2011-09-18 18:39:22AGW denier Dr. Ivar Giaever resigns


Breaking news in the media, following publication of Nobel Laureate Giaever's email at climate depot.


This is being hyped as 'Laureate resigns.'

The fact is much less newsworthy: 'APS member declines to renew membership'.

The key phrase in the email is this: "how can you measure the average temperature of the whole earth for a whole year?"

We need a response showing that this is the wrong question - any takers?  Global warming could be measured as annual average, but isn't.  As with Pielke, the focus on one over-simplified aspect of the science ignores multiple lines of evidence showing the amount, rate and causes of warming.

2011-09-18 18:41:15
Paul D



2011-09-18 18:45:47OOPS!



Scusi: very early morning here - I am not really awake yet.





2011-09-18 18:58:56
Dikran Marsupial
Gavin Cawley

typical denier disingenuousness, using the set of units that makes the change in temperature look as small as possible.  There is a good reason Kelvin is used in physics, there is a good reason why it generally isn't used in climatology and Celcius is normally used instead.  When was global mean temperature last at 0 degrees Kelvin?

"The claim … is that the temperature has changed from ~288.0 to ~288.8 degree Kelvin"

The APS statement uses degrees Celcius, to recast it in degrees Kelvin is just shabby,

2011-09-18 19:21:00


Giaever is an 82-year-old solid-state physicist; also worked in biophysics.

There's nothing in his record to show any specific understanding or knowledge of climate. And his argument is pretty silly, possibly worse than Dyson's:

"In the APS it is ok to discuss whether the mass of the proton changes over time and how a multi-universe behaves, but the evidence of global warming is incontrovertible? The claim (how can you measure the average temperature of the whole earth for a whole year?) is that the temperature has changed from ~288.0 to ~288.8 degree Kelvin in about 150 years, which (if true) means to me is that the temperature has been amazingly stable, and both human health and happiness have definitely improved in this 'warming' period."

- We don't measure the average temperature of the whole earth, we measure temperature anomalies.

- The world is bigger than a chip of silicon. An 0.8 K change in 150 years is pretty damn fast by planetary standards.

- Yes, human health and happiness has certainly improved; but this is based on consumption of finite resources, and has had an undeniable pollutive impact on the environment. If you think beyond the extent of your own limited lifespan, it doesn't take much head-scratching to conclude that humanity is facing some tough consequences in the near term (30 to 100 years).




2011-09-19 02:41:06nealjking
John Hartz
John Hartz

I have encountered this meme on the comment thread to Al Gore's '24 Hours' On Climate Change posted on NPR.

You might want to post a rebuttal on that thread.


2011-09-19 02:50:52

Lubos Motl kept mentioning this in the feed accompanying the live stream. It was one of his regular "arguments".....
2011-09-19 02:56:41



OK, I posted it. But I think it'll be lost in the crowd ...

2011-09-19 06:58:01


"human health and happiness have definitely improved in this 'warming' period."

I don't think there are records going back that far worldwide but in the last 40 years in the the US, health or happiness doesn't seem to have improved.

2011-09-19 07:14:37perseus
John Hartz
John Hartz

What is the source of your graphs?

2011-09-19 07:44:44


Money Can’t Buy You Love, Or Happiness

By James Gustave Speth, from the Spring 2008 issue of Environment: Yale magazine

I think the other was from Freakonomics via the nytimes


Probably down to socio-economic circumstances of course!

2011-09-19 08:54:37



We can't confine the topic just to the US. For one thing, Giaever is Norwegian.