Buy

Books
Click images for more details

Twitter
Support

 

Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing
Links

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace

Unthreaded

Hilary
Unfortunately blog polling can introduce bias. Even if it didn't it would be accused of it. A further thought. Going back to the Doran paper and the slant put on it, it was based on Zimmerman's thesis. That may contain a lot more than was stated in the paper, and if you are seriously investigating the topic, researching that may be revealing and rewarding. Just a pure guess though.

Feb 18, 2011 at 12:10 AM | Unregistered CommenterPharos

Dreadnought:

What a wonderful site! A practical solution to the terrible guilt all right-thinking Australians must feel when they venture into the bush with their iPood toilet trowels. And a proprietor who writes that she has "always been conscience of global warming and the threat it holds for mankind and all creaturers of this planet"[sic]. Only the cost of Oz-UK shipping inhibited me from ordering 96 rolls.

Feb 16, 2011 at 11:53 PM | Unregistered CommenterJane Coles

@Pharos Feb 16, 2011 at 10:06 AM

Thanks, Pharos ...

The Doran survey fails to disclose the full poll results. See my post Feb 15, 2011 at 9:38 PM on the Beddington on Warpath thread.

Oh, I know! And, yes, I did see your post yesterday ... as well as Sam at Climatequotes' excellent analysis earlier this month (see link in background to my survey). Sam had posed the question "What would an ideal survey look like?" which "inspired" my survey - in which I've chosen to focus on the specific hypothesis of C02 as primary culprit - as well as attempting to determine if there are scientists who might be better at "communicating with the general public" on the matter of "global warming" than ... oh, I dunno ... Mann, Jones, Steig, Schmidt, Ward - or even Beddington - for example ;-)

I'm fully aware that my survey is far from "scientific" and has the inherent bias of self-selection, but I thought it would be helpful to have some quantifiable "data" (from scientists free from the influence of any institutional inhibitions!) on these particular issues as a starting point!

Traffic at my particular corner of the blogosphere is very quiet but my (probably very ambitious!) goal is to have responses from 1500 scientists of any and all "persuasions". FWIW, since the survey page was "published" [Feb. 15 4:30 p.m. PDT], I've received 4 responses from 23 "page views" (far from "significant", but not a bad return rate, eh?!). The responses to the free-form question (on "communication with the general public") have been quite thoughtful.

In light of my goal, I'm trying to cast a net far and wide ... so please forgive me for repeating:

Calling all scientists - an invitation to speak for yourself!

Who knows ... if the results are interesting enough maybe "Big Oil" will send me my cheque which could be used to fund a genuine scientific survey, worthy of publication in a "peer-reviewed" journal ;-)

But at the very least, perhaps Donna might give it some mention in her forthcoming book ... or perhaps there will be enough material for me to write my own book!

Hilary

Feb 16, 2011 at 10:52 PM | Unregistered Commenterhro001

BBC st it again ...

Climate change raises flood risk, researchers say
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12484314

Feb 16, 2011 at 10:09 PM | Unregistered CommenterAJC

Correction

disingenuous NOT to make an upfront statement

Feb 16, 2011 at 9:01 PM | Unregistered CommenterPharos

oakwood

Yes. I despair. I was a Geol Soc Fellow for many years but eventually lapsed my sub mainly because I ran out of bookshelf space plus the subs kept rising. They were supposed to embrace all members views, and I think they were disingenuous to make an upfront statement that views are strong and disparate. Much as the AAPG statement, which is exemplary in honesty, even unique perhaps. The greatest irony, for the very mention of petroleum appears to summon down frothing visceral hatred and scathing dismissal of any possibility of ethical integrity, for the faithful.

Feb 16, 2011 at 8:59 PM | Unregistered CommenterPharos

(I've also posted this at WUWT Notes and Tips) ...there are a brace of “precipitation” papers in today’s edition of Nature – both based on computer models of course and both featuring some of the usual suspects:

Human contribution to more-intense precipitation extremes

Seung-Ki Min, Xuebin Zhang, Francis W. Zwiers & Gabriele C. Hegerl

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v470/n7334/full/nature09763.html#ref16

Anthropogenic greenhouse gas contribution to flood risk in England and Wales in autumn 2000

Pardeep Pall, Tolu Aina, Dáithí A. Stone, Peter A. Stott, Toru Nozawa, Arno G. J. Hilberts, Dag Lohmann & Myles R. Allen

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v470/n7334/full/nature09762.html

Feb 16, 2011 at 7:09 PM | Unregistered Commenterwoodentop

Thanks Pharos
In fact I followed some of those discussions at the time. But I see this as a new development. The recent letter of Summerhayes seems surprisingly immature and amateurish in its style for a senior member of a leading scientific society and lead author of an important policy statement. He criticises the denier blog sites, but his text would be very at home in the comments section of such a site or the Guardian's CIF pages (putting the pro-AGW view).

He criticises others for being unthorough and cherry-picking, but does exactly that in a long waffly comment of his own.

Feb 16, 2011 at 3:07 PM | Unregistered Commenteroakwood

Jane Coles

Thanks for the link. I did a bit of browsing on the subject of remineralisation and came up with this:

Enviro-Roll (Miracle) Toilet Tissue
Combat Climate Change, Loss of Biodiversity and Mass Extinction

That's that sorted then.

http://www.enviro-roll.com/

Feb 16, 2011 at 2:13 PM | Unregistered CommenterDreadnought

oakwood Feb 16, 2011 at 12:57 PM

FYI there has been a lot of debate on the Geol Soc Statement a while back here. If you use the search facility for 'geol soc' it finds 104 entries.

Feb 16, 2011 at 1:58 PM | Unregistered CommenterPharos

PostCreate a New Post

Enter your information below to create a new post.
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>