Comments on: The Biggest Lie http://bluecrabboulevard.com/2007/03/16/the-biggest-lie/ Summum nec metuas diem, nec optes - Marcus Valerius Martialis Tue, 02 Aug 2011 22:27:18 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4 By: Former Republican http://bluecrabboulevard.com/2007/03/16/the-biggest-lie/comment-page-1/#comment-56548 Former Republican Sat, 17 Mar 2007 14:18:24 +0000 http://bluecrabboulevard.com/2007/03/16/the-biggest-lie/#comment-56548 I'm sorry you're ill. I can't resist pointing out, though, that you are not a homogeneous thermodynamic system. Is it meaningless to say you are running a high temperature? Gaius, you are not going to refute global warming, or the anthropogenic source of part of it, by some "gotcha" point, especially one that isn't sound. Why on earth (sic) shouldn't a climate scientist define temperature as an average based on collecting temperatures at various locations and times? Science chooses definitions based on usefulness. If it's useful to broaden a definition, scientists do so, and will cheerfully use different definitions for different purposes. For example, "space" has a quite different definition in Einsteinian physics than it does in Newtonian physics. Yet we still use both types of phsics. And by the way, if you think that "direct measurement" doesn't depend on "how the data is collected and compiled" I suggest you read up on philosophy of science. You set up a false dichotomy. I’m sorry you’re ill. I can’t resist pointing out, though, that you are not a homogeneous thermodynamic system. Is it meaningless to say you are running a high temperature?

Gaius, you are not going to refute global warming, or the anthropogenic source of part of it, by some “gotcha” point, especially one that isn’t sound. Why on earth (sic) shouldn’t a climate scientist define temperature as an average based on collecting temperatures at various locations and times? Science chooses definitions based on usefulness. If it’s useful to broaden a definition, scientists do so, and will cheerfully use different definitions for different purposes. For example, “space” has a quite different definition in Einsteinian physics than it does in Newtonian physics. Yet we still use both types of phsics.

And by the way, if you think that “direct measurement” doesn’t depend on “how the data is collected and compiled” I suggest you read up on philosophy of science. You set up a false dichotomy.

]]> By: Gaius http://bluecrabboulevard.com/2007/03/16/the-biggest-lie/comment-page-1/#comment-56523 Gaius Fri, 16 Mar 2007 23:31:04 +0000 http://bluecrabboulevard.com/2007/03/16/the-biggest-lie/#comment-56523 Actually, he's exactly correct. I had not thought about that until he wrote it. Temperature/heat/thermodynamics are not things that can be redefined. They are fundamental. There is a reason they are called "laws". Yet the "global temperature" depends on how the data is collected and compiled, not on direct measurement. If you do not see that there is a real problem with that, it's time for you to go and send in your replacement. I am extremely sick and am running a rather high temperature at the moment. It would be extremely unwise to push me at this point. My patience is somewhat lacking at the moment. Actually, he’s exactly correct. I had not thought about that until he wrote it. Temperature/heat/thermodynamics are not things that can be redefined. They are fundamental. There is a reason they are called “laws”. Yet the “global temperature” depends on how the data is collected and compiled, not on direct measurement.

If you do not see that there is a real problem with that, it’s time for you to go and send in your replacement. I am extremely sick and am running a rather high temperature at the moment. It would be extremely unwise to push me at this point. My patience is somewhat lacking at the moment.

]]> By: Former Republican http://bluecrabboulevard.com/2007/03/16/the-biggest-lie/comment-page-1/#comment-56522 Former Republican Fri, 16 Mar 2007 23:13:51 +0000 http://bluecrabboulevard.com/2007/03/16/the-biggest-lie/#comment-56522 This is an ridiculous misreading of Hulme's column, a classic case of selective quotation, to make Hulme seem to say something he is not. Don't take my word for it. Go read http://environment.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,,2032821,00.html And Gaius, thank you for drawing my attention to Hulme's column. What he (actually) has to say is pretty interesting. So temperature can only be defined for a homogenous system? That's not just wrong, it should be obvious that it's wrong. People talk about the temperature of nonhomogeneous systems all the time. When ski resorts talk about a warm winter, they're not talking nonsense. You may have to define temperature differently than you do in thermodynamics, but so what? The Danish scientist is probably saying something serious that didn't translate well to a news article, something that might be worth understanding. But you will probably have to get technical to understand it. This is an ridiculous misreading of Hulme’s column, a classic case of selective quotation, to make Hulme seem to say something he is not. Don’t take my word for it. Go read http://environment.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,,2032821,00.html And Gaius, thank you for drawing my attention to Hulme’s column. What he (actually) has to say is pretty interesting.

So temperature can only be defined for a homogenous system? That’s not just wrong, it should be obvious that it’s wrong. People talk about the temperature of nonhomogeneous systems all the time. When ski resorts talk about a warm winter, they’re not talking nonsense. You may have to define temperature differently than you do in thermodynamics, but so what? The Danish scientist is probably saying something serious that didn’t translate well to a news article, something that might be worth understanding. But you will probably have to get technical to understand it.

]]>