Re: [asa] Re: Confirmation bias among GW dissenters, but ...

From: William Hamilton <>
Date: Tue Apr 28 2009 - 11:55:03 EDT

On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 10:22 AM, William Hamilton
<> wrote:
> It's not an argument I'm making. I'm only summarizing what Glenn
> Morton has told me. And yes, I agree that a 2 meter increase in sea
> level would wipe out a lot of places. And I wouldn't want to live in
> Phoenix now.

To continue
I'm just as much a nonexpert as you are. But as I've said before, I
have the impression that most of the scientists worrying about AGW are
atmosphric scientists, so they worry about what their expertise can
address: the CO2. (I'm not claiming that they fudge their research)
Other disciplines, geology and statistical physics to name two, have a
different perspective. I think Scafetta et. al. make a good case for
the influence of solar irradiance, and the current low sunspot
activity seems to predict a possible cooling cycle. All I'm saying is
that all disciplines which have a bearing on Global Warming ought to
be taken into account before policy decisions which will cause massive
economic dislocations are taken. BTW I figured untangled another
result in one of the references for my review. As soon as I can write
it in simple terms, I'll add it to the review. Basically I now
understand how they are claiming synchronization between solar
irradiance an earth teperature.
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 8:55 AM, John Burgeson (ASA member)
> <> wrote:
>> Thanks, Fred, for a good reply.
>> Bill wrote: "Geologists (some of them anyway)  are not as likely to support AGW,
>> because there have been times in the past where CO2 concentration as
>> much higher than it is today."
>> That does not seem to be a credible argument, Bill. Yes, CO2 has been
>> greater. And at the time the temperature was 6 degrees or so higher
>> and the seas were 6 to 7 feet higher too, since the pole ice had
>> melted.
>> The climate scientists at RealClimate do not appear to deny this.
>> Rather, when the subject comes up (there is a plethora of dialog on
>> other aspects), it is either assumed or expressly pointed out that a
>> sea rise of that magnitude would pretty much wipe out Galveston,
>> Sacramento, the Netherlands, Bangledesh, much of Indionesia, the ports
>> of New York, the Gpresent Gulf coast, etc. etc. Estimates of death and
>> destruction vary depending on how fast this takes place. Estimates of
>> refugees likewise (if people survive, they will migrate inland).
>> Temperature is the other issue. Will you want to live in Phoenix? Will
>> you be ABLE to live in Phoenix?
>> Burgy
> --
> William E (Bill) Hamilton Jr., Ph.D.
> Member American Scientific Affiliation
> Austin, TX
> 248 821 8156

William E (Bill) Hamilton Jr., Ph.D.
Member American Scientific Affiliation
Austin, TX
248 821 8156
To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Apr 28 11:55:31 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Apr 28 2009 - 11:55:31 EDT