Looking the wrong way.

Now i see the problem.

I thought it was that the system was way to complex and that no-one really knew anything. I now feel that I have been enlightened to the problem and realise that, as the song says, nothing can save us.

The three main protagonists are representative of the somewhat different foci of paleo-climatologists, climate modellers and economists. Very broadly speaking, paleo-climate science is built around the analysis of single location time series (often from holes that are drilled). Climate modellers spend a lot of time trying to see what is coming up in all it's complexity, while economists tend to eschew complexity and look for insight in highly idealised situations. But in order to increase the credibility of models, they have to do well at simulating past climates and what might happen in the future is certainly informed by what has happened in the past. And in order to better understand the impacts of climate change and various proposed policies, economists will need to embrace the complexity of human-climate interactions while modellers need to better understand what aspects of climate really do make a difference. None of these things will happen if we continue to all look in different directions, and more problematically, fail to support and reward those scientists who want to bridge the divides. Sea monsters notwithstanding.

I do think the picture is really clever.


Source

Cartoons

A while back I came across some cartoons from the climate change cartoon competition. I think the second place should have been first, and the runner up shown second. I don't quite understand the significance of the first place, then again I don't really understand political and artistic expression anyway. As they say, light does not penetrate dense wood.

Winner

Second

Third

Runner Up

More Cartoons

Climate Change Science

New climate change research from Argentina.

Seriously

Are they for real?

In the news

Well not really. Yet kind of. It's like the role of an employee of a bar was vital in giving a singer a drink before a live performance, who rocked a sold out concert was important to the overall picture. And that is me and my contribution to the Garnaut Review (sounds like the Stern Review). The review is a draft report on climate change and has just been released and is making the news. I spent numerous days before christmas collecting the data and passed it on to be adjusted as needs be. If you look closely you can see absolutely none of my contribution in chapter 4 , and actually I am not sure where my work went, however chapter 4 was the most likely place (having read a bit of it [it is over 500 pages]).

You can download the report here.

Well anyway, lets get back to rock music as I saw this clever sign recently.

Triple M - Australia's Classic Rock Radio Station

Global warming: the real cause

Well having study some literature on this topic I have now discovered the real reason for global warming and it was so obvious that it is hard to see.

Quoted from the enlightening site:

You may be interested to know that global warming, earthquakes, hurricanes, and other natural disasters are a direct effect of the shrinking numbers of Pirates since the 1800s. For your interest, I have included a graph of the approximate number of pirates versus the average global temperature over the last 200 years. As you can see, there is a statistically significant inverse relationship between pirates and global temperature.

For more enlightened results please see this journal- JIR (careful it is scientific).

GM Foods

No I am not talking about general motors foods, I am talking about genetically modified foods. This appears to be quite an issue at the moment due to food safety concerns about GM foods. Japan has even asked Australia to not use GM foods. Even the TV was bombarded with anti GM food advertising. This is short sighted I feel. Genetically modifying foods is something we have been doing for a long time. When we splice genes together of different wheats to get a new variety of wheat it is the same as getting two different genes from plants to boost drought resistance. In principal it is the same, and GM foods do need to go through a rigorous safety screening.

Now I admit nothing is fool proof and mistakes may happen yet I feel the risks associated with GM foods are outweighed by the benefits. Some of the existing benefits include increasing vitamin/ mineral content of foods and higher yielding crops. Presently, I am working on Agricultural greenhouse gas emissions and methane and nitrous oxides are big problems less focussed on in the context of climate change. I feel that GM technology really can help with cutting back these gas emissions. Perhaps scientists can make crops less nitrogen dependent, rice that emits less methane when growing, and my personal favourite cows that fart less.

The economist this week presented the map below showing the top 10 producers (by million hectares [1 hectare = 1000 m2]) of GM foods worldwide and countries that have adopted them. As the accompanying story suggests, Europe may no longer be able to keep out GM foods as trade regulations are forcing changes.