Dr. Gray seems like those psychics you mock for not applying for the $1 million reward:
Quote:
William M. Gray is known as a pioneer in the science of forcasting hurricanes. He is currently professor emeritus (meaning he's basically retired but still retains his title) at Colorado State University. Although he is an accomplished meteorologist, he has zero peer review papers on climatology. He is famous for making comments like "I predict, now I think I know as much as anybody, I'll take on any scientist in this field to talk about this, I predict in the next 5 or 8 years or so the globe is going to begin to cool as it did in the middle 40's."1 And similar statements by him have been recorded by the Denver Post. James Annon writes the following about Dr. Gray in his blog: article titled "Bill Gray won't bet on cooling":
"I emailed him some time asking if he will back up this statement with a bet. William Connolley and Brian Schmidt at least have done the same. None of us (to my knowledge) has had the courtesy of a reply. Given his statement above, I do not believe it is too much to expect that he should at least quantify his prediction in terms of his confidence (what odds he would place on his prediction being provved correct). To not do so seems to be clearly misleading the Senate Committee hearing."
http://www.logicalscience.com/skeptics/Gray.html
|
is he a credible climatologist:
Quote:
....Gray has lost favor with the scientific community not because of his science, but because he is making strong statements without backing them up with evidence. This view has been confirmed by Texas A&M's Andrew Dessler, a climate scientist who recently spoke to Gray at a scientific meeting:
After arguing with him for a few minutes, it became clear that Bill Gray has no scientific theory of his own *why* the water vapor feedback is negative, and no data to support his non-theory. He has no manuscript describing his non-theory and no plans to attempt to publish it.
After I pointed out all of the evidence supporting a positive feedback, he looked confused and finally said, "OK, maybe the feedback isn't negative, maybe it's neutral. I'll give you that." I quickly concluded that he has no idea what he's talking about. I wish everyone that considers him credible could have witnessed this exchange
http://blogs.chron.com/sciguy/archiv...ray_revis.html
|
Or, if you are really interested in an analysis of Gray's work:
Quote:
Gray and Muddy Thinking about Global Warming
Anybody who has followed press reporting on global warming, and particularly on its effects on hurricanes, has surely encountered various contrarian pronouncements by William Gray, of Colorado State University. A meeting paper that Gray provided in advance of the 2006 27th Conference on Hurricanes and Tropical Meteorology (taking place this week in Monterey California, and covered here by CNN), provides an illuminating window into Gray's thinking on the subject. Our discussion is not a point-by-point rebuttal of Gray's claims; there is far more wrong with the paper than we have the patience to detail. Gray will have plenty of opportunities to hear more about the work's shortcomings if it is ever subjected to the rigors of peer review. Here we will only highlight a few key points which illustrate the fundamental misconceptions on the physics of climate that underlie most of Gray's pronouncements on climate change and its causes.
more on each of Gray's claims: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php...4/gray-on-agw/
|
But that still doesnt address why you wanted to divert the discussion here to Carter's actions 30 years ago
