Offline much of today and this week as I’m doing a special project that will have me offline a lot. Guest posters feel free to jump in. Details below.
Those that wish to write guest posts can compose them and submit via the newly created Submit Story submission form. For image insertion into posts, may I suggest the free www.tinypic.com which Bob Tisdale regularly uses?
Posts don’t have to be long. They can be short news blurb summaries of about 150-250 words, much like is done at slashdot.org or they can be full fledged posts with embedded data and images.
Those of you that have guest author privileges – you know what to do.
– Anthony
UPDATE: Apologies – the Submit Story feature got hidden yesterday by an errant goof by one of our moderators who marked the page as “private” – fixed now – Anthony
Open thread? OK:
This is the anniversary month of the tragic death of the great Canadian folk singer Stan Rogers, who died at 34 in a plane crash. I first heard about Stan Rogers here at WUWT a couple of years ago, when someone posted this link:
Stan wrote Barret’s Privateers, the story of a 17-year old fisherman who was enticed with promises of fortune, but ended up a cripple trying to get home:
[performed by the Irish Descendants]
Lyrics:
Oh the year was 1778
(How I wish I was in Sherbrooke now)
A letter of marque came from the king
To the scummiest vessel I’ve ever seen
God damn them all!
I was told we’d cruise the seas for American gold
We’d fire no guns, shed no tears
Now I’m a broken man on a Halifax pier,
The last of Barrett’s Privateers
2. O Elcid Barrett cried the town
(How I wish I was in Sherbrooke now)
For twenty brave men all fishermen who
Would make for him the Antelope’s crew
God damn them all . . .
3. The Antelope sloop was a sickening site
(How I wish I was in Sherbrooke now)
She’d list to the port and her sails in rags
And the cook in the scuppers with the staggers and jags
God damn them all . . .
4. On the King’s birthday we put to sea
(How I wish I was in Sherbrooke now)
Ninety-one days to Montego Bay
Pumping like madmen all the way
God damn them all . . .
5. On the ninety-sixth day we sailed again
(How I wish I was in Sherbrooke now)
When a bloody great Yankee hove in sight
With our cracked four-pounders we made to fight
God damn them all . . .
6. The Yankee lay low down with gold
(How I wish I was in Sherbrooke now)
She was broad and fat and loose in stays
But to catch her took the Antelope two whole days
God damn them all . . .
7. Then at length we stood two cables away
(How I wish I was in Sherbrooke now)
Our cracked four-pounders made awful din
But with one fat ball the Yank stove us in
God damn them all . . .
8. The Antelope shook and pitched on her side
(How I wish I was in Sherbrooke now)
Barrett was smashed like a bowl of eggs
And the main truck carried off both me legs
God damn them all . . .
9. Now here I lay in my twenty-third year
(How I wish I was in Sherbrooke now)
It’s been six years since we sailed away
And I just made Halifax yesterday
God damn them all . . .
R.I.P. Stan Rogers
Surely E.M Smith would be a good guest poster!
RIP James Arness, Marshal Matt Dillon
Absence of evidence is evidence of absence.
This phrase has been quite controversial. Many believe it to be wrong,
and many think it is true, but may be uncertain about it.
So, to stop the doubt, I proved it mathematically to be true:
The reactions have been thanks from the intelligent people who suspected it to be true, and blind arrogant denial from the idiots who believe it is false. Quite similar to the climate quarrels in this respect.
And of course, absence of evidence of man made global warming, is of course evidence that global warming is not man made.
Absence of evidence is evidence of absence.
This phrase has been quite controversial. Many believe it to be wrong,
and many think it is true, but may be uncertain about it.
So, to stop the doubt, I proved it mathematically to be true:
http://kim.oyhus.no/AbsenceOfEvidence.html
The reactions have been thanks from the intelligent people who suspected it to be true, and blind arrogant denial from the idiots who believe it is false. Quite similar to the climate quarrels in this respect.
And of course, absence of evidence of man made global warming, is of course evidence that global warming is not man made.
Mother nature producing strange things.
Take a look at this from one of our local news stations. Some very strange clouds just north of us.
http://www.komonews.com/weather/blogs/scott/123000938.html
A blooper from Gunsmoke
;O)
This one is actually on topic… Its wondering about the cost of building a house under the carbon tax. It occured to me that nearly all the major structural components (except wood) are made by highly energy intensive processes. Brick, cement, tiles, steel, aluminium, glass, copper, etc etc .
So the carbon tax is likely to lead to a very large increase on the cost of building a house, not to mention adding large costs to ANY major construction project.
Good way to stimulate the economy….not !!
Children of One Earth, you MUST obey the most famous warmist of all, Dr. Charlie:
Richard Glover wrote in the Sydney Morning Herald:
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/the-dangers-of-boneheaded-beliefs-20110602-1fijg.html
“Surely it’s time for climate-change deniers to have their opinions forcibly tattooed on their bodies.”
I find this offensive in the extreme. I have met and seen WWII concentration camp survivors. They had numbers forcibly tattooed on their arms. Even he thinks it is “… maybe the tattooing along the arm is a bit Nazi-creepy.” But he did not, obviously, have any second thoughts about getting it published.
[self snip]
Stratosphere eruption in Chile. Got a honker in Mexico.
Eruptions | Big Think
http://bigthink.com/blogs/eruptions
Don’t let me be a guest post ever! it would mean I’d actually have to study this crap and take it seriously.
by “crap” I mean science. I used to have an interest in science but I’ve become very disillusioned by what I’ve become aware of. it’s very depressing.
“Submit Story” brings up ‘page not found’. Please delete this if a double post.
@Kim Øyhus – I believe that your proof is flawed; or to be more precise, your proof is correct, but it does not prove what you think it does.
Your definition of “absence of evidence” is “that no evidence exists”. It is impossible to ever establish that no evidence exists, except possibly by proving the original premise false and thus proving that no evidence can exist.
Adopting your notation, that “B” is some premise and “A” is evidence that “B” is true:
You have proven:
But, without having proven ¬B, we cannot ever prove ¬A. i.e.
So effectively, you’ve only proven:
In real life, we may say that no evidence has been discovered, but we cannot generally say that none exists.
The difference between a science and a religion is that in science, we accept that we don’t know everything, and try to find the answers, while in most religions, they invent something to cover the gaps in their knowledge, (and then say that the science is settled.)
ps.. you know its a religion when you see ideas such as “its the only explanation”.
For the people who like the Chinese “technology” this is the last incredible machine, it’s a seismograph which “predict” earthquakes up to two hours in advance 🙂 :
http://www.tudou.com/programs/view/zlPwyrKlZFM/
It was on sale on Ebay at this link:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&_trksid=p4340.l2557&hash=item4cf703e6a8&item=330561742504&nma=true&pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&rt=nc&si=uZCcIlzxOkq3HgB5L9gCj4jmzDY%253D#ht_13478wt_903
He got more and he sold just three so maybe he will relist it again next.
There has been a call for “guest posts”. I would like to ask for a particular “guest post”.
The post I have in mind would be one of 750 words or less, and would be the best shot at convincing someone that CAWG is false — or at least is still an open question. I am thinking of a middle school or high school audience, but perhaps also the “normal” working stiff who went to college awhile back and has forgotten a bit of his science courses.
I am not thinking of a post that would be the “definitive” post on the subject fit for widespread publication, but a short, informal one fit for an informal response to those who are convinced simply because they have heard “Global Warming is Killing US” all their lives.
I hope someone will be so very kind as to take the time to do a post like this.
Another election defeat for the socialists:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-13658998
But then they are always “Do as I say, not as I do” hypocrites:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1394422/Saint-Bono-facing-huge-Glastonbury-protest–avoiding-tax.html
Michael J, you have totally misunderstood my proof.
You have confused conditional probability with predicate calculus, or logic.
You have also confused “not” with “there does not exist”.
My definitions mean that “absence of evidence X” is “not evidence X”.
The proof works for particular evidences, not for all, as you misunderstood,
even thou there is no “for all” or “there exists” in the proof.
OK Joseph (2:06 am), how’s this:
If catastrophic global warming (CAGW) was a possibility, it would have happened a few hundred million years ago already.
Well…I guess it’s time for us to line up and get our tattoos:
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/the-dangers-of-boneheaded-beliefs-20110602-1fijg.html
Asshats…
Every place has ’em, and no one knows what to do about ’em…
JimB
IN INSANE USE OF LOW DOSAGE ANTIBIOTICS IN FARMING
If anything shows the real nature of modern “science” its a comparison between global warming and antibiotic immune bacteria. As far as I am aware, the only possible causal link between possible global warming is a tentative link with hurricanes, although this may be changes in ocean circulation. In contrast, if we look at the impact of the growth of anti-biotic immunity of bacteria, we see a large and growing number of people being affected by MRSA in hospitals and now the tragic death and long term injury to many in Germany.
One is an entirely natural event (climate varies naturally) which has yet to my knowledge to claim a single life, the other is a direct consequence of human action and is claiming more and more people, and by the laws of exponential growth, those numbers can only continue to grow if we continue our current insane farming practices.
How to grow an anti-biotic immune bacteria??
First it’s a numbers game, so you need an awful lot of bacteria – and don’t be fussy, as many different types as possible.
Second, you need to expose them to a high enough level of antibiotics to cause those bacteria without any antibiotic immunity to be heavily retarded, but low enough to allow any bacteria with even the slightest trait that helps it against antibiotics to grow. I.e. too much and you kill off any bacteria with a “potentially” good trait.
Next, you need a really “dirty” environment, ideally with a lot of mixing of bacteria from all different places so that there is the maximum potential for “gene swap” and the maximum chance that resistance to anti-biotics can swap from one bacteria to another.
Then, you need to keep up this regime, for year upon year, decade upon decade ensuring that you constantly have an environment selecting for the best bacteria …. and better still, when you do start to get even a small bit of anti-biotic resistance in bacteria, you’ve got to UP THE DOSE to really start pushing the selection mechanism to really ensure that only the most resistant bacteria can survey and push the evolutionary pressure toward immunity.
And hey presto, after several decades, you are almost certain to get antibiotic immune bacteria.
That’s why, when you go to the doctor and get antibiotics, they tell you to “complete the dose”. The point is that you have to ensure that you kill all the bacteria and that there is no chance of any partially resistant bacteria surviving to help breed the next super bacteria.
BUT WHAT THE F***ING *ELL IS THE POINT OF HUMANS “FINISHING THE DOSE” TO STOP EVOLVING ANTIBIOTIC IMMUNITY WHEN THERE ARE MILLIONS OF CATTLE OUT THERE TO DO THE JOB FOR US?
I can’t repeat it often enough, the insanity of feeding low dosage antibiotics to cattle is mindblowingly stupid. It is the speediest way possible to evolve lots and lots of antibiotic immune bacteria.
I won’t go into the strange way that Ecoli in “organic” compost spread on “organic” produce is likely to target those who worry about a bit of warmth and don’t seem to worry that they appear to be the likely vector by which these anti-biotic immune bacteria get into the human population.
BUT HAS ANYBODY EVER HEARD ANYONE EVER RUN A CAMPAIGN TO STOP FEEDING LOW DOSAGE ANTIBIOTICS TO CATTLE?”
Of course not … because unlike the global warming scam, there’s no money in this real and growing problem (literally growing … likely inside of all of us … just waiting for our own immune systems to be under par … and then bang … they take over and there’s then nothing the doctors can do).
Cheap meet = cheap lives = back to the ages when most people had a brother or sister who they saw die during their childhood.
So it is with the Solar question. The measured difference between TSI during Solar maxima & minima is so small, therefore it cannot be the Sun causing Global Warming! However, who says TSI is “THE” metric by which one judges significant changes in the Sun’s power. Just because we haven’t found the direct &/or indirect link, it cannot be so. Prof Mike Lockwood frequently uses this argument, but I suggest that it may be that Lockwood et al may not be as good as they think they are for whatever reasons! With the polar caps on Mars receding & warming, as are other bodies in the Solar System, there has to be the Big Question, why not the Sun? Herschel did win bets on the price of wheat/corn by watching Sunspots, the higher the number the lower the price of corn, & vice-versa. Is that not significant enough to reconsider the non-Solar driven climate changes. They constantly argue that it drove climate in the past, but not now, but don’t offer up a good reason for that sudden change, other than man-made CO2 which at 1/62,500th of the total atmospheric CO2 budget (thought I’d throw in some good sounding words, – it looks good in print!), cannot possibly have a significant affect on climate! I’ll be lecturing economists next at this rate.
Hear, hear on the Stan Rogers paean!
But the lyrics are a bit muddled. E.g.: “The Antelope sloop was a sickening site” — sight.
“She’d list to the port” — a list to the port
Etc.
Uh, the quote is actually “Absence of evidence is NOT evidence of absence.”
It’s evidence that evidence hasn’t been competently searched for, generally.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/06/05/open-thread-7/#comment-674538
Sure; I’d happily be prominently tattooed with “CO2 Global Warming is Bunk”. Provided you can make it painless and hygienic.
Apparently there can be significant volcanic local CO2 out gassing even without a ‘major eruption’. They have measured CO2 concentrations up to 6500 ppm at one of the six craters of this Indonesian volcano. At these levels, CO2 can be acutely toxic as noted in the article –
Reference – Jakarta Globe – CO2 Hits Dangerous Level at Mount Dieng | June 01, 2011
http://www.thejakartaglobe.com/news/co2-hits-dangerous-level-at-mount-dieng/444349
“Poisonous gases spewing from Mount Dieng in Central Java caused increasing alarm on Tuesday as concentrations of one of the gases breached levels deemed safe for humans. Sutopo Purwo Nugroho, a spokesman for the National Disaster Mitigation Agency (BNPB), said that at Timbang, one of Dieng’s six craters, levels of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the air hit 0.65 percent on Tuesday, higher than the safe level of 0.5 percent and more than five times greater that the usual concentration of 0.1 percent.”
…
“Since Sunday, the government has relocated more than 1,100 people living in the area to shelters in nearby Batur subdistrict. Sutopo said that a number of small volcanic earthquakes had been detected as well, lasting from five to 15 seconds.”
“Surono, PVMBG chief, said that in 1979, CO2 from the Timbang crater killed 149 people”
————————————————-
I found this article via the link posted by Ed Mertin says: June 6, 2011 at 12:04 am
Which led me to another article at that site “Carbon dioxide as a volcanic hazard at the Dieng Plateau (and beyond)” http://bigthink.com/ideas/38704
Thanks Ed .. and a big thank you to all who post and comment here at WUWT.
The problem is your weak English.
“absence of evidence of X” is “not evidence of not-X” might come closer.
And “evidence” does not have a plural. It is a “general uncountable” noun in English, so “evidences” is a non-word.
Etc., etc.
Kim Oyhus’ “proofs” have been discussed previously at the Air Vent (http://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2011/04/23/reply-to-a-believer/ and http://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2011/05/01/34/).
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/the-dangers-of-boneheaded-beliefs-20110602-1fijg.html
now tattoos for deniers
Since this is an open thread, how about some comments on this story
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/06/04/3235561.htm
Andy G55: No. In orthodox Christian theology numerous biblical passages speak to the inability of humankind to know everything. See the last chapters of the book of Job for a wonderfully poetic example. Granted there are some of shallow depth who will try to cover their ignorance (such as recent doomsday predictors), but wiser heads are not so foolish. Honest theologians and scientists both ask questions and try to understand the unknown. The difference is that their methods are not completely congruent.
@Kath
Richard Glover wrote in the Sydney Morning Herald:
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/the-dangers-of-boneheaded-beliefs-20110602-1fijg.html
“Surely it’s time for climate-change deniers to have their opinions forcibly tattooed on their bodies.”
Bring it on. I’ll put up with a tattoo if only in 20 years when everyone is yammering about global cooling and the coming ice age they can’t deny that they were saying the exact opposite before.
I would like to see your responses to this:
and this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wbzK4v7GsM
It may have been noted, but it’s still bullfeathers. You can survive 5X that concentration as long as the O2 levels aren’t compromised. CO2 can suffocate, or (somewhat) confuse the breathing reflex, but is not toxic.
Here’s an observation on what seems to be a serious problem w/weather models, which are very similar to climate models. For example in my area, the NWS forecasts high temps of 96, 97F several days in the future. Since the soil here is saturated (and forests are in full leaf), I know from previous experience that it will never reach those temps — there’s just too much evaporation. Sure enough, those two days end up w/highs of 88 and 90F even w/no cloud cover. I see this too-hot forecast repeated consistently in summer. The only time it is accurate is during very dry conditions like last (late) summer.
Forecasts too high by 7-8F is huge considering uniform, light wind & sunny conditions. IMO there must be a serious underestimation of evaporative cooling at the surface by the models, or CO2 “forcing” is greatly overestimated, or UHI-heated cities are taken as the “real” temps.
Scottish Skeptic;
Excellent sense, I was with you right up till you said, “Cheap meet = cheap lives = back to the ages when most people had a brother or sister who they saw die during their childhood.”
What does an inexpensive social encounter have to do with devalued lives? And childhood mortality? I suppose if you really disapprove of “Meat market” venues …
😉
>The difference between a science and a religion is that in science,
>we accept that we don’t know everything, and try to find the answers
If you look up the founders of most branches of science, you generally find fundamentalist Christians. One, Sir Francis Bacon, is attributed to developing the scientific method. Here is an interesting quote which particularly applies to the debate over AGW;
“Men have sought to make a world from their own conception and to draw from their own minds all the material which they employed, but if, instead of doing so, they had consulted experience and observation, they would have the facts and not opinions to reason about, and might have ultimately arrived at the knowledge of the laws which govern the material world.”
Noctilucent cloud season in the northern hemisphere again …
AIM completed its 8th PMC season (4 in NH and 4 in SH) on 8th April. Interesting results here: http://aim.hamptonu.edu/mission/status_archv/20110508status.html
First cloud of NH 2011 season observed by CIPS on 24th of May currently shown here:
http://aim.hamptonu.edu/mission/status.html
Any guesses for what the NH 2011 season might end up looking like?
Perhaps a topic of only “guest posts”, but on a specific topic:
“How and/or Why I Became Skeptical of the CAGW Concept”.
Might be interesting to read what brought each of us to our current position on the “global warming” discussion. Each person wouldn’t have to write a novel, just something relatively short.
For example, my story –
Prior to Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth” I pretty much just believed the main stream party line regarding “Global Warming” – all the facts were in, all the scientists agreed, the debate is over. The temperature of the earth was getting higher and the primary cause was anthropogenic CO2 emissions into the atmosphere (well, at the time I simply called it “man made”, didn’t really even know the word “anthropogenic”).
When I saw Al Gore on the late night shows promoting his movie, my only non-believing thought was that Al Gore is a very polarizing person and probably wasn’t the best spokesman for this GW problem, especially in the US. But then I started hearing “reviews” of “AIT” describing all of the errors, misrepresentations, and false information in the movie. Not just little things like “the temperature in Podunk, OH on July 27, 1967 was 87 degrees F when it really was 86 degrees F”, but major items like showing a graph representing millions of years of temp and atmospheric CO2 levels and stating clearly that CO2 was causing the temps to rise and fall when, in fact, it was the temp that rose and fell first followed by the CO2 level.
I began to wonder – why did Al Gore need to use misrepresentations, manipulated data, and false information to show something that “all the scientists agreed with, all the facts were in, and the debate was over”? I then started seeing what was on the Internet regarding the subject and I quickly took a puck in the face from the “hockey stick” – whoa! It is not just Al Gore! Even worse, the World’s Policy Makers were also being provided with the UN’s IPCC report and it also had to use misrepresentations, manipulated data, etc. to arrive at its conclusions. The main stream media was telling me things like “the Polar Ice Cap would be ice free for the first time in millions of years” in bold, assertive letters on the front pages while a week or so later in very small print way back in a obscure section would be a “correction” saying the Polar Ice Cap has been ice free many times in the past and it has nothing to do with anthropogenic CO2.
Instead of discovering that “all the facts were in, all the scientists agreed, the debate is over” what I’ve been discovering is that “the facts” are somewhat in dispute, there are many scientists who do not agree, and the debate, whenever it is allowed to happen, is far from over.
I am skeptical
I am skeptical
Skeptical I am.
(Apologies to Dr. Seuss)
Dang Gnomish! You beat me to it!
The forcible tattooing of people has a very dark history. (I would mention those who were the last ones to do just that. But then I’d probably get “snipped”)
Sometimes, you just have to wonder where these buffoons got their education. Is he ignorant, stupid or really evil?
Regards,
Steamboat Jack (Jon Jewett’s evil twin)
Kim Øyhus says:
June 5, 2011 at 11:17 pm
Absence of evidence is evidence of absence.
This phrase has been quite controversial. Many believe it to be wrong,
and many think it is true, but may be uncertain about it.
So, to stop the doubt, I proved it mathematically to be true:
_______________
HaHaHa ha
The irony in your “proof” is that only someone like God could determine whether or not there is a true “abscence” of evidence, so an application of the “proof” is only theoretically possible, unless you are God.
Perhaps some logicians think they are omniscient. Most first and second year philosophy students lose their faith in God. Only the more gifted students of philosophy allow for the existence of God.
Change the statement to, “Apparent absence of evidence is evidence of apparent absence.” and I could go along with it as it’s used in your examples of applications.
Brian H, if you had actually followed the link to my proof, and read it, you would have seen plenty of text about where the quote is from, and which forms it had.
Hint: Carl Sagan.
http://kim.oyhus.no/AbsenceOfEvidence.html
Your understanding of my proof, its text, and what I mean, is absent.
And if you had checked “evidences” in say Merriam-Webster, you would have seen that it is indeed a word.
From this I know now that Brian H makes strong claims without checking facts.
There is therefore no reason for me to read further what he writes.
On the Richard Glover rant calling for tattoos for “deniers”, I found this paragraph illuminating:
“People on the left instinctively believe in communal action, the role of government and the efficacy of international agencies such as the UN. They were always going to believe in climate change; it’s the sort of problem that can best be solved using the tools they most enjoy using.”
Yawn.
Etc.
Absence of evidence is worth noting ONLY if extensive, competent, and thorough efforts have been made to find it. Until then, it is only evidence of failure to look.
What is missing from the climate record is evidence that it has never changed. And even if there were evidence that it has never changed, that would be a change from the norm.
What is normal is change. Absence of climate change is not. Those who would spend trillions resisting or reversing change would hasten a dramatic change from the norm.
This is a simple question: Shown the past, use your best guess to predict the future. Start here. The question is What will happen next?:
http://www.globalwarmingart.com/images/8/8f/Ice_Age_Temperature_Rev.png
Several places, they’re showing the NOAA chart showing, as they say, the number of strong to violent EF-3, EF-4 and EF-5 tornadoes from 1950 to 2011. According to that chart’s caption, “…There is not a decades-long increasing trend in the numbers of these most dangerous of tornadoes…”
Personally, I see a problem with the chart. Mainly, the F scale was introduced in 1971 by Tetsuya Fujita of the University of Chicago.
“…In the United States, tornadoes from 1973 onward were rated soon after occurrence whereas the scale was applied retroactively to tornado reports from 1950 through 1972 for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Tornado Database…”
The Fujita scale is effectively a damage scale, and the wind speeds associated with the damage listed aren’t rigorously verified.
So, the F-rating of storms prior to ’73 were determined long after the storm, and probably long after the damage was repaired/removed. How accurate were the written reports and photographs?
Second, is the Enhanced scale (EF-ratings). The Fujita scale was superseded in 2007 by the Enhanced Fujita Scale in the United States (and is biased to US construction practices).
Once again, in order to match like-to-like, the historic records SHOULD be re-examined to re-rate them to the enhanced scale. Because as the US changed since 1950, so did their construction practices and construction codes.
A building constructed in the 1950’s, probably wood framed, may be no match for those built today (treated woods, braces, trusses, etc).
So damage to buildings may be a little off – a building may have been blown away by weaker winds because of it’s construction.
So to say this chart accurately reflects the number of EF-3, EF-4 and EF-5 tornadoes back to 1950 is, IMHO, just a LITTLE off.
Opinions?
c.s says: June 6, 2011 at 5:52 am
The video conflates “climate change denial” with smoking and weapons of mass destruction. Pathetic!
However, this is a science blog. A full discussion of the recent surfacestations paper would be helpful. I have not seen it on WUWT (I do not monitor every day), but I have seen criticism on other websites, with personal attacks on Anthony in particular, and “AGW deniers” in general. I think this debate needs to be met head-on.
You are welcome, Dave in DE. OK, CATCH MY BREATH! Huff, huff… margin call ok on ticker CLMT order this morning. I’m in, watch this sucker go!!! It pays an 8.90% yield. Excellent balance sheet, revenue, man what a stock!!
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/the-dangers-of-boneheaded-beliefs-20110602-1fijg.html
Oh here we go. McKibben calls for civic disobedience.
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/05/30-5
Published on Monday, May 30, 2011 by TruthDig.com
The Sky Really Is Falling
by Chris Hedges
“It goes far beyond party affiliation or ideology,” he said. “Fossil fuel undergirds every ideology we have. Breaking with it is going to be a traumatic and difficult task. The natural world is going to continue to provide us, unfortunately, with many reminders about why we have to do that. Sooner or later we will wise up. The question is all about that sooner or later.”
“I’d like people to go to climatedirectaction.org and sign up,” McKibben said. “We are going to be issuing calls for people to be involved in civil disobedience
I would like people to demonstrate their solidarity with people all around the world in this fight. The next big chance to do that will be Sept. 24, a huge global day of action that we’re calling ‘Moving Planet.’ It will be largely bicycle based, because the bicycle is one of the few tools that both rich and poor use and because it is part of the solution we need.
“I wish there was some easy ‘end around,’ some backdoor through which we could go to get done what needs to be done,” he said. “But that’s not going to happen. That became clear at Copenhagen and last summer when the U.S. Senate refused to take a vote on the most mild, tepid climate legislation there could have been. We are going to have to build a movement that pushes the fossil fuel industry aside.
“At least they knew they were going to win,” he said of the civil rights movement.
We’ve got to win quickly if we’re going to win. We’ve already passed the point where we’re going to stop global warming. It has already warmed a degree and there is another degree in the pipeline from carbon already emitted. The heat gets held in the ocean for a while, but it’s already there. We’ve already guaranteed ourselves a miserable century. The question is whether it’s going to be an impossible one.”
They just cant help themselves – every click is killing the planet:
http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Could%20killing%20planet%20search%20time/4891461/story.html
@Kim Øyhus — Please explain what you mean by “absence of evidence”.
If you mean “no evidence exists” then your proof is correct, but it is meaningless as we can never be sure that no evidence exists.
If you mean “no evidence has been observed” then the proof is flawed. Evidence may exist, but we are yet to find it.
Perhaps you have some other definition that I am not aware of.
By the way, Merriam Webster redirects “evidences” to “evidence”.
The noun “evidence” does not have a separate plural. The same word is used.
However the verb “evidence” has “evidences” as a transitive form. e.g. the arrival of swallows evidences the approach of spring.
c.s.
I took a look at the vid’s you posted. There is a lot of guilt by association going on in the first which I don’t find very effective or useful – but no matter.
The second vid is more interesting. I think they make an effective point that sea ice extent is an important indicator. I also think they dissemble making their argument about percentages. There is some validity in the point they make, but their suggestion doesn’t improve on the matter because they don’t point out that they have used different divisors in the percentages they compare. If they go the route they suggest they should have the same divisor in the percentages -in other words Arctic ice/total ice versus Antarctic ice/total ice. Using Arctic ice (current)/Arctic ice(past) versus Antarctic ice(current)/Antarctic ice(past) buries in the percentages the fact that there is much more Antarctic ice than Arctic ice. Most interesting of all is the following vid by the same group or person:
In this vid it is stated that there is a bipolar seesaw as regards to temperatures, and that most current climate scientists accept this . If I believe in the bipolar seesaw (which I may not) I would expect the total sea ice to be the important number and NOT the Arctic ice alone. They themselves argue “when one part of the planet warms, another cools at the same time.” They are doing this because they are uncomfortable Dansgaard-Oeschger events as reflected in Greenland ice cores – claiming that D-O events are regional not global. One thing I require of my sciences are that they be consistent. Don’t tell me on Monday that temps at opposite poles are regional but then on Friday argue the opposite.
Michael J, nice to see someone actually check a word in Merriam-Webster. You deserve an answer. I use language to convey information, not to follow rules.
I thought the examples on the proof page would be sufficient, but many people have the same problem as you, so perhaps they are not.
So, evidence for a murder would be a dead body, blood spatter, a smoking gun.
If any of these evidences are not there, they are absent, and the probability of murder is less.
Rabbits leave rabbit tracks. (A lot of people had problems understanding that the tracks that rabbits leave are rabbit tracks.) If there are fewer rabbit tracks, then there are fewer rabbits, because rabbits make rabbit tracks. The rabbit tracks are evidence for rabbits, and when rabbit tracks are absent, there is less chance of meeting a rabbit.
Kim Øyhus says:
June 6, 2011 at 9:12 am
If you don’t follow the rules, then you convey no information.
Kim Øyhus says:
June 6, 2011 at 9:12 am
Michael J, nice to see someone actually check a word in Merriam-Webster. You deserve an answer. I use language to convey information, not to follow rules.
I thought the examples on the proof page would be sufficient, but many people have the same problem as you, so perhaps they are not.
So, evidence for a murder would be a dead body, blood spatter, a smoking gun.
If any of these evidences are not there, they are absent, and the probability of murder is less.
Rabbits leave rabbit tracks. (A lot of people had problems understanding that the tracks that rabbits leave are rabbit tracks.) If there are fewer rabbit tracks, then there are fewer rabbits, because rabbits make rabbit tracks. The rabbit tracks are evidence for rabbits, and when rabbit tracks are absent, there is less chance of meeting a rabbit.
__________
I like the Rabbit track analogy with respect to trying to follow your thought process in this thread. Kinda like a fox chasing a zig-zagging rabbit through a field………
@Kim Øyhus — OK, Kim. Now you are talking about probability; “likelihood” perhaps. This is a different situation from logical proof.
If you cannot see any rabbit prints, then the likelihood of rabbits is certainly lower, but it is not zero. Maybe the ground is hard, or the wind covered the prints. But probably there are no rabbits.
You started with “Absence of evidence is evidence of absence.”. Given the context of this site, I read “evidence” as “scientific evidence”; i.e. “proof”. I think that maybe you intended it as “hints”. Is that correct?
The phrase is sometimes used about Global Warming, and in that context I do not think it is true. There is so much that we do not know about the climate that there could easily be evidence in front of our noses, and we might not see it.
Obviously, a long absence of evidence of disastrous AGW will give us a degree of confidence, but it is definitely not proof.
Regarding “evidences”, I did not complain about your language. Your meaning was clear and that is enough. I only commented when you were arguing the point with another commenter. From your name, I am guessing that English may not be your first language. Anybody who can communicate in multiple languages has my great respect. I speak only one language, and I am still trying to master it. 🙂
“Steve Oregon says:
June 6, 2011 at 7:47 am
Oh here we go. McKibben calls for civic disobedience.”
What distant planet is McKibben talking about? There has been some violent weather last year. And the year before that, and the year before that and before that as far as we can collectively recall. So a couple of quick questions: What is different and how on Earth is Mankind responsible for the non-difference? Global warming? A little I suppose; but the temperature record itself is dubious and shows little, very little change. Nothing catastrophic or even very interesting (oh heresy!) outside a relatively small group of technical specialists, scientists, and interested educated laymen. How oh how is this a crisis?
Oh, now I remember, it isn’t this planet McKibben is talking about; he’s actually talking about a planet he invented in his poetic disaster-pornography novel “Eaarth”.
World’s first solar power station that *LEGITIMATELY* makes electricity at night.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1393879/Gemasolar-Power-Plant-The-worlds-solar-power-station-generates-electricity-NIGHT.html
Occupying 185 hectares (457 acres, 0.714 sq miles, 1.85 sq kilometers) in southern Spain with 2650 mirrors (heliostats), sunlight is focused on a central tower, where molten salts are heated, then the salts are stored and can generate electricity for up to 15 hours on a full charge, for overnight or when there is no sunlight.
The pics must have been taken during a “testing phase,” in the 2nd one I can only count 6 panels that look aimed at the tower with 3 panels to the far left in differing positions.
Wow, those other renewable energies must be rather pathetic. So what happens for the maximum 95 days of the year when this power station ain’t producing?
During a full 365 day year, that averages as 502 watts per hour. Might be enough for some CFL’s, but my coffeemaker uses twice that amount. Going by that stated 270 days of generation at minimum, that’s a whopping giant average 679 watts per hour. Great, you can have a few CFL’s on while waiting for your hot water to be generated at half the rate of a common coffeemaker. Good thing that in the Andalucia region they don’t need electricity for air conditioning and refrigeration, let alone heating and cooking, as opposed to other regions of Spain where they do use electricity for those purposes.
Note: This is as opposed to non-legitimate solar power generation at night, as previously mentioned here when done in Spain (same country as above, amazingly enough):
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/04/13/the-insanity-of-greenery/
This is also as opposed to the many other residential and otherwise “solar stations” that already “generate electricity at night” by converting the energy stored in solar-charged batteries into normal household-type AC current, since apparently they don’t count. ☺
The author Clive Cussler had an international criminal try to blow up a Mississippi levee
and cause the river to change course and leave the Port of New Orleans high and dry. Suppose that a massive ice age flood did the same thing? Good by Midwestern economy.
One might reformulate Kim’s proof: Each time we fail finding evidence for A, the likelihood or probability for (not A) rises.
People, first find out about conditional probabilities and the rules that apply to them before bashing Kim because his proof looks perfectly fine to me.
@ Kim Øyhus: my head already aches from trying to get around your suggested Bayesian definition of “causation” for your supposed proof that “correlation is evidence of causation” – though the evidential value of any such correlation (as we lawyers tend to put it) is unknown and unquantifiable, and all one can truly conclude is that any instance of non-correlation conclusively proves non-causation.
You are doing the same again here: purporting to define concepts such as “evidence” and “absence” in terms which are actually just meaningless riddles – as is the conclusion you draw from them, which also lacks any evidential value.
I think you made your position amply clear in your posting to tAV as below:
http://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2011/04/23/reply-to-a-believer/#comment-49714
kadaka (KD Knoebel) says:
June 6, 2011 at 11:44 am
“World’s first solar power station that *LEGITIMATELY* makes electricity at night.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1393879/Gemasolar-Power-Plant-The-worlds-solar-power-station-generates-electricity-NIGHT.html
”
Going by the numbers in the article, assuming a value of 5 Eurocent/kWh, and (ignorantly) assuming 1 GBP=1 EUR (sorry, i’m lazy) they will recoup the money in 130 years (assuming an inflation of zero %). That’s a world record…
DirkH says:
June 6, 2011 at 1:11 pm
“Going by the numbers in the article, assuming a value of 5 Eurocent/kWh, and (ignorantly) assuming 1 GBP=1 EUR (sorry, i’m lazy) they will recoup the money in 130 years (assuming an inflation of zero %). That’s a world record…”
Ohh, sorry, that was TOO lazy; 260mill / 5.5mill yearly value gives 47.27 years… sorry i take it all back and i’m not sure whether they still qualify for the world record of slowest ROI ever.
Steve Oregon says:
June 6, 2011 at 7:47 am
Oh here we go. McKibben calls for civic disobedience.
‘“At least they knew they were going to win,” he said of the civil rights movement.
We’ve got to win quickly if we’re going to win.’
I wonder who he sees in the role of Dr. MLK, Jr.? Who in the role of the people who sat illegally at lunch counters in Birmingham in 1963? What will be the act of disobedience? Maybe drinking Starbucks and smoking dope on the DC Mall?
This article is good for a few laughs:
http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Could killing planet search time/4891461/story.html
the Internet is destroying the climate!
California’s Protected Golden Eagle dying in large numbers to green windmills according to the Daily Mail.
“California’s attempts to switch to green energy have inadvertently put the survival of the state’s golden eagles at risk.
Scores of the protected birds have been dying each year after colliding with the blades of about 5,000 wind turbines.
Now the drive for renewable power sources, such as wind and the sun, being promoted by President Obama and state Governor Jerry Brown has raised fears that the number of newborn golden eagles may not be able to keep pace with the number of turbine fatalities.
The death count along the ridgelines of the Bay Area’s Altamount Pass Wind Resource Area has averaged 67 a year for three decades.
The 200ft high turbines, which have been operating since the 1980s, lie in the heart of the grassy canyons that are home to one of the highest densities of nesting golden eagles in the US.
‘It would take 167 pairs of local nesting golden eagles to produce enough young to compensate for their mortality rate related to wind energy production,’ field biologist Doug Bell, manager of East Bay Regional Park District’s wildlife programme, told the Los Angeles Times. ‘We only have 60 pairs,’ he added.
Nationwide, about 440,000 birds are said to be accidentally killed at wind farms each year, as well as thousands more bats. With the government pushing for more wind energy farms, that statistic is likely to rise.”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1394945/The-green-killer-Scores-protected-golden-eagles-dying-colliding-wind-turbines.html#ixzz1OXqOcOJY
http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Could%20killing%20planet%20search%20time/4891461/story.html
Anyone know how many episodes of Happy Days were made after Fonzie jumped the shark?
Smokey… thank you for sharing the link to Barrett’s Privateers sung by the original writer, Stan Rogers. I have a version by The Corries that I have always loved.
Here is a song that, for sheer clever wordsmithing, can’t be beat! (you can skip the little intro but you will enjoy the song!)
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukvBRKiYcr0&w=480&h=390%5D
When I was a young apprentice
and less than compos mentis
I took leave of all my senses
with a maid I fell in love.
Her ringlets so entwined me
Aphrodite’s smile did blind me
Cupid’s arrow struck behind me
and her father owned a pub.
It was there I met my nemesis
in her father’s licensed premises
Like the Seraphim of Genesis
sat Mary Anne Maguire.
Arrayed in fine apparel
astride a porter barrel
She looked the kind of girl that
would fill you with desire.
All the turtle doves were cooing
as I took to my wooing
Her Loveliness pursuing
in the springtime of that year.
But she thought I should be older
and more gallant and much bolder
In the uniform of a soldier
’tis then she’d hold me dear.
In extremis and euphoria
I joined with Queen Victoria
For a spell of death or gloria
a-fighting with the Boers.
To the wind I threw all caution
I’ll return with fame and fortune
And together make a portion
of matrimony’s chores.
On the gravestone of her mother
she swore she loved no other
But I was to soon discover
that she played me for a berk.
For lady-luck had beached me
and intelligence had reached me
Whilst I’d been overseas she
had married to a Turk.
Well me, I then deserted
for to find the girl who’d flirted
Back to Ireland I reverted
for my jealously was roused.
In Maguire’s Pub in Derry
I found him making merry
With his arms around my Mary
as together they caroused.
So I took my time and waited
until his thirst was sated
And home he navigated
through the streets of Derry town.
At his lodgins he stood knocking
and whilst they were unlocking
I put a stone into a stocking
on his head I brought it down.
‘Twas then the night’s serenity
was rent with loud obscenity
And Ottoman profanity
that I couldn’t understand.
With an oath he made to grab me
with full intent to stab me
But as he tried to kebab me
I was screaming up the strand.
All around the town’s perimeter
he chased me with his scimitar
A powerful passion limiter
to an errant in his pride.
Through the waterside he chased me
to the Bridge of Foyle he raced me
And at Derry Quay he faced me
so I jumped into the tide.
Sure bravery’s no virtue
when some heathen’s trying to hurt you
And all noble thoughts desert you
when you see his curly knife.
For there’s many things worth trying for
and occasionally worth lying for
But there’s bugger-all worth dying for
so I’ll stick to the soldier’s life.
Joanie,
Thank you for that link, very entertaining. Having grown up in an Irish neighborhood I’m well aware of their musical gift.
[The link I gave for Barret’s Privateers was sung by the Irish Descendants, not by Stan Rogers. Here is the tune sung by Stan, his brother [with the long hair] and friends.]
What’s that blasted Sun up to these days?
For one, the area of umbra in spots is lacking:
http://www.robertb.darkhorizons.org/TempGr/uSC24vs13_14.GIF
Compared to 1901-5, it’s looking like a bit weaker than that cycle. Also, the flux shoots up when new spots appear, but stays up there as the spots shrink. Most puzzling.
Secondly, a lot of the spot groups appear to be short lived and lacking in umbra:
http://www.robertb.darkhorizons.org/TempGr/uvp2324a.PNG
The L&P effect holds to base course. Meanwhile, the southern part of the cycle makes no move towards the equator. The northern band of spots looks to hit the Solar Equator mid-2012. I’m half-heartedly expecting the Max to consist of a mess of weak spots, which would be par for SC24 behavior. It has yet to do anything normal, why change oars now?
What is really interesting (and rather unexpected) is the re-emergence of the Northern Solar Polar Cap.
http://stereo-ssc.nascom.nasa.gov/beacon/latest_256/ahead_euvi
Not entirely ‘there’ yet, but it’s working on it.
SC24: the asthmatic cycle that keeps right on sputtering, and sputtering, and sputtering…
http://www.weiner.house.gov/news_display.aspx?id=1386
Anthony Weiner:
“As President Obama challenges world leaders to join the United States and address the impacts of climate change; New Yorkers should pay close attention. New York has a unique opportunity to lead a green revolution in our economy and create thousands of high paying jobs, generate millions in investment to grow small businesses and put hard working middle class New Yorkers back to work.”
DirkH, you obviously understand the proof. What you learn from this discussion is how incompetent and arrogant people really are, confusedly bashing something they do not understand, but which intelligent rational people find quite obvious. This is the reason I seldom believe what people claim anymore, unless they have proven their veracity.
TimC, you seem to me to be a representative sample of lawyers, if you truly are a lawyer, as your sentences are long and convoluted while totally missing the meanings, facts and logic.
MichaelJ, my proof is about conditional probabilites. It states that clearly.
Here’s a clearer (on stage) Rogers performance of Barrett’s Privateers:
I’ve come up with a powerful and aggressive visual image that would do nicely as a tattoo for us scorcher-scam scoffers: a pair of upraised, shackled hands decisively snapping a hockey stick (with its blade upturned at the right). It is based on the well-known (to warmists) logo of the War Resisters League, in which the hands are snapping a rifle. A large, easily readable caption around the perimeter of the button reads, “Gore Resisters’ League.”
Following an earlier version of my suggestion (which had a weaker slogan, a too-small typeface, and lacked the chain), a kindly blogger named S. Weasel created an image that came close to my vision, here (then hit page-down twice): http://sweasel.com/archives/6403
I hope he’ll create an upgraded version—then I could take it to a tattoo artist and “get it on.”
Kim Øyhus says:
June 6, 2011 at 9:47 pm
DirkH, you obviously understand the proof. What you learn from this discussion is how incompetent and arrogant people really are, confusedly bashing something they do not understand, but which intelligent rational people find quite obvious. This is the reason I seldom believe what people claim anymore, unless they have proven their veracity.
____________
Your condition is probably projection. Your “proof” proves it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection
Anthony Watts had said:
For image insertion into posts, may I suggest the free http://www.tinypic.com which Bob Tisdale regularly uses?
The problem is that one cannot register for Tinypic anymore. Without a registered account, what you upload becomes anonymous web content of unknown ownership, with the original author having no control, unable to even delete. Who knows who could end up using it, with the author unable to assert copyright. Heck, I got a few old pics on Tinypic I wish I could get rid of but can’t. Try to register on Tinypic, you get thrown to the registration form for Photobucket.
Tinypic was acquired by Photobucket, see this from Sept 1, 2010. The plan was to transition users from Tinypic to Photobucket. Read this from September 24. The transition failed, many Tinypic users were upset that the links to their uploaded content stopped working. Notice was given on the Tinypic site, which users loudly complained was inadequate. So they restored the links. For now.
It’s hard to believe they weren’t aware that many Tinypic links are used in blog comment postings and the like, where the original poster doesn’t have the ability to update the links. The plan was to shut down Tinypic, they may try to do so again, providing what they will then think is adequate notice, although since Tinypic is a free service there are no “customers” with financial grounds on which to complain if they shut down Tinypic tomorrow.
For added irritation, I do have a Photobucket account, using the same email address as I used for my previous Tinypic uploads. But Tinypic remains too anonymous, I can’t access my Tinypic uploads from the Photobucket account. After hours of searching the Help sections, the sites, the web… It looks impossible to “reclaim” Tinypic uploads, at all.
Thus Tinypic should not be recommended.
Here is a video of the latest solar explosion:
“Simply Amazing Solar Prominence Eruption!”