I think Dyson's biggest hangup seems to be that much of the doomsaying surrounding global warming is based on computerized models, which is not, strictly speaking, science. You probably can't empirically test most of the climate models being produced.
The Global Warming Heretic - NYTimes On Freeman Dyson
41–50 of 114 posts
Re: The Global Warming Heretic - NYTimes On Freeman Dyson
#42I personally feel that it is better to err on the side of caution in regards to global warming. I say "feel" because I'm just not smart enough to navigate fact from fiction on this issue anymore. There's going to be extremes on both sides, but I don't see what we have to gain by not taking better care of our planet. Even if global warming is only partially manmade, shouldn't we do what we can to minimize the effect?…
"I don't see how society is harmed by erring on the side of caution" Let me try to help you see then. Even though it's extremely important that you prevent tooth decay, and even if you have a huge chunk of "Jolly Rancher" stuck between your teeth, it would be a non-optimal use of resources to use your last match as you were shivering on the side of a mountain with a broken leg, to dislodge the offending piece of cand…
Given how much we spend on entertainment and other luxuries, is it really fair to say call spending money on what is likely essential to the preservation of our species "literally stealing food and medicine from people's mouths?" Hell, given what we spend on killing each other over oil and religion, how is it that spending money on understanding and dealing with climate change is stealing? In the United States alone, we have spent over $600 billion on the Iraq war-- even a few of those billions could make the difference between action and inaction on climate change.
Re: The Global Warming Heretic - NYTimes On Freeman Dyson
#43I think Dyson's biggest hangup seems to be that much of the doomsaying surrounding global warming is based on computerized models, which is not, strictly speaking, science. You probably can't empirically test most of the climate models being produced.
Not science? Better tell the computer scientists and the computational physicists...
Science is, at its most basic, our attempt to understand the world. As such, science employs many different tools and approaches, including numerical modeling. In particular. numerical analysis is a very well understood field of mathematics that allows us to rigorously analyze complicated problems by using one of the most innovative tools ever devised: the computer. Of course, one can make an inaccurate model as easily as one can write down an inaccurate equation or make a mistake in a derivation. That doesn't mean that the tool isn't a part of science.
Re: The Global Warming Heretic - NYTimes On Freeman Dyson
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
"I don't see how society is harmed by erring on the side of caution" Let me try to help you see then. Even though it's extremely important that you prevent tooth decay, and even if you have a huge chunk of "Jolly Rancher" stuck between your teeth, it would be a non-optimal use of resources to use your last match as you were shivering on the side of a mountain with a broken leg, to dislodge the offending piece of cand…
Given how much we spend on entertainment and other luxuries, is it really fair to say call spending money on what is likely essential to the preservation of our species "literally stealing food and medicine from people's mouths?" Hell, given what we spend on killing each other over oil and religion, how is it that spending money on understanding and dealing with climate change is stealing? In the United States alone,…
> even a few of those billions could make the difference between action and inaction on climate change.
Really? If we spent $20B on global warming you'd go away happy?
> is it really fair to say call spending money on what is likely essential to the preservation of our species
Interestingly enough, if you read the cost estimates from the advocates, it's reasonably cheap to deal with the problem after it occurs, at least compared to the total global GDP at that time.
The only way you get to "spend now" vs "spend later" on an economic basis is by using a negative rate of return.
Re: The Global Warming Heretic - NYTimes On Freeman Dyson
#45Speaking of data, we've been dropping probes into deep water for almost a decade now. Since the heat capacity of the oceans dwarfs that of the atmosphere, surely the temperature of the water is relevant.
What are the oceans doing? If they're getting colder, the earth may well be losing heat, even if the atmosphere is getting warmer (which it hasn't been for almost a decade).
It would also be nice to know the temperature of the earth because its heat capacity dwarfs that of the oceans.
Re: The Global Warming Heretic - NYTimes On Freeman Dyson
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
In business, war, governance, love, and the climate, people are forced to make decisions based on sorely incomplete data because time is of the essence, and it is all they're ever going to get. If likely exaggeration is to be called out, so too are those who assert that doubt should necessarily imply inaction.
Why is "time of the essence"? Who told you so? Al "Save the Polar Bears" Gore? I promise you, those polar bears were in no danger. Do you know what a stampede is? It's a frightening thing, where a large herd of animals is frightened and begin to run. They run and run, trampeling anything in their path, killing anything that gets in front of them, and each other, as they run from the danger on their heals. Never would…
[deleted]
Re: The Global Warming Heretic - NYTimes On Freeman Dyson
#47Lets be honest, the REAL problem here with the idea of global warming caused by humans is that it can not simply be solved by the market. This possibility seems to make hardcore libertarians so uncomfortable that they can only hope no such problem exist.
Re: The Global Warming Heretic - NYTimes On Freeman Dyson
#48Quoting the great Bertrand Russell: "The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." Interesting how so many people who know NOTHING about Science are SO sure that global warming is caused by man. Such dogma reminds me of the times of the 16th century Inquisition: no amount of evidence will ever convince the nutcase warmists that th…
In business, war, governance, love, and the climate, people are forced to make decisions based on sorely incomplete data because time is of the essence, and it is all they're ever going to get. If likely exaggeration is to be called out, so too are those who assert that doubt should necessarily imply inaction.
It is weird that you point out a system with 10,000 year cycles as one where "time is of the essence".
Re: The Global Warming Heretic - NYTimes On Freeman Dyson
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Interesting how so many people who know NOTHING about Science are SO sure that global warming is caused by man. Such dogma reminds me of the times of the 16th century Inquisition: no amount of evidence will ever convince the nutcase warmists that there MIGHT be a possibility that global warming is not caused by humans." I'm calling your BS. There are very few if any people who believe that it is impossible that glob…
Well, since when is the media reliable? They also said Iraq had WMDs. Read some scientific papers. Seriously.
I don't think you followed the double negatives there.
The masses generally believe the media, and the media acknowledges the possibility of non-anthropogenic warming. If you are saying that the scientific establishment is 100% sure of AGW, then you just completely skewered your own argument.
Re: The Global Warming Heretic - NYTimes On Freeman Dyson
#50I personally feel that it is better to err on the side of caution in regards to global warming. I say "feel" because I'm just not smart enough to navigate fact from fiction on this issue anymore. There's going to be extremes on both sides, but I don't see what we have to gain by not taking better care of our planet. Even if global warming is only partially manmade, shouldn't we do what we can to minimize the effect?…
Rational decision making always involves assessing the (probable) costs and benefits of potential actions. If the potential benefit is small and uncertain, and the cost is large and certain, it probably makes sense to wait and collect more information.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opportunity_cost
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/bjorn_lomborg_sets_global...