next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
Index of Subjects
--Apple-Mail-93-900171233 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dear Don and Lois, It appears that elements of this thread are simply eddying in circles. =20= I don't have the time or inclination to stay stuck in such a loop, =20 however, for the sake of clarity, and as briefly as possible, let me =20 draw attention to a few important points. 1) Consensus: There is absolutely no doubt that a scientific consensus =20= exists on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) =20 report and position that, "An increasing body of observations gives a =20= collective picture of a warming world and other changes in the climate =20= system ... There is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming =20= observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities." The IPCC is certainly one of the largest international scientific =20 enterprises ever undertaken and virtually the entire spectrum of the =20 important and reputable scientific bodies in the world have expressed =20= their concurrence. These include the InterAcademy Council, the Joint =20 science academies (of the G8 + 5), European Academy of Sciences and =20 Arts, National Research Council (US), International Council for =20 Science, European Science Foundation, American Association for the =20 Advancement of Science, Federation of American Scientists, World =20 Meteorological Organization, American Meteorological Society, Royal =20 Meteorological Society (UK), Australian Meteorological and =20 Oceanographic Society, Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic =20 Society, Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences, =20 International Union for Quaternary Research, International Union of =20 Geodesy and Geophysics, International Union of Geological Sciences, =20 European Geosciences Union, Canadian Federation of Earth Sciences, =20 Geological Society of America, American Geophysical Union, American =20 Astronomical Society, American Institute of Physics, American Physical =20= Society, American Chemical Society, and on, and on. This de facto represents the scientific establishment of the world. Some of their concurring statements such as that of the Joint science =20= academies (the thirteen signatories are the science academies of =20 Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, Italy, India, Japan, Mexico, =20 Russia, South Africa, the United Kingdom, and the United States) say: "It is unequivocal that the climate is changing, and it is very likely =20= that this is predominantly caused by the increasing human interference =20= with the atmosphere. These changes will transform the environmental =20 conditions on Earth unless counter-measures are taken." IPCC shared (with Al Gore) the last Nobel Peace Prize for their work =20 and this report. 2) Unanimity: A consensus does not mean there is unanimity. There will =20= always be those, some for well-founded reasons, and others not, who =20 will differ. There is nothing in the least surprising about this. =20 There is scientific consensus around theories of genetics, evolution, =20= quantum mechanics, cosmology, relativity, plate tectonics, etc. There =20= also exist people who take issue with various aspects of these =20 theories; some for well-founded reasons; others not. The scientific =20 community does reach consensuses and the consensus with respect to =20 climate change is one of the most clear illustrations of this in =20 history. Unanimity is never achieved. 3) Climatology is a very complex and evolving science. There are reams =20= of discussion, debate, and contending ideas with respect to how many =20 mechanisms work, and all of these have some bearing on our particular =20= understanding of climate change. The effect of decreasing albedo; many =20= physical, chemical, biological, and geological oceanic processes and =20 their affects on various positive and negative feedback cycles that =20 may speed or slow the processes of climate change; atmospheric and =20 oceanic interactions; oceanic circulation patters and what drives =20 them; natural geological-age heating/cooling cycles, the reasons for =20 their existence and periodicity; natural short-term climatic =20 variations such as el ni=F1o and la ni=F1a and what initiates them; the =20= speed at which arctic ice, the Greenland ice cap, and the Antarctic =20 ice fields and shelves are melting and mechanisms which may speed or =20 slow these processes, etc. The recent thread on NatureNS with respect =20= to the timing and synchronicity of CO2, CH4, and temperature cycles is =20= yet another good illustration. To mistake normal scientific debate on =20= such issues (which leads to a the growth and development of the =20 science of climatology itself) with a lack of consensus on the reality =20= of climate change is a fundamental error. 4) Pseudoscience and the Climate-change Denial Movement: Then there is =20= pseudoscience. It is the case that science unfolds within the larger =20 social, political, and economic matrix of the world. Its unfortunate =20 but true that there are sometimes powerful interest groups who for =20 ideological and/or economic reasons are resistant to scientific =20 findings. A recent popular (and one might argue, effective) tactic has =20= been to launch contending pseudo-scientific theories or initiatives =20 that muddle the public discourse and understanding of scientific =20 matters. Steve Shaw and I have drawn attention to some of these as =20 they pertain to the climate-change denial movement. The George C. =20 Marshall Institute, the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, and =20= their "Petition Project" are a well-documented initiative of this =20 sort, one which I pointed out in an earlier post, have become so =20 extreme and problematic that even Exxon Oil, one of their bankrollers, =20= has found it necessary to cut off their funding and distance =20 themselves from them. In light of the fact that these same tactics, by many of the same =20 organizations, their supporters, advertising agencies, and even some =20 of the same front people were very successfully deployed for decades =20 by the tobacco industry in stymieing efforts to make clear the =20 connection between smoking and lung cancer, now that they are being =20 applied by the climate-change denial movement, it is imperative that =20 they are exposed for what they actually are: an industrial-strength =20 lobbying initiative, and not impartial, peer-reviewed, unbiased science. Exposing dubious "science" is a legitimate and essential part of the =20 scientific enterprise. 5) Climate Change: this thread which we have been calling "Global =20 Warming" is properly called "Climate Change". The effects of changing =20= climate are diverse and manifold causing warming in some areas, =20 cooling in others; increased precipitation in some areas and droughts =20= in others; increased storm activities (hurricanes, tornados, snow =20 storms, etc.); sea-level changes and flooding, etc. While there is an =20= overall warming trend, climate change manifests itself in many ways =20 which have profound effects on the environment, agriculture, ocean =20 circulation and productivity, the geographical settlement patterns of