[ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria
alfio.puglisi at gmail.com
Wed Aug 5 08:43:37 UTC 2009
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 7:48 AM, John K Clark<jonkc at bellsouth.net> wrote:
> "Alfio Puglisi" <alfio.puglisi at gmail.com>
>> you don't believe models based on reliable historical records
> Historical records? So you're saying these computer models claim to fame is
> that they accurately predicted the past!
No, I say that computer models are based on physics derived from
observing what happens in the world. It's just that observations in
modern times are much more accurate than paleontological data from
half a billion years ago.
> And I can't comment on the paper
> that you say made good predictions about the Pinatubo eruption because the
> link you supplied is dead;
The link was for the other paper. I just checked and it works now.
> but I'm guessing it said things would get a bit
> cooler for a year or two. Not exactly a gutsy and astounding prediction now
> is it.
Well, you asked for "anything" :-)
> On a chart that plots the CO2 levels over the last 600 million years you'd
> need an electron microscope to see that "vertical line" you're so terrified of
I'm looking at this:
I could see a change of some hundreds of ppm on that graph even
without my glasses :-)
And here is the famous vertical line:
> assuming the damn thing even exists.
Modern CO2 measures are very reliable, and precise to at least a few
ppm.You don't need to "assume" that it exists.
More information about the extropy-chat