2 concentrations may have, is the increase in temperature posited by the global warming hypothesis" according to Tamas Calderwood. How does he then explain CO2 levels of around 180 parts per million during the last ice age? A good 100 ppm lower than just prior to the industrial revolution. Since the industrial revolution CO2 levels have increased by more than 100 ppm to 387 ppm. Presently anthropogenic CO2 is increasing at a rate of 3ppm annually. At the current rate CO2 concentrations by 2050 will be well in excess of 500 ppm, which mainstream scientific opinion, which Tamas and other naysayers choose to ignore, consider to be dangerous levels. This level does not take into account natural positive feedbacks which are probably already occurring. So the challenge is for Tamas and other naysayers is to come up with atmospheric CO2 levels they would be happy to see their children and grand children live with. If nothing else one has to give the climate change naysayers points for persistence. Tamas Calderwood is certainly in that league. “The only adverse effect a rise in CO2 concentrations may have, is the increase in temperature posited by the global warming hypothesis” according to Tamas Calderwood. How does he then explain CO2 levels of around 180 parts per million during the last ice age? A good 100 ppm lower than just prior to the industrial revolution. Since the industrial revolution CO2 levels have increased by more than 100 ppm to 387 ppm. Presently anthropogenic CO2 is increasing at a rate of 3ppm annually. At the current rate CO2 concentrations by 2050 will be well in excess of 500 ppm, which mainstream scientific opinion, which Tamas and other naysayers choose to ignore, consider to be dangerous levels. This level does not take into account natural positive feedbacks which are probably already occurring. So the challenge is for Tamas and other naysayers is to come up with atmospheric CO2 levels they would be happy to see their children and grand children live with.

]]> By: The Kid From Bondi http://www.crikey.com.au/2008/09/01/comments-corrections-clarifications-and-cckups/#comment-25136 The Kid From Bondi Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-25136 Richard have you met Marilyn? A perfect fitm it would seem. Richard have you met Marilyn? A perfect fitm it would seem.

]]>