- If you're going to publicly blog about what I have said in a non-public email exchange, at least do both me and your readers the courtesy of honestly representing what I said.
- You wrote "The argument of Prof Petty is now the following: If there is no experiment in sight capable of making a distinction between True-SB and False-SB, it must mean that if True-SB is true then False-SB is equally true. Is this a correct scientific argument?"What I in fact said was quite different, as anyone who actually read my message will agree. I said that if the difference can't be detected experimentally, then "it matters not a whit for climate."
- You argue in your blog that the difference does matter for "stability aspects." And I return to my original claim, which is that if it matters in any way for the response of the climate system, it must also be experimentally detectable.
- Again, please describe a realizable experiment in which a measurement of X yields an outcome of Y according to one theory and an outcome of Z according to the other. If you cannot, then I claim you are engaging in mere sophistry.
My answer:
- It is not up to me to prove that your False-SB is not true.
- It is up to you to prove that the False-SB you are using is true.
- You have given a proof of False-SB consisting of applying True-SB twice, and I have shown that you cannot do that because you are using True-SB in way which is not consistent with the proof of True-SB. Your proof of False-SB is incorrect.
- It is up to you to give an experiment recording a difference between False-SB and True-SB. If you cannot do that it means that your False-SB is identical with the True-SB and then False-SB can be removed from the discussion completely, unless you insist on mere sophistry.
- Do you see what I am saying?
- Claes, It's hard enough for me to find the time (and justification) to engage in one online debate. I'd be a fool to open a second front.
- I plan to spend this nice Fall weekend with my neglected family and, maybe, raking leaves. I'd like to cordially invite everyone else to do the same. Grant
Well, well, maybe raking leaves is the best thing to do, but as a proof of False-SB it is not so convincing, I believe.
Inlägg
My hypothesis is that you are a tiresome bore with no interest in actual science, merely in being irritating and wasting people's time. I see nothing that contradicts that hypothesis. Professor Petty has heroically tried to explain reality to you, but you are not serious about understanding.
SvaraRaderaIf reality is raking leaves as Prof Petty suggests, I think he may be right.
SvaraRaderaClaes, why don't you instead spend your time on discovering what the implications of True S-B are for the climate. Does IR-radiation and absorption heat or cool the earth for example?
SvaraRaderaIt both heats and cools. What the net effect of a small change of radiative properties is, is impossible to say. What can be said is that it should be small.
SvaraRadera