James Hrynyshyn at Island of Doubt yesterday put up a really interesting examination of the Copenhagen Conference's efforts to deal with just what is the "safety limit" for global warming. I won't add much accept to lament the fact that "as much as possible as soon as possible" is too vague for public policy goals.
Because really, that is the only correct answer to the question politicians want scientists to answer: how much do we need to reduce CO2 emissions?
- Log in to post comments
More like this
That is, as the Dane said, the question.
The short answer is "nobody knows," of course. The ice core records suggest that we're adding CO2 to the atmosphere faster than the planet has ever seen before. That doesn't necessarily mean that the consequences of doing so ;;;; planetary warming and…
Wall Street's shadow in New York CityAs the education reformer and philosopher John Dewey once stated, "politics is the shadow cast on society by big business, the attenuation of the shadow will not change the substance." Unlike other critics of scientific communication, it is my contention…
This week's Nature includes a trio of climate features, book reviews, an essay, a pair of new papers, and and editorial highlighting how little wiggle room we have left if we want to avoid warming the planet 2 °C above pre-industrial levels. It's science journalism at its best. Sadly, it's up to us…
So the other day I found myself on a conference call with James Hansen, who is just back from a European trip during which he tried to convince environment ministers that we should stop burning coal. I was given the opportunity to put one question to the guy. So, referring to his many public…
Amused, if you think the oceans are untouched by humans you're a complete nutcase. Bye now, nutter.