[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I am not an expert in glacier movement, most people won't be. What I'd
> like off those experts is a clearer statement of what is known, I
> think that a consensus would probably be that there is >90%
> probability of no significant acceleration, 5% of maybe a meter's
> equivalent in a 100 years and <1% of 5m in 50 years, and 0.0000001% or
> something like that for 5 m in 10 years, but I haven't seen this (or
> something like it) stated explicitly anywhere. Nor have I seen
> anything on even how many people are working on the issue.
It's genuinely difficult to get meaningful personal probabilities of
highly unlikely (but poorly understood) events. Considering it as odds
on a fair bet gets tangled up with risk-aversion (ie they might prefer
the unlikelier side even with an expected loss, thus understating the
odds that they really think are fair).
It's doubly difficult now that many people have learnt how politically
powerful the "can't rule it out" appeal to risk-aversion can be.
James
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated
venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of
global environmental change.
Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the
submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not
gratuitously rude.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
