tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post8115312944175616377..comments2024-03-25T05:30:23.847+11:00Comments on HotWhopper: Logic fail x 2: Anthony Watts is confusingly disappointed with Pope FrancisSouhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comBlogger86125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-83899122960977996342015-01-08T21:34:59.588+11:002015-01-08T21:34:59.588+11:00Eadler2, as per my earlier post (January 6, 12:00 ...Eadler2, as per my earlier post (January 6, 12:00 AM) they stopped banning new books supporting heliocentrism in 1758, but it took another 60 years to get around to rehabilitating works that were already on the Index.<br /><br />And they had always accepted heliocentrism as a useful model. They just declined to accept is as a physical fact until the key issue of the apparent lack of parallax was solved (the stars were at much greater distances than anyone imagined). Cardinal Bellarmine explained all this to Galileo at the time, and once that vital piece of evidence put the issue beyond doubt, they made no further objection.FrankDnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-1388357374109357972015-01-08T14:08:00.305+11:002015-01-08T14:08:00.305+11:00In my previous post I should have included the poi...In my previous post I should have included the point made in my link that,<br />" Heliocentricism was never declared a heresy by either ex cathedra pronouncement or an ecumenical council."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-24313206887734588332015-01-08T12:51:59.882+11:002015-01-08T12:51:59.882+11:00Watts claim that it "took the Catholic churc...Watts claim that it "took the Catholic church 359 years to decide that Galileo was right after all, and that the Earth DOES in fact revolve around the Sun." is also quite wrong. They formally recognized that Galileo was right in 1822.<br /><br />http://www.astronomynotes.com/history/GalileoAffair.html<br /><br />"Galileo's works were eventually removed from the Index and in 1822, at the behest of Pius VII, the Holy Office granted an imprimatur to the work of Canon Settele, in which Copernicanism was presented as a physical fact and no longer as an hypothesis."<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-8831968281820468982015-01-08T12:28:52.061+11:002015-01-08T12:28:52.061+11:00... or I should say, has been out for over three m...... or I should say, has been out for over three months.Brandon R. Gateshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17031044715994785956noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-78804066541167244112015-01-08T12:26:29.470+11:002015-01-08T12:26:29.470+11:00BBD, ah my mistake, a new paper is out. Excellent...BBD, ah my mistake, a new paper is out. Excellent.Brandon R. Gateshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17031044715994785956noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-47794688681415967602015-01-08T09:32:15.858+11:002015-01-08T09:32:15.858+11:00Teh Wutters and McI tried very hard to pull down M...Teh Wutters and McI tried very hard to pull down M*13* (duly chronicled by Sou) but AFAIK they haven't come across Marcott14 yet. <a href="http://icecorelab.science.oregonstate.edu/sites/icecorelab.science.oregonstate.edu/files/Marcott_nature13799-1.pdf" rel="nofollow">Here's the full paper for you.</a> I know the CO2 curve stops ~9ka, but it's far enough into the Holocene to show that Wagner's proxy reconstruction is probably wrong. The new WAIS Divide core seems to be yielding the best combination of temporal resolution and gas measurement accuracy so far achieved (excepting the <a href="http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/co2/graphics/lawdome.gif" rel="nofollow">relatively short record from the Law Dome cores</a> - which also contradicts Wagner). BBDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10687930416706386215noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-81337127699793326732015-01-08T06:43:09.498+11:002015-01-08T06:43:09.498+11:00BBD,
WUWTers have of course thoroughly "debu...BBD,<br /><br />WUWTers have of course thoroughly "debunked" both Marcott (2014) and Shakun (2012). The latter especially because of its direct challenge to the "CO2 (always) lags, not leads" article of faith. It goes without saying that what I call the "hemispheric sloshing" of temperatures shown in Shakun goes completely ignored.<br /><br />I gather what's really going on is that direct gas measurement is indeed the superior technique for reasons I already found obvious, and that while what Wagner writes is good enough pass muster for publication in serious journals his techniques don't gain traction because real skeptics know when to model and when not to ... and have a thing for being logically consistent about it.<br /><br />I need a plasma cutter to slice the irony. Thanks for the feedback.Brandon R. Gateshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17031044715994785956noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-59136213332944594452015-01-07T22:47:18.392+11:002015-01-07T22:47:18.392+11:00Brandon R
I don't know much at all about this...Brandon R<br /><br />I don't know much at all about this but the latest, very high resolution gas analysis from the WAIS Divide core strongly suggests that Wagner is mistaken. See <a href="http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v514/n7524/full/nature13799.html" rel="nofollow">Marcott et al. (2014)</a>. <br /><br />As a general rule, actual samples of paleoatmosphere are likely to be a more accurate guide to CO2 variability than a statistical model of stomatal proxies. I thought the Wutters didn't trust statistical models derived from proxies anyway. WUWT? :-) <br /><br />It sounds like teh usual Wuttering over obsolete and problematic research. <br /><br />BBDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10687930416706386215noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-66995453347935380032015-01-07T13:14:23.407+11:002015-01-07T13:14:23.407+11:00You probably will not hear this at WUWT.
Brazili...You probably will not hear this at WUWT. <br /><br />Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff has appointed Aldo Rebelo, a climate science denier and a member of the Communist Party of Brazil as science minister.<br /><br />That will surely cause the "its all a communist plot" deniers heads to explode.<br /><br />http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/07/world/americas/climatologists-balk-as-brazil-picks-skeptic-for-key-post.html<br />MikeHnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-73589762120331206442015-01-07T10:09:25.417+11:002015-01-07T10:09:25.417+11:00BBD, That paper is a goldmine, thanks for the ref....BBD, That paper is a goldmine, thanks for the ref. The bit about volcanoes is topical for me right now. All this prompts me to ask, what's the deal with Friederike Wagner leaf stomata as a proxy for CO2 concentration in the Holocene? 1999 paper in Science touts >300 ppmv, "falsifying" the stable ~280 ppmv from ice cores:<br /><br />http://www.sciencemag.org/content/284/5422/1971.full<br /><br />The falsification claim is rebutted the next month by Indermühle and friends, including Barnola whose name I most know:<br /><br />http://www.sciencemag.org/content/286/5446/1815.full<br /><br />But they don't completely throw the technique under the bus, and in 2002 Wagner gets off another one in PNAS this time, where he cites the rebuttal and softens statements of certainty, but still trots out the 300 ppmv levels:<br /><br />http://www.pnas.org/content/99/19/12011.full<br /><br />Then in 2004 he publishes again in QSR:<br /><br />http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/Reference_Docs/Holocene_CO2_stomata_Wagner_etal_2004.pdf<br /><br />Still talking about 350-370 ppmv, but now the time series are in "norm. CO2 (ppmv)" which I take to be read as anomalies. He winds up the conclusion with, "The demonstrated ability of stomatal frequency analysis to generate independent but highly comparable proxy records clearly meets the requirements for a palaeo-proxy in the field of global atmospheric CO2 dynamics."<br /><br />Which I take to mean, "Why is no one paying attention to me?"<br /><br />These aren't crank journals. Do you know anything about this?<br /><br />There is one punchline I do know: WUWTers love their tree leaves ....Brandon R. Gateshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17031044715994785956noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-51199528644779387052015-01-07T09:15:12.769+11:002015-01-07T09:15:12.769+11:00I've heard the "I'm an environmentali...I've heard the "I'm an environmentalist" many times before from "luke-warmers", or "pseudo-skeptics" and out-and-out deniers. I believe the claimants are sincere. It is often followed up with "there are bigger problems for the environment than climate change". This is also true, and may even form part of a reasonable argument for how to partition limited resources to protect the environment. <br /><br />However, often it seems intended to imply that the claimant knows more about climate change than they really do. ("I love the environment, so trust me I know the science of the real threats to it.") That doesn't follow. I haven't seen anything from MM yet that persuades me that medium projections from IPCC are excessive.PLnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-38591537147214326842015-01-07T08:12:21.223+11:002015-01-07T08:12:21.223+11:00Meteormike
Low sensitivity is incompatible with p...Meteormike<br /><br />Low sensitivity is incompatible with paleoclimate behaviour. You can strut around repeating your incorrect and scientifically weightless opinion all you wish but it changes absolutely nothing. <br /><br />This is why it's called denialism. BBDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10687930416706386215noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-32463073072714863572015-01-07T07:59:04.372+11:002015-01-07T07:59:04.372+11:00MeteorMike
I am not particularly surprised you ar...MeteorMike<br /><br />I am not particularly surprised you are an environmentalist. Why not?<br /><br />Good luck with disagreeing with greater warming and extreme weather. Let us hope you are right. Unfortunately I do not think there is much likelihood of that.<br /><br /><br />Jammy Dodgerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08360437479098314946noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-72070621198322259592015-01-07T07:43:54.245+11:002015-01-07T07:43:54.245+11:00No problemo Jammy,
You might be surprised to know...No problemo Jammy,<br /><br />You might be surprised to know that I'm an environmentalist and will likely be in agreement with much of what the Pope states regarding being good stewards of the planet and help those less fortunate(people and countries).<br /><br />The point(s) that I will likely ignore, relate to advice based on assumptions of much greater warming or extreme weather that I disagree with. Meteormikenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-27773093135877286662015-01-07T06:16:36.204+11:002015-01-07T06:16:36.204+11:00Well it's a bit of both, innit? Though mainly ...Well it's a bit of both, innit? Though mainly during the summer. Apparently, at high N latitude, growth rate may be a proxy for TSI variability <a href="http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2014/140507/ncomms4836/full/ncomms4836.html" rel="nofollow">(Stine & Huybers 2014)</a>.BBDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10687930416706386215noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-19256437846516806642015-01-07T05:45:42.930+11:002015-01-07T05:45:42.930+11:00When God installs the sewer outlet where the fresh...When God installs the sewer outlet where the fresh water inlet is supposed to be, what else would we expect?Brandon R. Gateshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17031044715994785956noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-91753281427080226632015-01-07T04:57:52.449+11:002015-01-07T04:57:52.449+11:00The difficulty may lie in the fact that a differen...The difficulty may lie in the fact that a different MM thinks trees are thermometers not rain gauges.Brandon R. Gateshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17031044715994785956noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-58911686318442206592015-01-07T04:56:14.876+11:002015-01-07T04:56:14.876+11:00No no no, see when warmists say such things, it...No no no, see when warmists say such things, it's a fallacious appeal to authority and/or popularity.Brandon R. Gateshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17031044715994785956noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-19748819027386408572015-01-07T03:24:16.291+11:002015-01-07T03:24:16.291+11:00The Wiki link brought me to this quote from Ann Co...The Wiki link brought me to this quote from Ann Coulter, a beautiful example of the far-right's 'stewardship' mindset:<br /><br /> "God gave us the earth. We have dominion over the plants, the animals, the trees. God said, 'Earth is yours. Take it. Rape it. It's yours.'"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-8537176158727651482015-01-07T00:48:39.716+11:002015-01-07T00:48:39.716+11:00But not as hard as getting MM to admit that lukewa...But not as hard as getting MM to admit that lukewarmerism is incompatible with paleoclimate behaviour and is in fact just plain old denial in a sciencey disguise. BBDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10687930416706386215noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-52461236596300927372015-01-06T20:12:58.709+11:002015-01-06T20:12:58.709+11:00MeteorMike
Thanks for the definitive reply.
You ...MeteorMike<br /><br />Thanks for the definitive reply.<br /><br />You may think you answered repeatedly but you only answered in vague generalities, including your first posting, which was why I was interested in a bit of clarification. <br /><br />Yes, you are right that I was asking you if you felt at all obligated to follow what the Pope said. I do not have a hard time accepting your answer. The hard part was getting you to answer.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Jammy Dodgerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08360437479098314946noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-60847480446657957542015-01-06T14:54:44.208+11:002015-01-06T14:54:44.208+11:00I have seen it claimed that the Pope has a Masters...I have seen it claimed that the Pope has a Masters in Chemistry and worked in a lab at one point. Most of the Church also seems smart enough not to paint themselves into a corner by claiming that the Bible is a science text, as the Biblical literalists so foolishly do. <br /><br />No wonder the fundamentalists are so terrified of modernity. If they let themselves think too much, they may lose their faith, and then they'd be totally lost, or they think they would.palindromnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-52717575698050494762015-01-06T14:54:39.183+11:002015-01-06T14:54:39.183+11:00The Catholic Church vs the Cornwall Alliance - not...The Catholic Church vs the Cornwall Alliance - not a fair contest. Poor little Calvin's still got his knickers in a knot from the disdain he got at the 2007 conference.<br /><br /><i>Dr. Calvin Beissner (US) argued along the lines of Dr. Idso and Prof. Singer but framed his contribution theologically. His approach was strongly questioned by theologians around the able for an insufficient exegetical and systematic basis.</i><br /><br />from <a href="http://www.religiousconsultation.org/News_Tracker/pontifical_council_on_climate_change.htm" rel="nofollow">a report of the Pontifical Council on Climate Change and Development (2007)</a><br /><br />Calvin's not on the bandwagon with Evangelicals, either.<br /><br /><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evangelical_Climate_Initiative" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evangelical_Climate_Initiative</a>Souhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-6147527135384442412015-01-06T14:37:14.057+11:002015-01-06T14:37:14.057+11:00From The Guardian:
Francis will also be opposed b...From <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/dec/27/pope-francis-edict-climate-change-us-rightwing" rel="nofollow">The Guardian:</a><br /><br />Francis will also be opposed by the powerful US evangelical movement, said Calvin Beisner, spokesman for the conservative Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation, which has declared the US environmental movement to be “un-biblical” and a false religion.<br /><br />“The pope should back off,” he said. “The Catholic church is correct on the ethical principles but has been misled on the science. It follows that the policies the Vatican is promoting are incorrect. Our position reflects the views of millions of evangelical Christians in the US.”<br /><br />(I'm guessing the liberal Guardian cut-off his detailed explanation of the sciencey bits.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-69853162914356640542015-01-06T12:04:25.707+11:002015-01-06T12:04:25.707+11:00Jammy,
I've clearly answered your question rep...Jammy,<br />I've clearly answered your question repeatedly and will do so again.<br />This time, I pick choice:<br />a. Ignoring him.<br /><br />Possibly you are having such a hard time with this because, like many folks, you have the mistaken belief that Catholics are always obligated to follow everything the Pope says.<br /><br />Maybe this will help:<br /><br />http://www.catholic.com/tracts/papal-infallibility<br /><br />Meteormikenoreply@blogger.com