tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post4337522927786286267..comments2024-03-27T23:59:49.801+00:00Comments on Stoat: Pielke contra mundumWilliam M. Connolleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05836299130680534926noreply@blogger.comBlogger40125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-77411531333196963042019-11-25T15:50:22.657+00:002019-11-25T15:50:22.657+00:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Andy Mitchellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14975141756383175819noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-26578421168893856612019-11-25T09:20:09.809+00:002019-11-25T09:20:09.809+00:00This appears to be one of those situations where n...This appears to be one of those situations where no-one has anything new to say but no-one will accept not having the last word. So, I will: any more comments re Golk / Lancet that add nothing new will be deleted.William M. Connolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05836299130680534926noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-6851136400007663042019-11-25T08:27:48.507+00:002019-11-25T08:27:48.507+00:00So is the GWPF a reliable source or not? So is the GWPF a reliable source or not? Andy Mitchellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14975141756383175819noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-90834632139333927522019-11-24T21:34:35.083+00:002019-11-24T21:34:35.083+00:00Is the Lancet a reliable source? Yes. Did they pub...Is the Lancet a reliable source? Yes. Did they publish Wakefield? Yes. Bad stuff appears in good publications. Good stuff appears in bad publications. <br /><br />This should be obvious. I fail to understand why you... overlook... the obvious. Do you have any evidence or have you even seen any claims that Goklany is wrong?Tomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12747117922597525042noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-37228946707842205002019-11-24T08:34:05.299+00:002019-11-24T08:34:05.299+00:00"I linked to a specific piece that happened t..."I linked to a specific piece that happened to appear in the GWPF. Are you somehow suggesting that that implies endorsement of everything that appears in their various publications?"<br /><br />So is the GWPF a reliable source or not?Andy Mitchellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14975141756383175819noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-62711368182827176712019-11-23T17:40:12.739+00:002019-11-23T17:40:12.739+00:00I linked to a specific piece that happened to appe...I linked to a specific piece that happened to appear in the GWPF. Are you somehow suggesting that that implies endorsement of everything that appears in their various publications?<br /><br />Are you somehow suggesting that the mere fact of its appearance in that venue automatically guarantees that it is false to fact?<br /><br />I'm really curious about this. I'm having a spirited discussion with conservative defenders of Donald Trump over at the Blackboard. They refuse to consider anything that was printed in the Washington Post or the NY Times.<br /><br />Can you explain in what way you are different from them in this regard?Tomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12747117922597525042noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-48723638511380031352019-11-23T09:41:24.855+00:002019-11-23T09:41:24.855+00:00You linked to the GWPF in one of your first posts ...You linked to the GWPF in one of your first posts on this very thread. So what are you doing citing its productions as evidence for anything?Andy Mitchellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14975141756383175819noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-62901162639831597562019-11-22T15:54:05.906+00:002019-11-22T15:54:05.906+00:00What on earth would make you think I'm recomme...What on earth would make you think I'm recommending anything? Or that I consider the GWPF to be anything at all, good or bad?Tomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12747117922597525042noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-2293458442882813492019-11-22T07:48:52.497+00:002019-11-22T07:48:52.497+00:00"...In fact it seemed quite reasonable to me...."...In fact it seemed quite reasonable to me."<br /><br />As you have already revealed you consider the GWPF to be a reliable source, I don't see how that represents any kind of recommendation.Andy Mitchellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14975141756383175819noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-43831785564343594392019-11-21T15:57:42.293+00:002019-11-21T15:57:42.293+00:00TCW, I've read his work. I did not weep tears ...TCW, I've read his work. I did not weep tears of laughter. In fact it seemed quite reasonable to me.<br /><br />Brian, I think storm surge might be difficult for a variety of reasons, including unmeasured subsidence. But perhaps we're getting better at that.Tomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12747117922597525042noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-60089986235699951662019-11-21T04:01:08.733+00:002019-11-21T04:01:08.733+00:00"I don't really care. If he's right, ..."I don't really care. If he's right, he's right. If he's wrong, show it."<br /><br />Tom, he's a NIPCC apparatchk. Read his handiwork and weep tears of laughter.<br /><br />THE CLIMATE WARShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02578106673226403151noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-2826942415381866462019-11-20T22:10:32.244+00:002019-11-20T22:10:32.244+00:00Storm-surge damages might be an easier category to...Storm-surge damages might be an easier category to attribute, partially, to climate-change. Ironically, the areas with the smallest storm-surge damage might be easiest to attribute because absent sea level rise, they wouldn't have that type of damage at all.<br /><br />I'm thinking of this from a legal perspective, FWIW.Brian Schmidthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06172685194686202391noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-89520364553585974512019-11-19T21:46:04.364+00:002019-11-19T21:46:04.364+00:00WMC, who else is publishing on the subject?
I goo...WMC, who else is publishing on the subject?<br /><br />I google declining mortality due to weather and the first result is an article in Reason. But it references... Goklany. https://reason.org/policy-study/decline-deaths-extreme-weather/<br /><br />Well, there is this: https://www.nber.org/papers/w18692. But it's US only. Still, "First, we find that the mortality effect of an extremely hot day declined by about 80% between 1900-1959 and 1960-2004. As a consequence, days with temperatures exceeding 90°F were responsible for about 600 premature fatalities annually in the 1960-2004 period, compared to the approximately 3,600 premature fatalities that would have occurred if the temperature-mortality relationship from before 1960 still prevailed. Second, the adoption of residential air conditioning (AC) explains essentially the entire decline in the temperature-mortality relationship."Tomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12747117922597525042noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-36648502405804190942019-11-19T21:03:38.908+00:002019-11-19T21:03:38.908+00:00> major point is that weather and climate relat...> major point is that weather and climate related deaths have dropped by two orders of magnitude over the past century. <br /><br />Then I think that, as I said before, this is dull; and there's no reason to go to such a dodgy source for such info.<br /><br />> He repeatedly makes the point that improvements in observation and communications technology are the primary causes<br /><br />That however seems dubious. A quick scan shows him quoting himself for those points, and although I can't be bothered to check I'm fairly sure the circular references will continue if pursued.William M. Connolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05836299130680534926noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-23957185898906825722019-11-19T20:58:23.237+00:002019-11-19T20:58:23.237+00:00No, TCW, I haven't forgotten Goklany's his...No, TCW, I haven't forgotten Goklany's history, as noted above. He's conservative. I am not. He's a skeptic. I am not.<br /><br />I don't really care. If he's right, he's right. If he's wrong, show it.Tomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12747117922597525042noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-9093925440367617482019-11-19T20:01:31.288+00:002019-11-19T20:01:31.288+00:00Has Tom forgotten Goklany's political history ...Has Tom forgotten Goklany's political history ?<br /><br />He quit the Interior department to become a Cato Institute writer over a decade ago- here's the WashPost's 2018 take on his brilliant career:<br /><br />Climate and Environment<br /><b>How a climate skeptic marginalized for years at the Interior Dept. rose to prominence under Trump</b><br /><br />"10 days after President Trump took office last year, an Interior Department official suggested a swift change to its website in preparation for Trump’s choice to lead the department, Ryan Zinke.<br />While Zinke wouldn’t be sworn in for weeks, Office of Policy Analysis senior adviser Indur Goklany emailed Doug Domenech — a Trump appointee who would become the Interior Department’s assistant secretary of insular areas — telling him they would “be doing the new Secretary a favor if … the current ‘Our Priorities’ page visible on the DOI home page were removed before he is confirmed.”<br /><br />, Goklany wasn’t a new arrival. He had been working at the Interior Department since Ronald Reagan was president and had spent years questioning whether climate change would damage the planet as much as some of his colleagues predicted.<br />AD<br /><br />Goklany, who often goes by the nickname “Goks,” has written papers for several conservative think tanks as well as participated in their events and films while working at the Office of Policy Analysis for more than 30 years. Weeks after Trump’s inauguration, he found himself within the inner circle of the Interior Department’s leadership. He weighed in on climate change discussions, attended meetings with some of Zinke’s senior aides and began working in the office of the deputy secretary.THE CLIMATE WARShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02578106673226403151noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-32484540866534329992019-11-19T18:27:39.975+00:002019-11-19T18:27:39.975+00:00I believe Goklany's major point is that weathe...I believe Goklany's major point is that weather and climate related deaths have dropped by two orders of magnitude over the past century. He repeatedly makes the point that improvements in observation and communications technology are the primary causes of this really good news. It's not like he's saying the weather/climate got better.<br /><br />As for cold deaths/heat deaths, there are numerous papers on both sides of that issue. I have a personal interest in it as an elderly friend died of a cold winter in Hove because she didn't have enough coins to feed her coin operated meter. But I understand there are arguments in favor of each position.Tomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12747117922597525042noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-60098314384370401882019-11-19T18:20:05.598+00:002019-11-19T18:20:05.598+00:00Tom, the Lancet publishes lots of "correspond...Tom, the Lancet publishes lots of "correspondences" - these are in general not peer reviewed. They're a bit like comments on papers.<br /><br />Regarding refutations, Jeff Masters had a not-too-old piece on the problems with the stats:<br />https://www.wunderground.com/cat6/Which-Kills-More-People-Extreme-Heat-or-Extreme-Cold<br /><br />And then there's this:<br />http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2018/06/will-climate-change-bring-benefits-from-reduced-cold-related-mortality-insights-from-the-latest-epidemiological-research/<br />Marconoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-35054683728246201992019-11-19T18:19:18.829+00:002019-11-19T18:19:18.829+00:00Sorry, I meant has he only published *that stuff* ...Sorry, I meant has he only published *that stuff* at GWPF.<br /><br />> But is Goklany correct?<br /><br />Err, didn't you read what I wrote? As far as I can tell he is trivially and uninterestingly correct, depending on what you think he's saying, of course.William M. Connolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05836299130680534926noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-36786136708316609552019-11-19T17:43:52.539+00:002019-11-19T17:43:52.539+00:00"Indur M. Goklany is a science and technology..."Indur M. Goklany is a science and technology policy analyst for the United States Department of the Interior, where he holds the position of Assistant Director of Programs, Science and Technology Policy." (Wikipedia)<br /><br />Goklany, Indur M. (2006). The Improving State of the World: Why We're Living Longer, Healthier, More Comfortable Lives on a Cleaner Planet. The Cato Institute. ISBN 978-1-930865-98-3.<br />Goklany, Indur M. (November 2002). The Precautionary Principle: A Critical Appraisal of Environmental Risk. The Cato Institute. ISBN 978-1-930865-16-7.<br />Goklany, Indur M. (November 26, 1999). Clearing the Air: The Real Story of the War on Air Pollution. The Cato Institute. ISBN 978-1-882577-83-5.<br />Papers<br />Goklany, Indur M. (September 2015). "Carbon Dioxide The Good News" (PDF). Global Warming Policy Foundation Report. 18: 1–47. Retrieved October 19, 2015.<br />Goklany, Indur M. (September 19, 2009). "Climate change is not the biggest global health threat". The Lancet. 374 (9694): 973–974. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(09)61655-X. PMID 19766873.<br />Goklany, Indur M. (July 29, 2009). "Is Climate Change the "Defining Challenge of Our Age"?". Energy & Environment. 20 (3): 279–302. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.167.767. doi:10.1260/095830509788066439.<br />Goklany, Indur M. (February 5, 2008). "What to Do about Climate Change" (PDF). The Cato Institute. p. 1. Retrieved May 23, 2010.<br />Goklany, Indur M. (November 2002). "From precautionary principle to risk–risk analysis". Nature. 20 (1075): 1075. doi:10.1038/nbt1102-1075. PMID 12410243.<br />Goklany, Indur M. (August 22, 2002). "The Globalization of Human Well-Being". The Cato Institute. p. 1. Retrieved May 23, 2010.<br /><br />He seems to be a conservative analyst who finds it easier to get published in friendly environments, although Lancet has some cachet.<br /><br />As for your question, WMC, the only other reports I see are the ridiculous (and abandoned) ones like 300,000 deaths a year due to climate change.<br /><br />I am a progressive Democrat. I despise Trump. But is Goklany correct? If not, why haven't others published a refutation? The sources he cites are legitimate--I did a little publishing on this when I was doing State of the Climate summaries, so I know that much. <br /><br />Sometimes people who advocate positions I don't like are correct on specific things. Tomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12747117922597525042noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-57024159497040184222019-11-19T17:06:32.929+00:002019-11-19T17:06:32.929+00:00If IG only publishes at GWPF, it's not stange ...If IG only publishes at GWPF, it's not stange that people ignore him, since their stuff is generally junk. That deaths-from-disasters have declined is not controversial I think, e.g. https://ourworldindata.org/natural-disasters. Why would you use an unreliable source like GWPF rather than a reliable one?William M. Connolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05836299130680534926noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-43937435332113119842019-11-19T16:38:17.589+00:002019-11-19T16:38:17.589+00:00I really don't get it, Russell. Is Goklany acc...I really don't get it, Russell. Is Goklany accurate in his claims or not? His claims are not new, as shown by the dates on his charts. And yet I haven't seen any counter claims or refutations. Noticing that does not make me a 'bot.'Tomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12747117922597525042noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-40694743732956781982019-11-18T17:09:53.095+00:002019-11-18T17:09:53.095+00:00Didn't GWPF tell us that global warming stoppe...Didn't GWPF tell us that global warming stopped in 1998?Andy Mitchellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14975141756383175819noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-56113407590883961592019-11-18T16:51:47.193+00:002019-11-18T16:51:47.193+00:00The wet elephant in the room is the disparity betw...The wet elephant in the room is the disparity between flood death trends arising from climate change, and the jumbo actuariall anomaly arising from the 2004 Indonesian tsunami.<br /><br />The wave killed more people in one day than ordinary floods have in the last two decades.THE CLIMATE WARShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02578106673226403151noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-51781179744439137032019-11-18T16:17:25.338+00:002019-11-18T16:17:25.338+00:00The Bot is strong in this one.The Bot is strong in this one.Russellnoreply@blogger.com