Re: [Phys-l] Global Warming

["Bob LaMontagne" <rlamont@postoffice.providence.edu>]

The word Gray used is "minimal". Attributing a value of 45% to that is a
very perverse parsing. I use examples such as this in my course on
pseudoscience - it's called "argument by exegesis". 

Bob at PC


> -----Original Message-----
> From: phys-l-bounces@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu [mailto:phys-l-
> bounces@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu] On Behalf Of Brian Whatcott
> Sent: Monday, June 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