Now my University life has ended permanently I intend to get back on this blog again...
Pleasingly, the last article I wrote is still being discussed in the news so I have an easy follow-on.
An independant inquiry by the Dutch parliament says that the IPCC's findings were accurate, but that they should have been more transparent.
Source
This is effectively what I said at the time: They should not be including information that has not been independantly peer reviewed and accepted. This kind of thing needs to stop if we are to have any hope of changing peoples' behaviour.
Monday, 5 July 2010
Tuesday, 19 January 2010
Climate Science...
Climate scientists really need to get their acts together. First there was the “Climategate” scandal (much as I cringe when the word “gate” is automatically appended to every new debacle that comes along), and now the IPCC have had to admit that their report contained unverified opinion that had not been subject to peer review.
Source
This needs to stop. People are already sceptical or apathetic about climate change, and stupid errors like this only make things worse.
Personally, I think that this is what happens when politics gets involved in things, as we saw with the exaggerated intelligence reports in the Iraq dossier. Scientists need to keep their goals in mind and not be distracted by what might or might not sway public opinion – otherwise it ceases to be proper science. They definitely can’t start accepting “findings” that have not been analysed and peer reviewed through the proper channels.
Source
This needs to stop. People are already sceptical or apathetic about climate change, and stupid errors like this only make things worse.
Personally, I think that this is what happens when politics gets involved in things, as we saw with the exaggerated intelligence reports in the Iraq dossier. Scientists need to keep their goals in mind and not be distracted by what might or might not sway public opinion – otherwise it ceases to be proper science. They definitely can’t start accepting “findings” that have not been analysed and peer reviewed through the proper channels.
Thursday, 10 December 2009
Thursday, 26 November 2009
China finally sets some emissions targets...
BBC
Times
Well, it’s nice to see that China, fierce opponent of the Kyoto Protocol, has finally set some emissions reduction targets.
However, these targets do not go very far. China is measuring its emissions against GDP, and since China’s GDP is likely to continue rising faster than their emissions, it will be easy for them to meet this target while still emitting more carbon. A 40 to 45% reduction may sound like a lot, but it doesn’t mean they will emit less carbon, just that they will emit less per unit of GDP.
The USA is also going to announce it’s own cuts – 17% on 2005 levels by 2020. This sounds like a lot, but most other countries have already agreed to 20% reductions, and that is on 1990 levels. Because emissions in every country have risen significantly between 1990 and 2005, this means that a 2005 baseline is much higher and therefore much easier to achieve.
Still, it is nice to see the world’s top 2 polluters making some attempts to slow or stop their rate of pollution. Hopefully this means that their economies will grow in a more efficient way in the future. Also it means that other countries, businesses and individuals who continue to cite the fact that America and China continue to pollute as reasons not to act may change their attitudes.
Times
Well, it’s nice to see that China, fierce opponent of the Kyoto Protocol, has finally set some emissions reduction targets.
However, these targets do not go very far. China is measuring its emissions against GDP, and since China’s GDP is likely to continue rising faster than their emissions, it will be easy for them to meet this target while still emitting more carbon. A 40 to 45% reduction may sound like a lot, but it doesn’t mean they will emit less carbon, just that they will emit less per unit of GDP.
The USA is also going to announce it’s own cuts – 17% on 2005 levels by 2020. This sounds like a lot, but most other countries have already agreed to 20% reductions, and that is on 1990 levels. Because emissions in every country have risen significantly between 1990 and 2005, this means that a 2005 baseline is much higher and therefore much easier to achieve.
Still, it is nice to see the world’s top 2 polluters making some attempts to slow or stop their rate of pollution. Hopefully this means that their economies will grow in a more efficient way in the future. Also it means that other countries, businesses and individuals who continue to cite the fact that America and China continue to pollute as reasons not to act may change their attitudes.
Monday, 23 November 2009
Sunday, 22 November 2009
Some people are just stupid...
Source
Yeah... Apparently some people still believe that the LHC is going to kill us all, despite repeated assurances that it won’t. Most of the scientists involved will be at CERN, and it’s obviously in their best interests for it to not blow up in their faces.
It’s to be expected that people might be a little concerned, but this is ridiculous. This is symptomatic of the mistrust of scientists by many people. People don’t like what they don’t understand, and very few understand what CERN are doing (at least, not in any great detail). However, this kind of attitude towards science as a whole is detrimental, as evidenced by the David Nutt affair of a few weeks ago (which should have been a much bigger deal than it was). We need to let the physicists and engineers do their work, especially since all that money has been spent on it already, it’d be nice to see some results at some point.
Yeah... Apparently some people still believe that the LHC is going to kill us all, despite repeated assurances that it won’t. Most of the scientists involved will be at CERN, and it’s obviously in their best interests for it to not blow up in their faces.
It’s to be expected that people might be a little concerned, but this is ridiculous. This is symptomatic of the mistrust of scientists by many people. People don’t like what they don’t understand, and very few understand what CERN are doing (at least, not in any great detail). However, this kind of attitude towards science as a whole is detrimental, as evidenced by the David Nutt affair of a few weeks ago (which should have been a much bigger deal than it was). We need to let the physicists and engineers do their work, especially since all that money has been spent on it already, it’d be nice to see some results at some point.
Tuesday, 17 November 2009
Belle de Jour
Sample article about this.
I know everyone is talking about this a bit in the news, but I thought I’d add my thoughts.
I’m going to ignore the whole debate on the morality of prostitution; I think that has been and is being covered in enough detail elsewhere.
The key point I wanted to make (that hasn’t already been ground to dust) is that this sort of thing reflects very badly on the state of PhD funding in the UK. If female students are forced to turn to prostitution to fund their studies, surely there is something wrong. According to the main article in the Times on November 17th, many other women are also selling themselves to fund their doctorates. If this is true, then it represents a very sorry state of affairs for British students.
This woman is now a research doctor at a hospital. It seems ludicrous to suggest that there shouldn’t be enough cash available for her to complete her studies.
I know everyone is talking about this a bit in the news, but I thought I’d add my thoughts.
I’m going to ignore the whole debate on the morality of prostitution; I think that has been and is being covered in enough detail elsewhere.
The key point I wanted to make (that hasn’t already been ground to dust) is that this sort of thing reflects very badly on the state of PhD funding in the UK. If female students are forced to turn to prostitution to fund their studies, surely there is something wrong. According to the main article in the Times on November 17th, many other women are also selling themselves to fund their doctorates. If this is true, then it represents a very sorry state of affairs for British students.
This woman is now a research doctor at a hospital. It seems ludicrous to suggest that there shouldn’t be enough cash available for her to complete her studies.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
