« A little something while I'm away | Main | A patently pointless picture »

Comments

Tim

I think that the sentence means that they made the estimates assuming that the average molecule of CO2 stays in the atmosphere for 300 years while the average molecule of CH4 stays in the atmosphere for 12 years. What they're trying to say is that the CO2 we put into the atmosphere will have a much longer impact than the CH4, and so that's what causes the increase in the CO2 pie slice. This is a great graph for this blog....

Jan

"I doubt that the intention of the author was to tell us that methane is extremely unimportant relative to CO2".

Looking at other blog entries at that site let's me assume that this is exaxtly the point he is trying to make.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2014/08/how-much-methane-came-out-of-that-hole-in-siberia/
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2012/01/much-ado-about-methane/

On the other hand, your blog post's headline hypothesis makes me doubt if your main concern with realclimate.org is about data viz.

Steven Sullivan

The author you castigated has responded to your critiques

http://www.realclimate.org/?comments_popup=17455#comment-602057

junkcharts

Jan: When the title of a blog post is "The story of methane, in five charts", one would expect to be able to understand the story without scrolling through a bunch of other blog posts that aren't cross-linked.
I don't have a concern with realclimate.org. I made a post about a specific blog post that contains an inappropriate use of pie charts.

Steven: thanks for the link. I stand behind my argument that the blog post is a example of poor public communications, and claiming that dropping data is a "conservative" choice and not addressing how a pie chart is used to illustrate data that do not add up to 100 percent just strengthened my case.

Daniel Earwicker

As a rebuttal to deniers who claim that too much fuss is made about CO2 from cars when all these farting cows are much more dangerous, this makes sense.

dan l

Got that Kaiser? You're a "self-proclaimed" expert.


You skipped over the last 2 panels which are truly horrific - especially that bush league cut away thing in the second part. They should have made it 3d so I'd be sure it was a joke.

-10 points for style.


jlbriggs

The author's responses are childishly defensive, quite frankly.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Kaiser Fung. Business analytics and data visualization expert. Author and Speaker.
Visit my website. Follow my Twitter. See my articles at Daily Beast, 538, HBR.

See my Youtube and Flickr.

Book Blog



Link to junkcharts

Graphics design by Amanda Lee

The Read



Keep in Touch

follow me on Twitter

Residues