tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-291546886593837379.post7877151927641193337..comments2021-02-19T08:18:26.072-07:00Comments on Black Hills Monitor: Skeptical self-criticism?Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-291546886593837379.post-10913363126692137302010-04-04T22:22:05.694-06:002010-04-04T22:22:05.694-06:00climacs desires an explanation of how I arrived at...<b>climacs</b> desires an explanation of how I arrived at my views on climate change. Since I'm on the road, this abbreviated response will have to do until we return home: <b><i>a variety of life experiences, not the least of which is a curiosity about what it is that polarizes well-meaning and intelligent people who gravitate to a level of certitude that I find a bit unrealistic.</i></b> In the instance of climate change, a few radical believers from both sides score high in this regard. At least that's this author's humble opinion; I'll elaborate later. I would caution <b> climacs</b> not to get too comfortable with the "military" and "Wall Street Journal" assumptions about how I arrived at my posting. I may surprise him. Or not. In any event, I appreciate his rather thoughtful, if cursory, examination.Larry Millerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10548596666235774978noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-291546886593837379.post-57286449762491171832010-03-31T22:12:47.602-06:002010-03-31T22:12:47.602-06:00After stumbling across this post I was motivated t...After stumbling across this post I was motivated to write a couple posts myself - <a href="http://climacsblog.blogspot.com/2010/03/unexpectedly-diagnosing-black-hills.html" rel="nofollow">one trying a dimestore evaluation of the opinion on climate change underlying the post</a> and <a href="http://climacsblog.blogspot.com/2010/03/some-of-what-climate-models-are-and-are.html" rel="nofollow">one addressing some apparent misconceptions about climate models</a>.<br /><br />If anyone is interested in that, the links are given. And if on the odd chance it was requested I would be glad to try to answer any questions, respond to any curiosities, suggest good sources of info on climate science, etc.<br /><br />Realistically though all I am hoping for here is explanation of how the author developed the stance on climate change expressed through the post, at least assuming I have it close to figured out. In brief it appears the author is not fully convinced when it comes to anthropogenic climate change but believes enough to think we should play it safe and address the issue.<br /><br />On the rounds I make on the web that is not a commonly stated view, something in-between like that. I think a lot of people hold such a view but do not bother to talk about it. So, again assuming I am not far off base, from what did that stance develop? What info led to that view? Was there greater skepticism before that was tempered? Was there greater confidence in the science that was weakened? It may not apply to anyone else, but I am curious at least about this one particular particular path.climacshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05972817045496150799noreply@blogger.com