I've been meaning to comment here too.
When I teach statistics, my goal is to give the graduate students a
toolbox if you will, of useful ways to test ideas. More complex
statistics comes later. In teaching, I use the idea of testing hypotheses,
with a very important caveat. Both, null and
Wayne, isn't somewhat of a trick question? I mean, in science, we have a
tough time saying that anything except the trivial is unequivocal.
Also, is it even theoretically possible to unequivocally demonstrate a
difference in climate due to natural or to human causes? Especially when
they are
Dear Colleagues,
I am pleased to inform you that two new articles have been published in
the Journal of Pollination Ecology and are ready for free download:
J Poll Ecol 2011, 3(1)
Typology in pollination biology: Lessons from an historical critique by
Waser, Nickolas; Ollerton, Jeff
James and Ecolog:
No, it's not a trick question, it's an honest plea for better, more
convincing information about quantification of the direct and indirect effects
of anthropogenic causes of climate change. The public at large has an even
tougher time sorting out the scientific sheep from
I don't know if this helps, but WorldClim has some interesting GIS layers.
http://www.worldclim.org/download
Neahga Leonard
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 4:04 PM, Jonathan Greenberg
greenb...@ucdavis.eduwrote:
Folks:
I'm trying to hunt down daily or monthly gridded radiation data at 4km
or
A Postdoctoral Research Associate position in Forest Soils is available at
the University of Maine. The position is supported by National Science
Foundation funding and will emphasize the use of stable isotope tracer
techniques to evaluate nitrogen biogeochemistry at a long-term
experimental
Graduate Research Assistantships in Forest Soils – PhD/MS: Position
responsibilities will be to conduct research on the biogeochemistry of
northern forested watersheds related to a changing chemical and physical
climate. Several positions are available related to a new project using
stable
Wayne,
Whether it's a trick question or not depends, of course, on the details.
However, if you really want information about the direct and indirect effects
of anthropogenic causes of climate change you could not do better than to
start with the 4th IPCC report. This is freely available to
Wayne Tyson wrote:
The problem is credibility of good science in the eyes
and minds of the public.
The public is used to hearing rather wildly conflicting information
about climate change from the scientific community. In
1974 some claimed that global cooling was a looming
problem:
In the face of uncertainty with potential consequences of great magnitude,
the precautionary approach should rule. Under this approach it is safer and
more prudent to take effective action to counter climate change than it is
to take no action and risk its effects. The costs of taking action are
Her research and books look very interesting, but I have been a little
hesitant because some scientists (including some well-respected ones I know
personally and have high regard for) hold her in utter disdain over the PNAS
communication she sponsored on the hypothesis that caterpillars evolved
Well-put! It would be great if people (particularly reviewers) always kept
this in mind.
--Ruchira
On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 7:57 AM, James J. Roper jjro...@gmail.com wrote:
I've been meaning to comment here too.
When I teach statistics, my goal is to give the graduate students a
toolbox if
Thanks for offering repeatedly debunked claims here. It helps if your
data is up-to-date. The physicist who resigned the APS should have
boned up on his atmospheric physics before resigning. The physics
underpinning anthropogenic climate change is nearly 200 years old -- and
it is as well
13 matches
Mail list logo
