Friday, September 10, 2010

Scientists are real people

If you are accustomed to the media representation of scientists, my subject line is something of a shock.  What, do I mean scientists aren't all junior Dr. Spock's off Star Trek?!  Contrary to everything you've ever seen on TV and films?!  Well, yes.  We're human, no less than anyone else on the planet, and unlike fictional Vulcans.

That's relevant to the post, not so much for content, but at the reason that comments and posts have somewhat gotten away from me.  There were many good comments in the What is a good experiment? thread, and I haven't commented there myself.  (I'll encourage you to go have a look.).  And there have been good comments to later notes that I, again, haven't commented on (see the list of most recent comments that's, currently, buried way to the bottom of the page).  Not that my comments are required, or any such thing.  But, since I like conversation, it pains me to not be engaging the way I'd like to be.  (Don't worry, even if I'm not commenting, I am definitely reading.  I read far faster than I compose.)

For the subject at hand, the answers are entirely mundane -- 'real person' -- sorts of reasons.  I've been doing other things.  I'm a parent with 3 kids.  And they've been doing things over the last month.  Good things for them, and me (at least to spectate).  But they do tend to mean that I'm focusing some of my time, energy, and attention in places other than the blog.  Some (many) scientists are parents (and grandparents).  Many of us are very concerned about parenting well.  Or least are seriously interested in our kids.  Even with my youngest being 20, I still think there's room, and need, for a parent.  And they're great kids, so who wouldn't want to be involved?!  Or at least sitting in the back of the audience cheering.

I'm also a spouse.  My spouse and I have been doing things together in evenings and weekends which are very good and which we enjoy together -- visiting friends, having friends over, going places, and so forth.  Good, 'real person', things, but while I'm doing those, I'm not blogging.

And I have a day job different from the sorts of things that I write on the blog.  There's a small degree of transference.  I can point out to you that my May predictions of September's ice extent are looking to have bracketed the likely result pretty well.  The high (model-based) figure was 5.13 and the low (statistically-based) figure was 4.78.  We passed below 5 in the last few days.  Probably won't be as low for the monthly average as 4.78.  But the spread between the two forecasts was fairly small, and succeeding in bracketing reality with that narrow range is ... not bad.  I'll have more to say once we get to the end of the month and see what really happens.  The day job has been showing up interesting things, which turns around to mean more time at the office, and less time taken from my lunch hour to write on the blog.

The end of the month provides a chance for me to meet up with folks who are local.  I'll be speaking at the Annapolis Science Cafe, on Thursday, the 30th of September.  More about that to come.  It'll be about ice (you're shocked, I know).

Last night I earned 'Beastmaster' status.  My wife has two dogs.  (Her dogs -- she's had them longer than she's known me.  We've only been married a little over 4 years; newlyweds.)  Both are small dogs, of, as Dave Barry said, of the 'pillow' family.  The older one, Tater, is pushing 12 and has his hair growing over his eyes -- to the point that he often can't see what is around him, like walls.  One reason that hair grows so long is that he has traditionally (I'm told) reacted violently whenever anyone approached with scissors to trim off the overhang.  Last night I sat him down, solo, and trimmed his bangs.  No sedation or armies to hold him down.  He's doing better now.  Here's a picture of him during 'snowmageddon' last February (the snow is about 30 cm, 1 foot, next to him; double that farther away from the door).  He'd just had his hair trimmed (after sedation, at the veterinarian's).  He had far less vision last night before I started trimming.

In between all that, I've been nudging an idea towards being able to submit it for serious publication.  It's difficult doing that from home.  I'm used to publishable ideas being things I work on at work.  This one, however, is not related to what I do at work beyond the fact that it involves the earth.  Not really close enough to persuade the folks who sign my paycheck that I should be devoting work time to it.  Once I've sent it off for a round of preliminary review by friends who have some good general science knowledge (to see if I've made a generally well-formed argument), I'll be thinking more bloggy things.  Not least being various things to talk about here regarding doing science and some offshoots of interest.  The climate cycles 1 post is one such already.  There are more to come.  Not least, while that first climate cycles post talked about seasonal variations, we also should take a look at daily variations.  Same as we (middle and high-latitude residents) expect summer to be warmer than winter, we (all) expect daytime to be warmer than night time.  That expectation makes it climate.  Figuring out by just how much becomes science.

And there are the usual 'real life' sorts of things -- paying bills, getting my car fixed, trying to take care of an injured shoulder, blah, blah, and very blah.  Scientists are real people, with all the same issues as anybody else.  Irritates me that so many seem to think we're Vulcans.  Plus, of course, that we stand in closets in between times of saying something or other annoying and irrelevant to the human issues at hand.  We all have the usual problems, responsibilities and joys of being 'real people'.  Some of that affects the blog.  All of it is just the usual, for scientists, same as for anybody else.  I'll be getting back to more regular writing here in the near future, as this part of my regular life becomes more active.

Wednesday, September 1, 2010

Constructing an analysis 1: Drop in a bucket

'Analysis' is what we call an attempt to represent the state of the atmosphere/ocean/sea ice/... given a set of observations. One such analysis is the global surface air temperature analysis. That, then, spawns efforts to find a global mean temperature, or global mean temperature trends, and so forth. Several of the recently-added blogs aim to study that, in one way or another. That particular one is not my interest in two different ways.

One is, I'm an oceanographer, so I'm more interested in a sea surface temperature (sst) analysis. The other is, most of the interest in the surface air temperature analysis seems to come from its role as a detector of climate change. On the scale of things, I consider this the second weakest climate change indicator. The only thing weaker, in my view, is the so-called 'Hockey Stick'. But enough raw opinion.

Regardless of what it is you're trying to analyze, and what your reason for doing so is, there are quite a few ways of setting about doing so objectively. The fact that there are many makes this the first of something like eight notes I'll be writing up on the idea. There turn out to be many different ways of making an analysis, each objective, each with strengths, each with weaknesses.

The simplest one, if not as simple as you might think, is the 'drop in a bucket' method.

Tuesday, August 31, 2010

Sea ice on the blogs

Always a bit of a question whether I should comment elsewhere, or save my writing for here.  I've usually resolved that question in favor of making comments even though that does crimp my writing time for here.  Most recently, or at least most recently at length, I was visiting the Stoat's burrow.  The topic at hand is the Antarctic sea ice that I was writing about back in March WUWT trumpets result supporting climate modeling.

William has a follow up post today.  I'll probably be commenting there, or maybe taking up a point here soon.

No comment there from me, but also a recent post/show about Arctic sea ice cover Arctic Sea Ice is Just Fine.  Of course it isn't, and the author makes a nice presentation illustrating that it isn't.

Monday, August 30, 2010

Blogroll news

The updated blogroll has been in action since Satruday, but here's the note describing the newcomers.  In some cases, I've been reading the blog itself for some time.  D'Oh!

Newcomers to the blogroll:

Main focus on climate science, or some part thereof:
The Science of Doom
Neven's Arctic Sea Ice Blog
Climate Change: The Next Generation
  Climate change: The Next Generation is a different sort of blog.  Most content is pointers to the scientific literature or to science press write ups of the scientific literature.  I think this is a good way for people, particularly those who don't have major research libraries handy, to get pointers to interesting parts of the literature.

Main focus on temperature reconstruction and analysis
Moyhu (Nick Stokes)
The Whiteboard (Ron Broberg) [Updated to include]
Clear Climate Code
  (This is aimed at being more general than just temperature reconstruction and analysis, eventually, but at the moment still seems to be mostly this.)

Main focus on the computer science of climate science
Serendipity (Steve Easterbrook)

Sui Generis
ClimateSight
  The author, at least when she started, was a high school student taking an interest in learning about climate science.  If I remember correctly, she's starting university about now.  Articles tend to be about her wrestling to understand the science, and her wading through the nonscience to get there.



Suggestion that I'll invite further comment regarding:
The Green Grok
  This one didn't strike me as 'of course it should be here'.  It looks good, but the goals don't seem to align as well with mine.  I invite the comment (see also my response below to Carrot eater's previous comment) so you all can let me know why you do or don't think it would be a good addition here.  That's a different issue than whether it's a good blog.


Some comments to the previous note :

Carrot: If I ask an opinion question, then your opinion, and everyone else's, certainly does count.  It's also helpful to me to know why folks agree or disagree -- with me, or with each other.  I agree with you that irregular is fine for my blogroll, for the same reason you give.  Of course the final opinion that counts for making blunders in blog management here is mine.  Still, sometimes y'all can steer me away from some of the worst blunders.

S2: I've sent Fergus some email over the past year and heard nothing back.  Don't know if he's just left the blogosphere or what.  I do know that the author of evenmoregrumbinescience is ok, just doing other things.

M: There turn out to be multiple whiteboard blogs, and I'm not sure which one you mean.

Wednesday, August 25, 2010

Were the 70s cold?

I was surprised to see that the 1970s weren't particularly cold.  My surprise is partly because where I lived (Chicago area) we were busy setting all-time records for cold, and that was true for much of the US and across to the UK. 

The other part of the surprise is that it's common to hear people (see them write) something on the lines of "Of course we're seeing a warming since the 70s; it was cold in the 70s!"  Surely someone along the way did their homework and checked out what the global temperatures were?

Fortunately, if we're looking at science, we don't have to assume that other people did their work, or did it correctly.  The alternate word for it is, skepticism.  Real skeptics don't make those assumptions, they do the work themselves.  The fact that it's work also explains why there are a lot of fake skeptics -- it's much easier to pick the answer you like and reject everything else.

So let's apply some real skepticism and ask what was really going on with temperatures in the 1970s.

Tuesday, August 24, 2010

Teacher preparing for new year

My wish for us this year: let's take care of each other so that we can take care of our students. I picture our jobs as a great big, wonderful tree house full of knowledge. Our students have to leave their life's baggage on the ground and as they climb up they realize the sky isn't all that far off. May we all remember the simple joy that comes from a fresh box of crayons and a friend to sit with at lunch. BAM!
 
Liz Martinet, teacher


Friday, August 20, 2010

Bad Astronomy: The Wonders of the Universe

Somewhat in the vein of asking about links that you-all think might be good to add to the blogroll (I'll get there, honest!), I'll mention a blog that I read and isn't on the blogroll.
One such is Phil Plait's Bad Astronomy. Not that he needs the advertising, but I do read and enjoy his blog for reasons relevant to my own aims here. Namely, he regularly has articles (I'll list a few below; apparently 'dozen' should follow the 'few') that illustrate my own feeling -- that the universe is a wonderful and interesting place, and doing science is a way to embrace that wonder.

Thursday, August 12, 2010

Open Lab 2010 nominations

I have the logo on the right for nominating blog articles to the best of collection -- the Open Laboratory 2010. I'll suggest that you look back at the articles that you think are particularly good, here and elsewhere, and follow that link from the decorative logo, or this link to make your nominations. I was reminded of this because Bora Zivkovic, who does the 'Blog Around the Clock' (a title he perhaps is living out), is also the lead on that activity.

Note that, because of Bora's publication schedule, articles are eligible from December 2009 through November 2010.

Wednesday, August 11, 2010

New locations for two from blogroll

Two blogs from the blogroll have moved -- A Blog Around the Clock and All My Faults are Stress-Related.

Are there other updates?  Blogs I should be adding to the roll?  Note that 'should' requires that the blog be substantially about science -- learning and doing it -- rather than ... well, quite a few other things that are otherwise.  I grant more leeway for blogs that link over here, figuring that reciprocity is good citizenship.