A visual approach to the climate debate

Here is a fabulous boil down approach to the climate debate.

The main site is called “Information is beautiful” and like Robert Rhode’s Global Warming Art, it provides a compelling and beautiful graphical presentation of an otherwise rather dry and technical topic.

What do people think? Too simplistic? Too technical for a lay audience?

57 thoughts on “A visual approach to the climate debate

  1. Skip,

    it’s honestly been fun, but I’ve wasted too much of my time here. If I’ve had to explain the in’s and out’s of all this spectroscopy stuff to you in gory detail, I doubt my concerns are going to mean much to you. There is a level of subtlety necessary for wrapping our heads around these problems that seems horribly lacking from this entire public conversation and frankly I’m tired of being a part of it.


  2. Come on, it means plenty.

    I’m just trying to understand you’re overall angle, that’s all.

    I never claimed to have answers to these subtleties; my guess is someone does, but I don’t know who. Maybe RealClimate; they are far more technically apt. Remember all Coby promised when he made this blog was responses to “common” talking points.

    When I asked the questions above, Max, I thought they would come off as pretty innocent. I’m genuinely trying to understand, not just your technical concern, but its *implications*: Light striking a carbon molecule in the atmosphere would/might behave thus and so, and therefore . . . [insert implication for AGW and public policy here].

    See my point?



  3. Mr. Maxwell: Show me the math. Work out a single case where stimulated emission actually occurs for CO2 in the atmosphere. Then cite experimental results confirming your work.

    Of course, you are a busy person, but apparently not too busy to refrain from posting copious amounts on this thread.


  4. To add to my comment, you may assume a grad school level of knowledge at the level of say, Herzberg. You may not cite experiments with lasers in the free atmosphere.

    Demonstrate any stimulated emission due to solar radiation on CO2 vib-rot states, with explicit derivation and cited observations.

    I strongly suspect that you will not even make the attempt.


  5. I just wish I knew what either one of you were talking about.

    But my main question is to Max: Why is this important? If he thinks he has something revelational I wish he would just come out and claim it.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s