Re: [asa] Antarctica cooling

On 1/23/09, Christine Smith <christine_mb_smith@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hi Burgy,
>
> As much as prudence demands that we not overweight any one study,
> particularly one in which hard data is admittedly scarce, I would not rely
> on anyone from the Heartland Institute as a source of information.

I quite completely agree, of course. What I probably should have said
in my post is that I was looking for how a rebutal argument might be
phrased.

I see the Heartland Institute is hosting a conference shortly. Perhaps
they will squabble among themselves enough to bring (deserved)
discredit on their idiocy.

I note that the IPCC only claims 90% certainty about their primary
conclusions. So far I have not found any contrarians who admit to any
uncertainty at all in their anti-GW assertions.

In 1955, 54 years ago (!), for my Master's thesis (now on my web
site), I designed and ran some physics experiments that turned up
wholly new and unexpected patterns. I had all the data and results in
hand by May and expected to graduate that June; the paper was
"finished." Ha ha. The physics faculty (rightfully) had me work for
three more months investigating EVERY known source of possible error
(several were "helpful" in suggesting possibilities I had not thought
about). It was a humbling experience (yes -- the findings held) and
taught me much about how real science operates. By the time I
graduated (in August) the paper was twice as long!

Thanks for confirming my thoughts on Heartland.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Jan 23 10:48:51 2009