2010-09-13 07:51:49A shout out to Dana's advanced rebuttals
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
121.222.93.62

There's a blog post from ClimateSight giving Dana a shout out for his advanced rebuttals.

I’ve really been enjoying the Advanced versions of Skeptical Science’s rebuttals to common misconceptions about climate change. So far, they have all been written by someone going by the name of dana1981, who I would like to give a huge shout-out to. I am a new B.Sc. student who is interested in pursuing a career in climate change research, and these articles have been very helpful in giving me a taste of basic atmospheric science.

Then she describes Dana's posts, followed by:

Skeptical Science’s recent efforts to expand their rebuttals to include beginner, intermediate, and advanced levels of explanation were inspired by a RealClimate post written by Dr. Gavin Schimdt.... Skeptical Science took up this challenge, and although their efforts have largely been focused on creating “plain-English” beginner articles, as a huge target audience for climate change communication is the general public, I’m extremely grateful that they’re also catering to new science enthusiasts such as myself with the advanced articles. Please, keep them coming!
While we’re on the topic, I should also mention a great new post by Skeptical Science, which is not part of their argument database – “The contradictory nature of global warming skepticism”. You can’t hold the objection that the world isn’t warming and then turn around and say that global warming is natural, but these and other self-disproving arguments reach us on a daily basis. Deniers can’t seem to agree on a single unified objection to anthropogenic global climate change, and some individuals, as the post shows, contradict themselves up to five times in six months.
And hey, I just realized right now – that post was also written by dana1981. Whoever this writer is, he or she is doing a great job. 

I think the impact of this group of authors is only just beginning - the steady flow of Basic rebuttals have been fantastic, the smattering of Advanced rebuttals are an extremely valuable resource and it's been a joy to watch all these minds interact and collaborate on this forum. Seeing a thread where someone writes a basic rebuttal then seeing the rebuttal evolve and improve from the many comments and suggestions is, well, a dream for a science blogger such as myself. And in the meantime, Shine Tech are developing software that will enable us to get our content out there more widely and quickly. Mark informed me last week that the next build of the iPhone app will include blog posts so when we post a new blog post, it will zip out to iPhones everywhere. On that note, Mark also let me know we've now had over 63,000 downloads of the iPhone app so each blog post will be reaching a broad audience.

2010-09-13 08:07:58Congratulations, dana1981 !
nealjking

nealjking@gmail...
84.151.43.165

Good going!

 

John, I think we're ready to go on the positive-feedback articles: We have 5 thumbs for the basic, 2 on the advanced, and even 1 for the intermediate.

I'll stick them into the preview archive.

2010-09-13 08:22:40thanks
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
71.137.148.215

Yeah that was pretty cool.  I'm subscribed to Climate Sight, so it was a real surprise to open up my email and see a blog post talking about my rebuttals here.  Very flattering.

In the comments I also mentioned that neal's positive feedback and my mid-century cooling advanced rebuttals are up-and-coming.

2010-09-13 08:43:41The + feedback versions are in archive
nealjking

nealjking@gmail...
84.151.43.165

John,

All 3 are in archive.

However, the Basic one is formatted in a way that is not ideal for the text: the green box has the text:

 

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

Some skeptics ask, "If global warming has a positive feedback effect, then why don't we have runaway warming? The Earth has had high CO2 levels before: Why didn't it turn into an oven at that time?" Positive feedback for global-warming dynamics is not expected to lead to a runaway temperature blowout, because the diminishing returns on the feedback cycles will limit the amplification. The best estimate is that the overall result will be about a factor of 3.

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

 

I originally planned it to look like this:

 

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

Some skeptics ask, "If global warming has a positive feedback effect, then why don't we have runaway warming? The Earth has had high CO2 levels before: Why didn't it turn into an oven at that time?

What the science says...

Positive feedback for global-warming dynamics is not expected to lead to a runaway temperature blowout, because the diminishing returns on the feedback cycles will limit the amplification. The best estimate is that the overall result will be about a factor of 3.

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

 

You may re-arrange the format as you like.

2010-09-14 14:25:28I totally agree
Jim Meador

jimm58@gmail...
67.101.214.230
I have really enjoyed reading all of dana1981's posts. Clear, concise, accessible, with a very matter-of-factly tone.
2010-09-15 07:21:53thanks
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
38.223.231.249
Thanks jim!