tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27993761.post2683052281123542189..comments2023-07-27T07:43:17.253-07:00Comments on Waldenswimmer: 1/(1-f)Waldenswimmerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09383447119958726339noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27993761.post-79753686612095437412007-10-28T15:47:00.000-07:002007-10-28T15:47:00.000-07:00Thank you for your comment, Tom. In reverse order...Thank you for your comment, Tom. In reverse order, my statement about a 20 degree F rise was based on the probability distributions discussed in the lead paper from RealClimate.org, which is linked on the site. They go into much greater detail about the possibility of catastrophic temp. rise. I think it's quite real. The scary part to me is that the feedback loops in each case seem to be stronger than expected just a few years ago. Related to this idea is my perhaps my unfair characterization of Mr. Lomborg. But he's an economist, not a climate scientist, and in some ways he's working the other side of the glory-hog street from Al Gore. Talking about temperatures only is highly misleading. What about the undeniable acidification of the oceans that is going on right now, for example? This happens directly with a CO2 rise unrelated, really, to air temperature rise. The German studies (discussed by Angela Merkel recently) take issue with the idea that green adaptation is prohibitively expensive; indeed, their studies indicate there is a fivefold return on investment in renewable technologies. I just don't think we have the luxury of using economics as our sole criterion anymore, and this attitude is very reminiscent of Bush's approach until very recently. Thanks again for commenting.Waldenswimmerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09383447119958726339noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27993761.post-39003778812824840302007-10-28T06:59:00.000-07:002007-10-28T06:59:00.000-07:00I'm interested in your characterization of Lomborg...I'm interested in your characterization of Lomborg as an asshat--have you read his most recent book? I just finished it--he does not deny global warming nor anthropogenic contributions to it, just does a standard cost/benefit analysis on alternatives. I don't think talking about a 20 degree fahrenheit rise raises the level of discussion on climate change, especially not without a timeline and a list of conditions that would lead to it. Perhaps that is something Professor Chu addresses.Tomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12747117922597525042noreply@blogger.com