William Connolley, aka the wiki warrior of climate, runs a blog called “Stoat” under the National Geographic brand. In his latest episode rant, he is complaining about his personal perception of Dr. Judith Curry’s professionalism regarding her ocean acidification discussion.
Is is just me, or does professionalism and f-bombs not go together? Sheesh.
Here is the screencap:
Both he and “Eli” (Chemist Dr. Joshua Halpern of Howard University) seem to have trouble with their own self images when it comes to professionalism.
All this over a change in pH from 8.25 to 8.14 (values given is Stoats rant). This is a small amount of variance which may very well be within the bounds of natural variability.
Maybe the Stoat never read this article from Jo Nova about a paper from Scripps on ocean pH:
It turns out that far from being a stable pH, spots all over the world are constantly changing. One spot in the ocean varied by an astonishing 1.4 pH units regularly.
…
The authors draw two conclusions: (1) most non-open ocean sites vary a lot, and (2) and some spots vary so much they reach the “extreme” pH’s forecast for the doomsday future scenarios on a daily (a daily!) basis.
…
Even the more stable and vast open ocean is not a fixed pH all year round. Hofmann writes that “Open-water areas (in the Southern Ocean) experience a strong seasonal shift in seawater pH (~0.3–0.5 units) between austral summer and winter.”
This paper is such a game changer, they talk about rewriting the null hypothesis:
“This natural variability has prompted the suggestion that “an appropriate null hypothesis may be, until evidence is obtained to the contrary, that major biogeochemical processes in the oceans other than calcification will not be fundamentally different under future higher CO2/lower pH conditions””
Isn’t water’s capacity for CO2 governed by temperature? I thought the sea would have to cool down in order to increase its capacity for CO2..?
My 18 month old has illogical tantrums based more in reality than Stoat.
Maybe he just needs a Popsicle or to be held and burped.
Really? Someone actually slid over and read what the Con(nolley) writes? I feel sorry for whoever does that, it must fry a few brain cells each trip.
The irony of Con(nolley) writing about “spraying disinformation” is almost painful.
Well, there’s one small phrase of truth in his rant – “… me not doing science any more.”
Did he ever?
Dr Curry is one of the politest and most tolerant bloggers on the planet.
This rant says nothing about her, but a great deal about the author.
8.25 to 8.14 a difference of 0.11, which is 1.351% of 8.14.
When I was carrying out my undergraduate physics experiments we had it drummed into us that + or – 4% was statistically insignificant as it was within the bounds of an error due to measurement. Given that they have not measured the whole ocean or even 1% of it I doubt the accuracy of the measurements being extrapolated to the whole ocean.
We also were told that chemists were sloppy with there errors (but that’s another story) 😮
Corny-olley wants the monopoly on disinformation – perhaps there’s a good reason why he left RC
Judith actually used her lack of information on the subject to raise interesting points about exactly how we make choices when we don’t have all the information … as usual, Connolley’s not following the bouncing ball.
w.
Was that ‘stoat’ or ‘weasel’ ?
While we’re on the subject, I’ve often wondered why someone would name his blog after a weasel. My final conjecture was that it was something to do with the “Truth In Advertising” laws, but that’s just a hypothesis, it’s still an enduring mystery.
w.
WC is an idiot, we all know that. To be honest, if you want to look at something with more intelligence than the weselly stoat – you’d be better off lifting a local manhole and seeing the lifeforms in the underlying sewer!
Forget him – he ain’t worth the effort.
Mind you, having his rants ‘saved for prosperity’ isn’t a bad idea. After all, humankind needs to learn from its mistakes 😉
‘weselly’ should be weaselly !
Now didn’t we have a gentleman a week or two ago here who paralysed the “ocean acidification” hypothesis with garlic and a crucifix, shot it with a silver bullet and buried it at a crossroads with a fresh sapling stake through its heart?
Actually, I had pictured Connolley as a rotund gentleman, somehow his actions have reminded me of a few people I know who sit in the basement typing and filling their keyboard with crumbs (those who watch SouthPark, remember the WoW adversary?) I realize it’s not nice to make fun of someone’s appearance, but in his picture he reminds me of some other ill-tempered know-it-alls I’ve had to work with that refuse to listen to logic and reason.
<<>>
CO2 solubility does indeed fall with increasing temperature, BUT, at any given temperature, the amount that will dissolve is roughly proportional to the partial pressure of CO2 in the atmosphere.
ps The above was a reply to Rune – my parentheses were badly chosen and deleted his/her posting.
Well, it seems to me that the Weasel has explained a little of his own monomania. Note his belief that a review of the literature will produce the ‘truth’. Note now the vast deficit of knowledge we have about acidification and the ocean.
Note in particular here his mistaken belief and his acts in response to this mistaken belief. This is grandeur.
====================
What an angry, snide nitwit.
It is encouraging to see the panic that exists among the deluded who blindly supported the “save the planet by banning CO2” hypothesis. The confidence that once was rife is fading as even the most committed accidently come across facts which challenge their beliefs. So paranoid are they I feel many must have invested their life savings in carbon futures or renewables. Watching UK minister Ed Davies try to swing a debate away from the temperature record toward ocean warming and melting ice caps where he is convinced the evidence for AGW is more robust it was obvious his chief scientist advisor is one of the fraudulent few. Oceans are cooling and ice caps are growing yet Minister Davies hasn’t been briefed as such. Such embarrassment when the penny finally drops. I notice some of your senators are no better informed and your president seems even more ignorant. Who votes for these clowns???
One thing that ‘the Team’ and his followers don’t lack is ego , honest yes , accuracy yes , scientific decency yes , all those thing they have in very short supply . But ego they have on an epic scale .
I have been assuring my friend in Nova Scotia that acidification of the ocean will make cracking lobsters effortless. I guess I’ll have to send her a ball-peen hammer and an apology. 😛
As for Connolley, his mother is probably still looking for a strong enough soap to cure his vocabulary problem. To address Dr. Curry this way shows his impudence rather than an understanding of the subject. Maybe the college kids are impressed.
@Rune
“Isn’t water’s capacity for CO2 governed by temperature? I thought the sea would have to cool down in order to increase its capacity for CO2..?”
The partial pressure is also important. I.e the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere. Henry’s law explains this.
Never a trust a middle aged man with a pony tail ….now anyone seen Grant Foster.
This pH change is well with the normal variance, 8.4-7.4pH, so what is the problem? Seawater pH changes daily depending on many factors so this panic says more about the panicers than anything, total ignorance about ocean chemistry perhaps.
If the man had facts, he wouldn’t insult. Otherwise, he is just plain sadistic.