|
Author
|
Topic: John A. Davison: An Evolutionary Manifesto: A New Hypothesis For Organic Change
|
DaveScot
Member
Member # 1545
|
posted 11. July 2008 14:12
John,
You didn't figure out the shoe size/salary correlation. It's a classic example in why correlation doesn't equal causation.
On the face of it's a strong correlation. The reason it's strong is so many people with small shoes are children who don't earn any salary at all.
Correlations are all well and good as indicators that there may be a connection but, listen up because this how experimental science is conducted, variables under investigation must be isolated. Just because there's a rough correlation between CO2 and temperature increase (which by the way has ZERO correlation in the past 10 years) doesn't mean that's the cause of temperature increase. There are far more variables involved than just CO2. Blithely parroting the Mauna Loa CO2 record does not indict it as the cause for temperature increase. In fact the findings from the Vostok Ice cores unambiguously show that over the past million years temperature rise preceded CO2 rise by about 400 years. Yet no runaway greenhouse occured and the earth has been a LOT warmer than present in the past with a LOT higher concentration of CO2 in the air. To any reasonable person this is rather strong evidence that there's a negative feedback which caps temperature rise regardless of atmospheric CO2 concentration.
One of the most famous living climatologists alive today, often called "the father of climatology", believes that rising temperature causes the water cycle to speed up and that falling rain acts like a swamp cooler to bring the air temperature down. That's sound science as any dummy should know that water absorbs a lot of heat in changing phase from liquid to vapor. Pull out that crufty old chemistry book you must have there an look up how many kilocalories that would be per gram of water. I know you must have it as you love to bandy about the kilocalories involved in the phase change from ice to water.
Moreover cloud cover has a much higher albedo than ground or water. Clouds in the sky reflect a very large amount of sunlight directly back into space.
The climate models employed by the IPCC hysterics don't know how to treat clouds and rain. That's a variable they don't know how to isolate. So they ignore it.
Now follow along because this is almost certainly how the earth's thermostat works to limit rising temperatures:
As temperature rises, ice melts and cools the oceans (phase transition from solid to liquid). This increases the surface area of the oceans so that the sun beating down on a greater surface area increases the total amount of evaporation. This causes more clouds to form which reflect more sunlight back into space. More clouds produce more rain and the evaporating raindrops cool the air through another phase transition from liquid to gas.
That's three distinct negative feedback mechanisms in atmospheric temperature rise. None of these are accounted for in climate models because no one understands what weighting factor to give them. So they don't weight them at all and without those negative feedbacks you get runaway greenhouse. And a runaway greenhouse is simply something that has never before happened in the earth's entire history even when global average temperature was far higher, all glaciers gone and sea level hundreds of feet higher, and CO2 an order of magnitude higher than mankind could get it even if every last gram of fossil fuels were burned today.
Unfortunately the converse is not true. There is much evidence that the earth has become a giant snowball in the past (in fact it's called "snowball earth") and no one has figured out what reverses runaway cooling. With the earth covered in snow an awful lot of sunlight is reflected back into space which is a positive feedback. Possibly only something like an asteroid strike of biblical proportion can bring the earth back from a snowball state.
Anyhow, what I really wanted to do here was not remind you of the importance of isolating variables under scientific investigation or remind you that evaporting raindrops suck up a lot of energy as they fall or describe negative feedbacks that aren't accounted for in global climate models but rather to say that now would be an excellent time for distinguished University of Minnesota alumni to write a letter to university adminstration urging discinplinary action against one PZ Myers for heinously soiling the image of their alma mater. A written letter carries far more weight than an email, by the way.
[ 11. July 2008, 14:33: Message edited by: DaveScot ]
IP: Logged
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 11. July 2008 19:28
Thanks for the free lecture laced with the condescending style so characteristic of everything you ever proclaim. You are the world's expert on every subject as your history has made indelibly clear. As always, you talk down to everyone who dares to disagree with you and ban them from your domain when they fail to yield.
You are wasting your time with me because I have already made my predictions based on my sources, sources that you ignore. In support of your preconceived world you have trotted out charlatans like Fred Singer and TV weather forecasters with no credentials whatsoever. You clutch at every skeptic as long as he agrees with your arrogantly expressed, ill founded assertions.
To deny, as you continue to do, that we are in a crisis has removed you from the world of rational discourse and has placed you permanently where you have always belonged as just another arrogant, totally self absorbed, intolerant bully, a sociopathic fanatic incapable of ever admitting that he might be wrong about anything.
I repeat my prediction that by the end of this decade, and probably sooner, those like yourself who deny that we face the greatest crisis in the history of civilization will be as scarce as hen's teeth.
By the way Dave, when you write to the President of the University of Minnesota, how are you going to sign your letter, with your cowardly alias, DaveScot, or with your real name - David Springer? I'll bet you won't write a letter at all. You will be much to busy denigrating and insulting your critics and behaving like the pompous, intractable, intolerant blowhard you were congenitally "prescribed" to be.
"A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject."
Winston Churchill
That's David Springer.
"Mankind fiddled while earth burned...A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."
John A. Davison
[ 11. July 2008, 19:51: Message edited by: nosivad ]
IP: Logged
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 11. July 2008 22:30
DaveScot aka David Springer.
Who is the famous, living "father of climatology" who you neglected to name? I don't have the foggiest idea who you are talking about. I always name my sources. Why don't you?
If you or anyone else thinks that the earth is a self regulating system you are very sadly mistaken. Nothing could be further from the truth. This planet has undergone great changes over the millennia but always gradually and with an evolving biota that could evolve and thereby survive those changes. Those days are long gone. Evolution has ceased, organisms no longer evolve and now only become extinct. That is all that we now witness because that is all that is happening. There hasn't been a new Genus in two million years and not an experimentally verified new species in historical times, times during which tens of thousands of species have become and continue to become extinct. As every habitat disappears so do those forms confined to that habitat. There is not a shred of evidence that any recently extinct animal or plant has been replaced. In my opinion they never will be.
Every bit of tangible evidence points to the imminent termination of civilized society on this planet due, in my opinion, ENTIRELY to the activity of its most recent arrival, Homo sapiens and most probably it will occur within the present century.
I have presented my predictions and now I ask you to make yours. A scientist who can't or won't make predictions is no scientist. Until you do, you are no better than the Darwinians we both despise.
Now do me favor for a change and don't disappear as you usually do only to erupt much later once again as is your history. Your hit-and-run tactics are well known and have become your trademark. That won't wash any more. It is crunch time Springer. Get used to it.
"A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."
John A. Davison
IP: Logged
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 12. July 2008 05:50
Well?
IP: Logged
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 12. July 2008 07:42
http://www.uncommondescent.com/off-topic/the-earths-thermostat/#more-3467
Once more DaveScot/David Springer shows his real self by repeating his spiel without mentioning my name. This is cowardice raised to a level unprecedented in the annals of civil discourse.
It is undestandable why he refuses to mention my name. He is afraid to! Cowardly egomaniacs are like that wherever one finds them. He probably won't respond here for the same reason.
I will let Einstein speak for me -
"It is abhorrent to me when a fine mind is paired with an unsavory character."
It is hard to believe isn't it?
I love it so!
"A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable... Mankind fiddled while earth burned."
John A. Davison
[ 12. July 2008, 11:18: Message edited by: nosivad ]
IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 12. July 2008 11:56
DaveScot aka David "I love being right" Springer.
If the earth is so well thermostated, why then in the past has the sea level risen and fallen by as much as 300 feet? Do you have any idea what a rise of a mere 30 feet WILL HAVE have on civilization as we know it? Apparently not. It is INEVITABLE and has already begun.
The simple truth is that in the course of a mere two centuries we have irreversibly altered the planet, ensured our own destruction, and are now helpless to do anything about it.
Since you will not or, more probably, can not divulge the name of your precious "father of climatology," perhaps someone else will be willing to tell me who this anonymous guru of yours is. It isn't Anthony "sunspots" Watts is it?
It is hard to believe isn't it?
I love it so!
It doesn't get any better than this.
"Mankind fiddled while earth burned."
John A. Davison
[ 12. July 2008, 12:13: Message edited by: nosivad ]
IP: Logged
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 12. July 2008 16:41
David Springer.
The longer you refuse to respond, the worse I am going to make you look. Trust me.
IP: Logged
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 12. July 2008 19:09
It looks to me as if Springer's unnamed "living, father of climatology" is an invention of his ever fertile imagination.
Let me inform others who I think was the real "father of climatology." It was Alfred Russel Wallace, the same Wallace that co-authored the Darwinian fairy tale which he completely abandoned later in life.
Referring to carbon dioxide which he called carbonic acid gas -
"Considering, however that this poisonous gas is largely given out by the higher animals as a product of respiration, it would evidently be dangerous to the permanence of animal life if the quantity forming a constant consituent of the atmosphere were much greater than it is."
Man's Place in the Universe, page 212.
and
"The huge and ever-increasing cities, the vast manufacturing towns belching forth smoke and poisonous gases, with the crowded dwellings where millions are forced to live under the most terrible insanitary conditions are the witnesses to this criminal apathy, this incredible recklessness and inhumanity.
For the past fifty years and more the inevitable results of such conditions have been fully known; yet to this day nothing of importance HAS
been done, and nothing IS being done."
page 256, his emphasis, original in italics.
This was written in 1905. Today, more than a century later, nothing still has been done.
It is my conviction that it is now much too late. If we were to stop CO2 and H2O vapor emissions tomorrow, does anyone think the Chinese would do the same?
"Mankind fiddled while earth burned."
John A. Davison
[ 12. July 2008, 19:14: Message edited by: nosivad ]
IP: Logged
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 12. July 2008 20:18
http://www.uncommondescent.com/off-topic/the-earths-thermostat/#comments
One thing I find very gratifying. Springer's cowardly unidentified reprint of the harangue he presented against me here has produced only two comments at Uncommon Descent. One of those comments is by Springer! It is obvious that the clientele at Uncommon Descent is terrified of this unprincipled bully. Why they don't demand his removal is what I can't understand.
It doesn't get any better than this.
"Mankind fiddled while earth burned."
John A. Davison
[ 13. July 2008, 04:38: Message edited by: nosivad ]
IP: Logged
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 13. July 2008 04:10
I figured it out!!
I now know who the "living father of climatology" is.
"Now listen up and get this dummies."
It is David "I love being right" Springer, which immediately explains why he refuses to name him. (He is very shy you know.) His clever little autoregulated thermostat is an in invention of his mind alone.
He is also, among other matters, the "living father" of species extinction, of the utilization of water as fuel and of a cure for cancer. Is there any subject about which he is not the "living father?" In his own words, as justification for his high handed banishment and deletion of any or all that disagree with him -
"The Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away."
It is hard to believe isn't it?
It doesn't get any better than this.
"A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable...Mankind fiddled while earth burned."
John A. Davison
IP: Logged
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 14. July 2008 04:28
The most revealing characteristic of this one sided dialogue is the cowardly way Springer invariably reacts. He proclaims, he denigrates, he insults, only then to run away and gloat over an imagined victory. Is this really any different than the tactics employed by P.Z. Myers who also treats his adversaries in the same manner? Don't they both ban their critics and treat them with contempt? Aren't the same tactics beings employed by most internet forums and blogs? Aren't most of them protectionist, isolationist enclaves of like minded, "born that way" mentalities, naturally polarized magnets which develop spontaneously?
"Birds of a feather flock together."
Cervantes
Please note that Springer has described this forum as "obscure." Isn't he contributing to that obscurity by his own actions, by his hit-and-run tactics? If this forum is obscure, it isn't my fault. It has allowed me to hold forth for which I am grateful even though I am lecturing in an empty auditorium, an auditorium in which there are virtually neither critics nor supporters except for the periodic raids by David Springer, the biggest bully in the history of the internet. I have been isolated here just as surely as was at EvC and Panda's Thumb. The only difference is I haven't been banished yet. If others refuse to engage me here or on my own weblog, I can only conclude that they are afraid of me and especially my sources, among the finest minds of the post-Darwinian era. What I can't understand his why my supporters, fine minds like Daniel Smith and Martin, are not able to speak here. Why were they banished from this blog? What does it all mean?
If "brainstorms" has become "obscure" and it has, why has that happened? What is to be gained by such a policy? Who is responsible for it? "Brainstorms" was once a vibrant venue for spirited exchange. Why is that no longer true? These are questions that should be answered. But will they be and when?
" A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable...Mankind fiddled while earth burned."
John A. Davison
IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
DaveScot
Member
Member # 1545
|
posted 14. July 2008 15:03
Hi John!
Try googling "father of climatology".
You know how, right?
Anyhow, I wrong about who wrote about the water cycle transporting heat from the surface through evaporation to high in the troposphere where it condenses and releases the heat. High in the troposphere is of course above most of that bad old CO2 that would otherwise trap the heat.
It was Roy W. Spencer:
Roy W. Spencer is a principal research scientist for University of Alabama in Huntsville. In the past, he served as Senior Scientist for Climate Studies at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama. Spencer is a recipient of NASA's Medal for Exceptional Scientific Achievement.
He is principally known for his satellite-based temperature monitoring work, for which he was awarded the American Meteorological Society's Special Award. He is also a supporter of intelligent design[1] and is skeptical of the scientific consensus that human activity is primarily responsible for global warming.
The paper you might like to read is:
Global Warming and Nature's Thermostat
I wasn't really aware the guy's an ID supporter too. The description was his biography on wikipedia.
[ 14. July 2008, 15:18: Message edited by: DaveScot ]
IP: Logged
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 14. July 2008 21:49
Dave,
Well I guess then Spencer is the "living father of climatology?" I was convinced it was you!
If Spencer, you or anyone else remains skeptical that global warming is human caused, I doubt I will be able to take seriously what they have to say. To question that proven reality is, in my considered opinion, unthinkable.
Why don't you predict what the future holds? Scientists do that don't you know. Tim Flannery has, Alfred Russel Wallace did and so have I. Judging from your past comments, you seem to feel that an elevating CO2 is a virtue just as you welcome a warmer planet and celebrate the fact that they are growing broccoli in Greenland. Is that your projection?
It is true that I have take an extreme position when I predict that there is nothing we can now do to reverse the crisis. I stick to my guns just as I always have about everything I have ever put in print. I have yet to be found in error. Until I am I remain content. A scientist who cannot make predictions is not a scientist. That is why Darwinians are not scientists.
Unlike you with your egomaniacal "I love being right," I sincerely "hope I am wrong."
So I ask you to give us your prediction for the future of the planet for the rest of this century, a century that I am convinced will see the inundation of all coastal cities and with that the end of civilization as we have known it. With the melting of both poles and the coefficient of thermal expansion being what it is for water, the only question is when. It has already begun.
I will also remind you that I have predicted that those who question that man is the main cause of global warming will be as scarce as hen's teeth by 2010 and probably before.
"There is one impact that results from global warming, however, that is unobtrusively manifesting itself and is being felt on all continents approximately equally: All of them are shrinking. This is because, courtesy of heat and melting ice, the oceans are expanding."
Tim Flannery, The Weather Makers, page 141.
"We have met the enemy and it is us."
Pogo
"Mankind fiddled while earth burned."
John A. Davison
[ 15. July 2008, 04:32: Message edited by: nosivad ]
IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view of this topic
