Eli Rabett has spotted some excellent points in the Royal Society of Chemistry submission to the Parliamentary inquiry into the CRU hack.
RSC Gate
March 7th, 2010Regional rainfall in a warming world
March 7th, 2010Regional rainfall in a warming world: “
By John D. Cox | Fri Mar 5, 2010 05:15 PM ET
Slowly but surely, a picture of climate change at the regional scale — where it really matters — is beginning to take shape.
Apart from the obvious warming at the high polar latitudes, which already is affecting Arctic sea ice, the rate of Greenland ice cap melting, and Antarctic ice shelves, new details are beginning to emerge about the impact of global warming in the Tropics — the boiler-room of Earth’s climate and weather.
This is the home of El Niño, and the generator of Asian monsoons, the towering cumulonimbus storms that deliver water vapor to the atmosphere and drive patterns of rainfall over much of the world.
In the March issue of the Journal of Climate, a team of University of Hawaii researchers led by meteorologist Shang-Ping Xie offers a preliminary look at what a relatively uniform warming does to a climate system that is chock o’block with regional patches of hot and cold and wet and dry. …
Regional Rainfall in a Warming World
“
(Via Technozoic.)
Naomi Oreskes on her new book ‘Merchants of Doubt’
March 7th, 2010Via Tim Lambert:
A talk by Naomi Oreskes on her new book, Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming.
As with any talk by Naomi Oreskes, it is well worth a watch. Though she makes a couple of minor slips, for me there was only one bum note in the whole thing, where she suggests that ’sceptics’ as a whole are responsible for the CRU emails hack.
The banquet analogy she uses is excellent, and reminded me of a classic piece of standup from the Seinfeld episode ‘The Stock Tip’. Unfortunately I can’t find the clip on youtube, so you’ll have to settle for the script:
JERRY: Went out to dinner the other night. Check came at the end of the meal, as it always does. Never liked the check at the end of the meal system, because money’s a very different thing before and after you eat. Before you eat money has no value. And you don’t care about money when you’re hungry, you sit down at a restaurant. You’re like the ruler of an empire. “More drinks, appetizers, quickly, quickly! It will be the greatest meal of our lives.” Then after the meal, you know, you’ve got the pants open, you’ve got the napkins destroyed, cigarette butt in the mashed potatoes – then the check comes at that moment. People are always upset, you know. They’re mystified by the check. “What is this? How could this be?” They start passing it around the table, “Does this look right to you? We’re not hungry now. Why are we buying all this food?!”
Yes Tim, they are saying exactly that
March 7th, 2010Tim Worstall writes:
For, you see, no one is saying that the Arctic Oceans, at 50 metres down, have been getting warmer.
Certainly not getting warmer as a result of anything that we’re doing with fossil fuels or cow burps.
Scientific replication is not rote repetition
March 7th, 2010The results of CRUTEM have been replicated, reimplemented and/or corroborated at least six times by now, using a variety of analyses, written in different languages, by different people. Read the rest of this entry »
Contradictory climate ’sceptic’ arguments
March 6th, 2010I am making a collection of climate ’sceptic’ arguments that flatly contradict each other. Here’s what I have so far. You will sometimes encounter these arguments in the same paragraph.
“We can and cannot compare past temperatures with the present”
“Figures faked to show warming show cooling, and this is why it is warming”
“The records are and are not reliable”
“We can and cannot predict the future climate”
“Do and do not trust complex models”
Word on the Street blog
October 10th, 2009Word on the Street now has a blog.
Tweetie 2 for iPhone
September 30th, 2009Tweetie 2 for iPhone has showed up a failing of the Apple app store model (there is no way to do paid upgrades – Mark Damon Hughes summarises the issue nicely here) and also created a bit of a stir.
Now, Tweetie is a good app and I don’t actually mind paying for it. But then, I already have. Paying for it just once would be nice, yet I’ll probably upgrade to v2 anyway. Still, the feeling that Tweetie 1 users are just abandoned leaves a bad taste. And there are certainly a lot of bogus arguments flying around about it. Here’s a few:
In other words, Tweetie 2 is the technical debt edition.
As a developer myself, I hear ‘rewrite’ and internally translate: Tweetie 1 looked real purty on the outside, but on the inside it was an unmaintainable pig. So bad it needed a rewrite to do it right.
Well, why is that our problem? Many developers would be a bit apologetic about rushing it out and cutting corners the first time instead of boasting about it and passing out the upgrade begging bowl so soon.
If $3 is not a lot of money then why does Loren want it? It’s not a lot, so he won’t miss it, right, if we don’t pay it?
So, he could give us the app for $0. By your own argument, it’s not a lot of money for him to forgo, and it’s not like we haven’t paid for it already.
In fact, $3 is a hell of a lot of money when we ALL have to pay it – and some of us know this, because we’re not all stupid. How many users of Tweetie are there? 10,000? 100,000? 1,000,000? More? Is 6 months of anyone’s development time really worth anything from $200k to $2m? Probably not.
This one is manifestly false because millions of lines of excellent software have been written and we all use it for precisely nothing. Some people have referred to Tweetie 2 as a labor of love – well, doing it for nothing, for the love it, that’s what that actually means. A lot of such software is part of iPhone and Mac. Where’s the three bucks for those developers? Why haven’t those developers starved?
For comparison, even in the paid model, outfits like Flying Meat and Balsamiq manage to provide excellent support and products without gouging a full upgrade price every time all you want is a bug fixed. Sometimes doing things ‘the Apple way’ is not a good thing.
For further comparison, millions of people live on $2 a day.
No, but fixing the bugs for nothing would be nice. Especially for people who just bought the thing a week ago.
That line sounds familiar. Isn’t it what you all said about Tweetie 1?
Maybe Tweetie 2 will also turn out to be so bad it needs a rewrite? It’s already clear that we should expect it to be no longer supported within 10 months or so, one way or another. That is the argument isn’t it? $3 every 10 months or so, or no more updates. So we can see what will happen when there are no more features to add, but there are still bugs that need to be fixed.
What would have been better would have been to give a discount to all users on Tweetie 2 for a short time – i.e. a discount aimed at existing users, but since that can’t be enforced, allowing new users to get the cheaper price too. Say $1 less – and after all, $1 is not a lot of money right? So that should have been no problem.
Google Sidewiki enables right of reply
September 24th, 2009I think Google Sidewiki is great news for the web – in particular it is a step in the right direction to address a long standing problem of censorship on blogs.
Especially on political blogs, it is possible for the owners to remove and edit people’s comments or ban comments entirely – Sidewiki puts an end to that. Though I suppose it is still possible for mobs to vote comments down.
Here’s a nice example of it used to comment on a blog where comments are completely disabled.
Nice job Google.
(Of course, it was always possible to start your own blog and comment on anything there. However, unless your blog ranks you may as well be talking to yourself. Nobody will see it. This provides a venue for the other side of any story to be heard, right by the actual story.)
Note: Firefox/IE only for now, unfortunately.
Word on the Street for Mac
September 13th, 2009Now you can run Word on the Street on Mac OSX (Snow Leopard) too:
