Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: [Phys-L] Global Warming (Was: just for fun?)



Fine--again my only problem is with attempts to use the historical data to 'prove' that CO2 does cause global warming. As for alternate science, the previously cited work that suggests that CFCs rather than CO2 has been primarily responsible for the temperature rises in the 2nd half of the 20th Century by a group well known for their work on CFCs has the same intriguing quality as the paper on CO2 leading temperature 100k years ago. ;-)

Actually what draws me to this kind of work has been some extra-curricular philosophy of science study I've been doing, the most recent being Science Wars: What Scientists Know and How They Know It <http://www.thegreatcourses.com/tgc/courses/course_detail.aspx?cid=1235>
Professor Steven L. Goldman
Lehigh University

One major issue that has been at the forefront in the last century of debates is whether theory drives experiment to the point where the experiment is almost guaranteed to confirm theory. Of course there is historical evidence both ways here, but the first waves of criticism on the Temp lags CO2 paper are of this nature. Just ties in with what I am studying although again, I'm not in position to judge.

rwt

On 1/6/2014 6:00 PM, John Clement wrote:
The arguments about global warming which concentrate on the possible lag of
CO2 with respect to glacial recovery, really are irrelevant. The glacial
periods are known to be caused by astronomical cycles, not CO2. The CO2 can
be a factor, but the primary factor is the earth's orbit. The current
situation is that the CO2 has a much higher abundance than would be normal
and this is the most important factor in the climate models.

So those who say that CO2 can not cause warming because it is not well
correlated with glacial periods are off the mark. That is not relevant to
the debate. Any arguments about CO2 have to then be within the
climatological models.

So is there any data which shows an increase in CO2 correlated with greater
warming, which is not connected to the well known cycles that produce
glacial periods? Of course lack of data is not the same as negative data.

John M. Clement
Houston, TX



_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@phys-l.org
http://www.phys-l.org/mailman/listinfo/phys-l


--
Richard Tarara
Professor of Physics
Saint Mary's College

free Physics educational software
www.saintmarys.edu/~rtarara/software.html