tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28837843.post8853475191467819068..comments2024-03-19T07:10:27.303-07:00Comments on Quark Soup by David Appell: The Farce of the Cruz HearingDavid Appellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03318269033139447591noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28837843.post-91493021681795360922015-12-14T15:39:47.437-08:002015-12-14T15:39:47.437-08:00Mark Steyn made a couple of points that support th...Mark Steyn made a couple of points that support the idea that this hearing was a farce. Almost all of the Republicans elegible didn't attend the hearing. And, some of the Dems were present only when it was their turn to ask a question. Some even walked out while their question was being answered. Given the lack of attention from the Senators, I really don't see what purpose this hearing served.<br /><br />Cheers<br />David in Calhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10222355423128534221noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28837843.post-59234008114862751962015-12-12T10:07:03.826-08:002015-12-12T10:07:03.826-08:00David in Cal: The purpose of a Congressional heari...David in Cal: The purpose of a Congressional hearing is to assess issues of national importance, not to be of "value to the skeptic side." Hearings aren't high school debates with scoring kept for each side. It's telling you see it otherwise.<br /><br />Steyn had no business whatsoever at that meeting. He has no training in science, clearly knows very little about it, and knows nothing about national security either, though none of his ignorance ever stops him from opening his big mouth. His invitation was purely political, and was an insult to climate scientists and to the entire nation.David Appellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03318269033139447591noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28837843.post-6759765025831407712015-12-11T23:02:47.058-08:002015-12-11T23:02:47.058-08:00when you’ve got so few scientists you’re willing t...<i>when you’ve got so few scientists you’re willing to listen to that you’re obliged to invite Mark Steyn...</i><br /><br />Silly comment. Cruz wanted Steyn. Steyn showed his value to the skeptic side when he forced the Commmittee to let Dr. Curry respond to certain comments. He then put Sen. Markey on the defensive by questioning Markey. See http://fabiusmaximus.com/2015/12/10/senate-climate-hearing-91817/ <br /><br />Also, there are lots of other skeptics Cruz could have called. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming for a list.<br /><br />Furthermore, there was no obligation to have some minimum number of witnesses. David in Calhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10222355423128534221noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28837843.post-13870016688601882422015-12-11T12:36:35.942-08:002015-12-11T12:36:35.942-08:00Thanks, David. I had read only Spencer's post...Thanks, David. I had read only Spencer's post, and failed to look at his comments. The comment you cite kind-of justifies Tom's point about satellite temperature not necessarily being a good proxy for surface temperature. I wish we knew by how much, in Spencer's opinion, the ground temperature trend could vary from the satellite temperarture trend. I still would like to see the cite where Spencer faults the satellite temperature measurements as Tom says he did. David in Calhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10222355423128534221noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28837843.post-45033379247797078612015-12-11T11:53:53.877-08:002015-12-11T11:53:53.877-08:00I'd very much be interested in understanding t...I'd very much be interested in understanding this better. I'm not even sure I understand the relationship between total precipitable water and microwave emission from an oxygen atom. <br /><br />If someone can give us a brief tutorial --- a nice link would also help --- I'd appreciate it.JoeThttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06540568535579405609noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28837843.post-26778971625066888632015-12-11T11:09:38.576-08:002015-12-11T11:09:38.576-08:00David in Cal: At Tom's link, Spencer wrote
&q...David in Cal: At Tom's link, Spencer wrote<br /><br />"...free tropospheric temperature doesn’t have to warm as fast as the surface temperature...it all depends upon changes in precipitation microphysics, which are not well understood."<br /><br />I don't know exactly what he means by "free" in this context.David Appellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03318269033139447591noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28837843.post-25504378742642974042015-12-11T09:54:34.166-08:002015-12-11T09:54:34.166-08:00Tom Dayton -- I went to your link, but it didn'...Tom Dayton -- I went to your link, but it didn't seem to support your comment. It said nothing about major unresolved issues in the assumptions used in the complex conversions of the microwave measurements into estimates of temperatures. Also, in that link, Spencer implied that the satellite temperatures were more reliable than surface temperatures.<br /><br />Do you have a better source? <br /><br />Thanks<br />David in CalDavid in Calhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10222355423128534221noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28837843.post-69096888024795002602015-12-11T09:46:45.921-08:002015-12-11T09:46:45.921-08:00David -- Of course you are right that Cruz selecte...David -- Of course you are right that Cruz selected witnesses who are climate skeptics. He pretty much knew in advance what his witnesses would say. But, many Congressional hearings are like that. <br /><br />I thought Markey sounded ignorant. However, I think he was right to question the need for this hearing. Regardless of whether the hearing produced useful facts or not, I think it won't have much impact. The Senators were obviously not swayed by any of the testimony, and the hearing got little attention from the media.<br /><br />Cheers<br /><br /><br />David in Calhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10222355423128534221noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28837843.post-61615009536452218962015-12-11T09:35:58.286-08:002015-12-11T09:35:58.286-08:00Even Roy Spencer now admits that satellite "m...Even Roy Spencer now admits that satellite "measurements" of tropospheric temperature cannot and must not be used as proxies for surface temperature measurements, due to major unresolved issues in the assumptions used in the complex conversions of the microwave measurements into estimates of temperatures. (Spencer is one of the two main people responsible for the "UAH" satellite-based troposphere temperature estimations.) http://www.drroyspencer.com/2015/12/2015-will-be-the-3rd-warmest-year-in-the-satellite-record/#comment-203356. Tom Daytonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02622479978644513684noreply@blogger.com