[Phys-L] Re: [Political Action] The nature of the lack of proof (climatewarming)

[Robert.Cohen at PO-BOX.ESU.EDU (Robert Cohen)]

On Friday, December 17, 2004 11:33 AM, Leigh Palmer wrote:

> "The rapid rise in both surface temperature and CO2 is one of
> the indications that humans are responsible for some of this
> unusual warmth." [op. cit.]
>
> logical fallacy: *post hoc ergo propter hoc*
>
> If two events are consecutive they are causally related. In
> this case I am not even aware that the indicated warming
> occurs after the carbon dioxide increase. Unless that is
> demonstrated the argument is equally strong (i.e. fallacious)
> that warming causes the carbon dioxide increase.

[Is this from the same person who argued that forces
cause accelerations?]

Yes, *by itself* this quote exhibits false logic.  However,
this quote simply neglects to mention the assumptions being
made in the argument, i.e. we know of a mechanism whereby
increased CO2 is associated with increased surface temperature
and we know that human actions are responsible for increased CO2.
We assume the reader accepts these assumptions.

> "Other surface temperature data sets differ somewhat from
> those shown here, but in all of them the modern temperatures
> are generally greater than during the past several hundred
> years." [op. cit.]
>
> In all of them, eh? Satellite measurements of tropospheric
> temperature are more extensive, less biased to northern
> cities and, perhaps, deserve some attention. These "surface
> temperatures", by the way, are really measurements of
> atmospheric temperature taken at the Earth's surface.

Are you talking about
<http://www.ghcc.msfc.nasa.gov/MSU/images/tropo_temp.gif>?

As you mention, the satellite measurements represent the
troposphere, not the surface.  Just because we are unsure why
the troposphere shows no warming (perhaps even a slight
cooling) does not necessarily invalidate the measurements at
the surface.  In addition, I believe these same satellite
measurements also indicate warming for the upper troposphere.

> "A climate model projection that includes both natural
> processes and human activities closely matches actual
> measurements of 20th-century temperature changes."
>
> ...
>
> "The same climate model without human activity (natural
> processes only) does not match the strong warming that
> occurred during the past few decades." [op. cit.]
>
> This example demonstrates clearly that models can be made to
> fit data better if one has more free parameters to use.

My understanding is that the inversion process used to obtain
temperatures from satellite measurements is based upon the same
physics involved in the computer models.  Computer models are not
based upon "fits".  They are based upon physics. A significant
problem with the models is one of resolution.  In order to model
the entire atmosphere, the grid points must be far apart, which
leads to a smoothing effect.

____________________________________________________
Robert Cohen; 570-422-3428; www.esu.edu/~bbq
East Stroudsburg University; E. Stroudsburg, PA 18301