Re: [Phys-L] just for fun?

[adrian sears <adriansears@yahoo.com>]

well said john
--------------------------------------------
On Sat, 1/4/14, John Denker <jsd@av8n.com> wrote:

 Subject: Re: [Phys-L] just for fun?
 To: Phys-L@Phys-L.org
 Date: Saturday, January 4, 2014, 10:39 AM
 
 On 01/04/2014 09:29 AM, Richard
 Tarara wrote:
> [The bottom line is that looking at this point makes it
 look like
> Gore outright lied in his use of the historical data
 graphs which
> gives people a excuse for ignoring everything else he
 said.
 
 I've gotta call BS on that.
 
 a) The fact is, humans are dumping a lot of CO2 into the
  atmosphere.
 
 b) The fact is, there is a causal relationship between CO2
  and climate change.
 
 c) The fact is, there is a perceptible correlation in the
  data.
 
  Note: Correlation is not proof of causation.  However
   -- It is not the only evidence we have.
   -- It serves as an illustration of the relationship.
 
  A cowbell is not the same as a cow, but it may help you
  find the cow.
 
 d) If Al Gore had said that CO2 levels explain every detail
  of the temperature record, that would have been a stupid
  thing to say ... but AFAICT he never said that, so what's
  your problem?
 
 e) If Al Gore had said that CO2/temperature correlation was
  the only evidence -- or even the best evidence -- of
  anthropogenic climate change, that would have been a
 stupid
  thing to say ... but AFAICT he never said that, so what's
  your problem?
 
> just like the continents fit together
 
 That analogy illustrates my point.  The way that the
 map of 
 South America "fits" against the map of Africa is not
 perfect
 ... and it is not our best evidence of plate
 tectonics.  Not 
 even close.
 
> which gives people a excuse for ignoring everything
 else he said
 
 That's not an excuse.  It's a disingenuous pretext, not
 
 a rational reason.
 
 The point remains that if Al Gore and his video had never
 existed, we would still have a problem with anthropogenic
 climate change.
 
 I'm pretty sure everybody on this list has simplified an
 explanation or two for pedagogical reasons.  For
 example,
 I would not want to be called a liar every time I write 
   KE = 1/2 m v^2         
                
      [1]
 without including relativistic corrections.  I insist 
 that equation [1] should not be used as a pretext for
 ignoring everything else I have to say.  Conversely, I
 am not suggesting that anybody should accept on blind
 faith everything (or anything) they hear from me, or 
 from anybody else.
 
 I am suggesting that we should dial back the nitpicking
 and the ad_hominem nonsense.  I am suggesting that we
 focus attention on the best evidence, not the worst
 evidence.  That applies to what we say in the
 classroom,
 and in this forum, and elsewhere.
 _______________________________________________
 Forum for Physics Educators
 Phys-l@phys-l.org
 http://www.phys-l.org/mailman/listinfo/phys-l