Comments on: Alley at the NAS Panel

By: Michael Wallace

Michael Wallace — Sun, 09 Oct 2011 22:02:37 +0000

I realize this comment string is probably too old post to with any relevancy, but here is a new development from Dr. Richard Alley of Penn State that I have read in EOS Transactions (27 Sept. 2011, Volume 92 no. 39). He has chaired a committee which developed the contents for a new exhibit at the Washington, DC – based Marian Koshland Science Museum of the National Academy of Sciences. This exhibit is titled “Earth Lab; Degrees of Change”. It includes an interactive carbon-management simulator. The EOS article claims that the exhibit is based on authority from an National Academy of Sciences (NAS) affiliated publication “America’s Climate Choices Reports”, which concludes that “climate change is occurring, is very likely caused by human activities, and poses significant risks for a broad range of human and natural systems”.

By: Andre Bijkerk

Andre Bijkerk — Thu, 09 Mar 2006 16:09:27 +0000

Traditional problems with ice core temperature reconstructions are well known. You measure the isotopes of the precipitation, containing more variables than temperature alone. But you only measure those "temperatures" when it snows. Obviously, summer and winter snow has a totally different signature. Which also means that a climate shift (which happens all the time) that changes the summer winter precipitation ratios also changes the accumulated isotope ratios in the ice cores. This problem has been quantified (by measuring) recently with this Ph.D thesis with one main conclusion: when it snows the temperatures are above average. Now, the annual snow accumulation on the Greenland summit ice core, the source of the Alley2000 temperature, rides the same thrilling rollercoaster as the isotope ratios but this type of behavior was not reckoned with in that time of Alley2000. So, a fundamental revision of ice core temperature reconstructions should be expected.

By: Jeff Norman

Jeff Norman — Tue, 07 Mar 2006 13:47:25 +0000

#3 Would I have a choice beyond leaving the jurisdiction?

In #2 I was referring to:

very interesting remarks about the disconnect between what policy-makers wanted and what academics could provide.

It looks to me that they went with what some “policymakers” wanted, which seems to be common in climate change reporting.

I am not sure I understand your comment. Are you suggesting the policymakers threatened the scientists with higher taxes if they didn’t “improve” the reported uncertainty in the paleoclimate reconstructions or rewrite the summary for policymakers?

By: Barclay E MacDonald

Barclay E MacDonald — Tue, 07 Mar 2006 06:12:55 +0000

#2 If a policy maker told you your taxes were higher, would you pay them?

By: Jeff Norman

Jeff Norman — Mon, 06 Mar 2006 17:10:07 +0000

If the policymaker told you to jump off a bridge would you do it?

By: DF

DF — Mon, 06 Mar 2006 17:01:27 +0000

The BP start point is not shown in the WDCP text and I’ve used 1980.

BP is defined in the literature as always fixed at 1950.

In passing, it is remarkable that a detailed and systematic presentation should be regarded as “grey” literature while articles that are, at best, extended abstracts in Nature and Science are not.

I would assume "grey" is a reference to the fact that INSTAAR Occasional Papers are not peer-reviewed in the traditional sense since it is a mechanism by which The Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research publishes the work of its own scientists. I would agree though that some technical reports like this are worth a great deal more than some of the formally peer review literature.

Steve: Thanks. I’ll fix this and edit my post. Alley’s data seems to be heavily rounded. I wonder what a less smoothed version looks like. I wonder if Alley will provide it.