@Donna

Yet, at the other end of the spectrum, there are some that seem to believe
in scientific theories religiously.  As far as I know, no scientific theory
can be proven right; it can only be proven wrong if its predictions break
down.

@Don

> Unfortunately earth events can't be rerun for reproducible tests.

Right, including global economic and social developments.  That is when
model/computer simulations, affected by its assumptions (and perhaps by
potential nefarious maneuvering), come into play.

At any rate, decades ago was another long-term report based on
model/computer simulations of economic and population growth: The Limits of
Grow.  It got a lot of press coverage and there were endless discussions
for a while.  Nowadays it seems to be largely forgotten.

@Raul

Although the "actual" rate(s) might not necessarily apply everywhere, it
seems to be extremely unlikely that I could be in trouble.


On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 9:59 PM, Raul Miller <rauldmil...@gmail.com> wrote:

> That was from memory. I should have looked it up before posting.
> Sorry... lazy...
>
> Looking at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_level_rise I seem to have
> gotten numbers much higher (roughly double) the actual rate.
>
> Thanks,
>
> --
> Raul
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 8:14 PM, Jose Mario Quintana
> <jose.mario.quint...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >  > That said, I hope your property stays in good condition.
> >
> > Thank you.
> >
> > Reportedly, the sea levels have been rising at least for the last few
> > thousand years.  The question is if there is an acceleration.
> Apparently,
> > Al Gore's house is near the coast of California.  What is its
> elevation?  I
> > have no idea.
> >
> >>  The models can be wrong, and the change can still be happening. (If I
> >>   understand properly, we've been seeing global average sea level rise
> >>   at a rate of approximately 1 inch every five or six years since
> >>   roughly the 1920s. It might not be that that sea level rise is because
> >
> > Do you have any references?
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 7:48 PM, Raul Miller <rauldmil...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Eh... I'm not sure anything I said should be a cause for rejoicing?
> >>
> >> The models can be wrong, and the change can still be happening. (If I
> >> understand properly, we've been seeing global average sea level rise
> >> at a rate of approximately 1 inch every five or six years since
> >> roughly the 1920s. It might not be that that sea level rise is because
> >> of changes in the amount of CO2 that's in the atmosphere, or maybe the
> >> fraction of the rise which attributable to CO2 is significantly wrong
> >> in the models, or maybe atmospheric CO2 has had a dampening effect on
> >> the actual mechanisms, somehow...  or maybe even CO2 is more
> >> significant than the models propose, but something which has not been
> >> accounted for has dampened that effect... but any of these would just
> >> mean we don't adequately understand what's going on - not that it's
> >> not happening.)
> >>
> >> Also, there's erosion effects and so on that can also be significant.
> >>
> >> That said, I hope your property stays in good condition.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Raul
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 7:32 PM, Jose Mario Quintana
> >> <jose.mario.quint...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > I am glad to hear that (my house in Miami Beach faces the Bay's
> waters).
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 6:59 PM, Raul Miller <rauldmil...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> I have heard a variety of disagreements, both with that premise, and
> >> >> with attempts at experiments.
> >> >>
> >> >> (Including, since you brought up climate change, an attempt (by a
> >> >> reputable MIT graduate) to reproduce Hans Hug's data (funding for lab
> >> >> costs was there, and interns to do the legwork were available, but
> >> >> because there was a possibility that experimental results could
> >> >> conflict with current climate change models, lab access was denied).
> >> >> See http://www.john-daly.com/forcing/hug-barrett.htm and
> >> >> http://www.john-daly.com/artifact.htm for writeups on what he was
> >> >> trying to reproduce.)
> >> >>
> >> >> Anyways, yeah, it's easy to find people to disagree with almost
> >> anything.
> >> >>
> >> >> Nevertheless, there's actually been quite a bit of notice attracted
> to
> >> >> this issue:
> >> >>
> >> >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis
> >> >>
> >> >> https://www.nature.com/news/1-500-scientists-lift-the-lid-
> >> >> on-reproducibility-1.19970
> >> >>
> >> >> So I guess I don't feel I need to place a lot of stock in people who
> >> >> simply "disagree". Much better to show the relevant work, in my
> >> >> opinion. (And, in some cases, the necessary work has been done. So
> >> >> it's not like I'm asking for the impossible.)
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks,
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> Raul
> >> >>
> >> >> On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 6:05 PM, Jose Mario Quintana
> >> >> <jose.mario.quint...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> > <  One weakness of the academic publishing system has been that it
> >> never
> >> >> > cared much about reproducible scientific results. Hopefully that
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I suspect some scientists (or "scientists" depending on one's
> point of
> >> >> > view), for example, those working on Climate Change (Global
> Warming)
> >> and
> >> >> > related matters, might disagree with the premise.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 6:55 PM, Raul Miller <rauldmil...@gmail.com
> >
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> That's an interesting question...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> One weakness of the academic publishing system has been that it
> never
> >> >> >> cared much about reproducible scientific results. Hopefully that
> >> >> >> segment of academia can muster some way of supporting efforts to
> >> >> >> support / refute such work. This will be difficult because of
> >> >> >> communication issues - it's all too easy to refute something
> >> different
> >> >> >> from the original. But, also, because of human social issues -
> people
> >> >> >> do not like dealing with failures.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> But, also, not everything is science.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> So I expect things to fragment somewhat - there's the political
> >> >> >> patronage side of things, the engineering practicality side of
> >> things,
> >> >> >> the scientific reproducibility and extension work side of things,
> >> >> >> there's the artistic merit side of things, there's the historical
> >> >> >> perspectives side of things, there's the health benefit side of
> >> >> >> things, there's the accounting verification side of things, and so
> >> >> >> on...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> People who can tie into widespread support will tend to do well
> >> >> >> regardless (think: football, for example). Others... well, I think
> >> >> >> it's going to depend somewhat on the discipline.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> I don't think the peer review system is going to just go away,
> but I
> >> >> >> think it's going to be seeing some different competition...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Working code (github contributions, perhaps) might be one example
> of
> >> >> >> this. But computerized platforms tend to come and go far more
> quickly
> >> >> >> than the printed page.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Mostly, I guess... anything involving people tends to need
> concerted
> >> >> >> effort to deal with.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> This was probably not a useful answer.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> --
> >> >> >> Raul
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 6:11 PM, Ian Clark <earthspo...@gmail.com>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >> > I've given up writing for Vector. (That's a terrible thing to
> say
> >> for
> >> >> >> > someone still loosely attached to the Vector committee.)
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Why write a letter on vellum with a quill pen when you can pick
> up
> >> the
> >> >> >> > phone?
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Of course, if I still had an academic reputation to defend,
> funding
> >> >> >> sources
> >> >> >> > to keep sweet, administrators to browbeat, pretty students to
> wow,
> >> I'd
> >> >> >> > think differently. My shelf full of journals would be like the
> >> >> diploma on
> >> >> >> > the wall. But the old systems are withering away.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Yet academics continue to need accreditation, good peer-reviews,
> >> >> >> > publications for their CV (in case they get hounded out of their
> >> >> school).
> >> >> >> > What's to replace the old systems? Facebook Likes?
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 6:00 PM, 'Pascal Jasmin' via Programming
> <
> >> >> >> > programm...@jsoftware.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> I asked for feedback on choosing one of 2 topics but received
> no
> >> >> reply.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>       From: Cliff Reiter <reit...@lafayette.edu>
> >> >> >> >>  To: programm...@jsoftware.com
> >> >> >> >>  Sent: Monday, March 5, 2018 10:54 AM
> >> >> >> >>  Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] RV: JoJ 2018
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> Dear J forum,
> >> >> >> >> Writing for the Journal of J or Vector is different from
> writing
> >> for
> >> >> the
> >> >> >> >> Jforums or Wiki. All those venues are a valuable resource for
> us
> >> who
> >> >> >> >> work with J. I encourage us to supply all those forums with
> >> >> material. I
> >> >> >> >> submitted a paper to Vector a few months ago:
> >> >> >> >> http://archive.vector.org.uk/art10501760
> >> >> >> >> and I noted that they too didn't have an issue in 2017.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> I plan to submit an article to JoJ in a month or so. I would
> >> rather
> >> >> not
> >> >> >> >> be the only article in an issue. Anyone else game to submit
> >> >> notes/papers
> >> >> >> >> to the journals most relevant to J? I would love to see our
> >> journals
> >> >> >> >> have the some of the awesome energy that the forums have!
> >> >> >> >> Best, Cliff
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> On 1/15/2018 7:25 AM, mikel paternain wrote:
> >> >> >> >> > Hi everybody
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > We have not received any contributions to publish in 2017.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > JoJ was born to collect works on J.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Send contributions to i...@journalofj.com<http://
> >> >> >> >> webmail.journalofj.com/imp/message.php?mailbox=INBOX.
> >> >> Enviados&index=17#
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Thanks in advance
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > JoJ
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> >> >> >> ----------
> >> >> >> >> > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/
> >> >> >> forums.htm
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------
> >> >> ----------
> >> >> >> >> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/
> >> >> forums.htm
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------
> >> >> ----------
> >> >> >> >> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/
> >> >> forums.htm
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> >> >> ----------
> >> >> >> > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/
> >> >> forums.htm
> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------
> >> ----------
> >> >> >> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/
> >> forums.htm
> >> >> >>
> >> >> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> >> ----------
> >> >> > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/
> >> forums.htm
> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> >> >> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/
> forums.htm
> >> >>
> >> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> >> > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/
> forums.htm
> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> >>
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to