Climate Measurement

It was entertaining to read Lowi spin on the issue of global warming and climate change. I particularly like him pointing out the uncertainty in measurement.

Even if one believes the temperatures relevant to the state of the global climate are being reliably measured, the temperatures being reported by the authorities show less change during our lifetime than the inherent measurement error of the best available thermometric instruments. Never mind tree rings, ice cores, fossil worms, tea leaves and the like. This observation raises the question as to how to take the temperature of the planet in the first place.

It seems that in order to understand measurement, you actually have to get the device and collect the actual data. The first time you do it, you get a number and write it down. But think about the accuracy and precision of that number - how much confidence do you have in the device that made the measurement? Can you check it against something that has a known value - and do you measure that known value in repeated measurements? Do you have a protocol to follow, that tells you how to equalize measurement conditions over a variety of measurement types, so similar measurements can be compared?

Mr. Lowi seems to think that the issue of global climate change is all economic and bad for business. Look around - the world is already pretty bad for business, unless you are one of the priviledged elite. And it runs on fiat money. This afternoon, i am off to a meeting of the clobal warming coalition from noon to four at the public library - mr. lowi will likely not be in attendence, and they will likely contradict his point of view. As a chemist - i am open to all explanations, but the simplest physics is the one that i believe. However - there is more to physics that we currently know.