Re: [Phys-l] Global Warming

["Monce, Michael N." <mnmon@conncoll.edu>]

I can't answer your supposition as I don't have the data.  I haven't looked at exactly what sort of percentages Gray is asserting.  You could be right, but I think you would have  to check with what he calculates.
 
       Mike
 

________________________________

From: phys-l-bounces@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu on behalf of Brian Whatcott
Sent: Mon 6/12/2006 1:21 PM
To: Forum for Physics Educators
Subject: Re: [Phys-l] Global Warming



Mike Monce,

Parsing only the sentiment you attribute to William Gray,
that  "the current trend, in his view, is due more to natural cycles,
and the effect of human activity is minimal":

Let us suppose that "due more to natural cycles" can mean at least
51% of the warming effect is due to a natural thermal cycle.
Let us also suppose that "the effect of human activity is minimal"
can mean that human activities contribute less than 5% of the
warming effect.

One might thereby deduce that
  The current heating cycle has a contribution of up to 45% from
non-human, and non-natural sources., according to William Gray,
a noted authority on modeling climate.

Brian Whatcott


At 07:27 AM 6/12/2006, you wrote:
> I know arguing from authority is frowned upon, but William Gray
>  has taken a stand on the issue: the current trend, in his view,
> is due more to natural cycles, and the effect of human activity is minimal.
> Just do a Google with his name and global warming.
>  He certainly qualifies as someone who's opinion should be considered
>  given his experience with modeling ocean/atmosphere vis-a-vis hurricanes.
>
>                    Mike Monce
>                    Connecticut College


Brian Whatcott    Altus OK    Eureka!


_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l