Comments merwin has made

  • Question about semantics and interpretation

    Hi Andrew,

    Could i ask you to put me on the right track here, since i'm discussing global warming and hurricanes in another forum.

    The trouble i'm having is to define which statements that are acceptable in light of the WMO and/or the IPCC consensus. I'll use Katrina here as an example - but this really isn't about it. The discussion boils down to these two statements:

    • Katrina was caused by global warming
    • Katrina was not caused by global warming

    From my personal reading both of these two statements are wrong. I know that its not possible to pin down the attribution in intensity to a single event, and i'm also well aware that the AMO probably has a much larger impact on north atlantic cyclones, and that land-use changes and development is the real culprit in the damages from hurricanes (both for Katrina and in general), since i do read prometheus once in a while...

    Hopefully you can help me in assessing whether i'm correct or entirely off track in this. I don't mind being wrong - i'd rather correct any mistakes that i've made.

    Thank you,

    Kim.On Another silly debate around the IPCC report posted 2 years, 9 months ago 10 Responses

  • Thank you

    Thank you for the link to this - it is (so far - i'm starting on #3) a good series. I'm already recommending it to people who aren't that savvy in science. And as a more indepth view than Gore AIT (which i usually recommend as the first thing to see).On From the U. of Arizona posted 2 years, 10 months ago 1 Response