SERVING THE QUANTITATIVE FINANCE COMMUNITY

 
User avatar
ppauper
Posts: 70239
Joined: November 15th, 2001, 1:29 pm

Uh-oh another climate change thread...

December 7th, 2007, 1:54 pm

fighting global warming one codger at a time
 
User avatar
ppauper
Posts: 70239
Joined: November 15th, 2001, 1:29 pm

Uh-oh another climate change thread...

December 7th, 2007, 2:28 pm

QuoteOriginally posted by: JWDMore distortionsppauper is having hallucinations about Al Gore’s excellent movie, about which the judge said (17.i): the AIT is “substantially founded upon scientific research and fact” . The conclusion from ppauper that AIT is a “science fiction film” is absurd. how so ?from wiki:>>Science fiction is a broad genre of fiction that often involves speculations >>based on current or future science or technology.algore's propaganda film paints a vision of an apocalyptic future and fits the definition of science fictionThe judge himself used the terms "alarmism" and "exaggeration" to describe the movie.And to quote the judge:QuoteIt is now common ground that it is not simply a science film – although it is clear that it is based substantially on scientific research and opinion – but that it is a political film.(snip)Paul Downes, using persuasive force almost equivalent to that of Mr Gore, has established his case that the views in the film are political by submitting that Mr Gore promotes an apocalyptic vision.In other words, the judge ruled that it was a political film promoting an apocalyptic vision of the future.Again, that fits the bill of science fiction.algore's lawyers stipulated to the fact that it was a political film:pq[Martin Chamberlain, who, with equal skill, has adopted a very realistic position on thepart of the Defendant, does not challenge that the film promotes political views.QuoteWith an appropriate guidance note, the judge approved the film for showing in the schools and dismissed the case against the film.You know full well that the judge did not "dismiss" the case.Rather he ruled that this one-sided propaganda film could only be shown if material was distributed along with the movie pointing out that it was one-sided and choc full o' "errors".QuotePolar bears are – yes indeed – being harmed by global warming Again, you're trying to muddy the issue: the issue is that in his propaganda film, algore said "A new scientific study shows" X. The judge asked his lawyers to produce this "scientific study" which algore cited and the lawyers were unable to do so. Because algore invented it.
 
User avatar
JWD
Posts: 1310
Joined: March 2nd, 2005, 12:51 pm
Contact:

Uh-oh another climate change thread...

December 7th, 2007, 5:32 pm

The judge and the “minority” contrarians The judge categorized skeptics/contrarians a “minority”, contrasted with the “great majority” of scientists, and the credibility of the IPCC. The judge agreed that Al Gore’s film An Inconvenient Truth AIT, which he said was clearly substantially founded upon scientific research and fact, could be shown to students, accompanied with the guidance note. However the judge disagreed with adopting any “neutrality” toward minority skeptical views that counter the IPCC reports (these reports containing the latest and most authoritative scientific information). Here is the relevant section from the judgment:The sceptical view40. … Teaching staff will be aware that a minority of scientists disagree with the central thesis that climate change over the past half-century is mainly attributable to man-made greenhouse gases. However, the High Court has made clear the law does not require teaching staff to adopt a position of neutrality between views which accord with the great majority of scientific opinion and those which do not [this was anticipatory of my decision].The notes set out in this guidance have been drafted in accordance with the Fourth Assessment Reports of the [IPCC], published in 2007 under the auspices of the United Nations and the World Meteorological Organisation. AIT was made before these latest reports had been published, but it is important that pupils should have access to the latest and most authoritative scientific information. The IPCC derives its credibility from the fact that its conclusions are drawn from a "meta-review" of a massive number of independently peer-reviewed journal articles, and from the expertise and diversity of those on the reviewing panels." This is in my judgment necessary and judicious guidance.Ref:http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Adm ... /2288.html (with some bold font for emphasis)-----------
Jan Dash, PhD

Editor, World Scientific Encyclopedia of Climate Change:
https://www.worldscientific.com/page/en ... ate-change

Book:
http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/ ... 71241_0053
 
User avatar
TraderJoe
Posts: 11048
Joined: February 1st, 2005, 11:21 pm

Uh-oh another climate change thread...

December 7th, 2007, 11:47 pm

QuoteOriginally posted by: ppauperQuoteOriginally posted by: JWDMore distortionsppauper is having hallucinations about Al Gore’s excellent movie, about which the judge said (17.i): the AIT is “substantially founded upon scientific research and fact” . The conclusion from ppauper that AIT is a “science fiction film” is absurd. how so ?from wiki:>>Science fiction is a broad genre of fiction that often involves speculations >>based on current or future science or technology.algore's propaganda film paints a vision of an apocalyptic future and fits the definition of science fictionThe judge himself used the terms "alarmism" and "exaggeration" to describe the movie.And to quote the judge:QuoteIt is now common ground that it is not simply a science film – although it is clear that it is based substantially on scientific research and opinion – but that it is a political film.(snip)Paul Downes, using persuasive force almost equivalent to that of Mr Gore, has established his case that the views in the film are political by submitting that Mr Gore promotes an apocalyptic vision.In other words, the judge ruled that it was a political film promoting an apocalyptic vision of the future.Again, that fits the bill of science fiction.algore's lawyers stipulated to the fact that it was a political film:pq[Martin Chamberlain, who, with equal skill, has adopted a very realistic position on thepart of the Defendant, does not challenge that the film promotes political views.QuoteWith an appropriate guidance note, the judge approved the film for showing in the schools and dismissed the case against the film.You know full well that the judge did not "dismiss" the case.Rather he ruled that this one-sided propaganda film could only be shown if material was distributed along with the movie pointing out that it was one-sided and choc full o' "errors".QuotePolar bears are – yes indeed – being harmed by global warming Again, you're trying to muddy the issue: the issue is that in his propaganda film, algore said "A new scientific study shows" X. The judge asked his lawyers to produce this "scientific study" which algore cited and the lawyers were unable to do so. Because algore invented it.You lose ppauper. The film's been shown in schools all over the Western world. You lose. Bye bye.
 
User avatar
JWD
Posts: 1310
Joined: March 2nd, 2005, 12:51 pm
Contact:

Uh-oh another climate change thread...

December 8th, 2007, 6:06 pm

Here is another reference to a study showing polar bears drowning because they had to swim far offshore due to scarcity of sea ice – due to climate warming ppauper is of course and as usual dead wrong. Al Gore didn’t invent any study on polar bears. Here is another likely candidate for the reference to the study Gore used; I just found it; there is a pretty good match with Gore’s statement in the film. Either the judge didn’t read it carefully enough to understand its thrust, or perhaps more likely the lawyers didn’t find it. The situation wasn’t just that there was a storm causing the bears’ drowning; the bears wouldn’t have been swimming that far off shore in the first place if there hadn’t been a scarcity of sea ice. That is backed up by the statements that bears haven’t been observed swimming off shore until recently, the sea ice is manifestly decreasing, if the bears can’t walk on ice that doesn’t exist then they have to swim, and under these circumstances they are placed at risk for drowning in a storm. Moreover, since the coverage of the study was only partial, many more bears have undoubtedly drowned. Gore’s excellent film An Inconvenient Truth was right, and the contrarians – represented on Wilmott by ppauper - are wrong.Here’s a quote from the article:Polar bears drown as ice shelf melts …The new study, carried out in part of the Beaufort Sea, shows that between 1986 and 2005 just 4% of the bears spotted off the north coast of Alaska were swimming in open waters. Not a single drowning had been documented in the area. However, last September, when the ice cap had retreated a record 160 miles north of Alaska, 51 bears were spotted, of which 20% were seen in the open sea, swimming as far as 60 miles off shore. The researchers returned to the vicinity a few days later after a fierce storm and found four dead bears floating in the water. “We estimate that of the order of 40 bears may have been swimming and that many of those probably drowned…Ref:http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/u ... 767459.ece -------------
Last edited by JWD on December 7th, 2007, 11:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Jan Dash, PhD

Editor, World Scientific Encyclopedia of Climate Change:
https://www.worldscientific.com/page/en ... ate-change

Book:
http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/ ... 71241_0053
 
User avatar
farmer
Posts: 13477
Joined: December 16th, 2002, 7:09 am

Uh-oh another climate change thread...

December 9th, 2007, 2:54 am

For .0001% of the US federal budget, the government could set up a breeding program to produce panda bears to feed to the polar bears. Or maybe people who actually care about polar bears could just pay for the panda-raising pens. Then we wouldn't have this problem. Much faster and easier than having a summit conference on taxes in Switzerland or something...
 
User avatar
ppauper
Posts: 70239
Joined: November 15th, 2001, 1:29 pm

Uh-oh another climate change thread...

December 9th, 2007, 5:54 pm

QuoteOriginally posted by: farmerFor .0001% of the US federal budget, the government could set up a breeding program to produce panda bears to feed to the polar bears. Or maybe people who actually care about polar bears could just pay for the panda-raising pens. indeed, that would resolve the polar bear issue directly.
 
User avatar
JWD
Posts: 1310
Joined: March 2nd, 2005, 12:51 pm
Contact:

Uh-oh another climate change thread...

February 23rd, 2008, 12:30 pm

Interesting blog on global warming / climate change This Environmental Law Prof Blog is basically a collection of a large number of informative hard-to-find quotes and links on global warming / climate change. Ref: http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/enviro ... index.html -----------
Last edited by JWD on February 22nd, 2008, 11:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Jan Dash, PhD

Editor, World Scientific Encyclopedia of Climate Change:
https://www.worldscientific.com/page/en ... ate-change

Book:
http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/ ... 71241_0053
 
User avatar
JWD
Posts: 1310
Joined: March 2nd, 2005, 12:51 pm
Contact:

Uh-oh another climate change thread...

March 29th, 2008, 2:46 pm

Climate Change May Spark Conflict with Russia, E.U. Told. By Ian Traynor, London Guardian, March 10, 2008. “[A]… report… written [to the 27 heads of government gathering in Brussels for a summit this week] by Javier Solana, the EU’s foreign policy supremo, and Benita Ferrero-Waldner, the commissioner for external relations… predicts that global warming will precipitate security issues for Europe, ranging from energy wars to mass migration, failed states and political radicalisation… [including] greater rich-poor and north-south tension… The officials single out the impact of the thawing Arctic and its emergence as a potential flashpoint of rival claims, pointing to the Kremlin’s grab for the Arctic last year when President Vladimir Putin hailed as heroes a team of scientists who planted a Russian flag on the Arctic seabed… The report also stresses the volatility of the regions that hold large mineral deposits and predicts greater destabilisation in central Asia and the Middle East as a result of global warming. The report comes as the issue of energy security begins to loom large on the agenda of western policymakers. A summit of NATO leaders in Bucharest next month will discuss the problem for the first time.” Refs:http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/ma ... matechange Above post with references is from the following excellent website on global warming:http://www.climatecrisiscoalition.org/blog/ --------------
Jan Dash, PhD

Editor, World Scientific Encyclopedia of Climate Change:
https://www.worldscientific.com/page/en ... ate-change

Book:
http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/ ... 71241_0053
ABOUT WILMOTT

PW by JB

Wilmott.com has been "Serving the Quantitative Finance Community" since 2001. Continued...


Twitter LinkedIn Instagram

JOBS BOARD

JOBS BOARD

Looking for a quant job, risk, algo trading,...? Browse jobs here...


GZIP: On