Catch Me on the Radio Today

This morning--or at least it will still be morning on the West Coast--I'll be appearing for an hour on the Bill Good show, the top-rated talk radio program in Vancouver. I'll be on with Ross Gelbspan, author of Boiling Point and The Heat is On, to discuss the role of the media in covering climate change (and whatever else comes up in the conversation). We go on the air at 11 am PT, which of course is 2 pm can listen by clicking the "Listen Live" link found on this website, and feel free to post any comments about the show here.

UPDATE: One of the callers to this show quoted something from MIT oceanographer Carl Wunsch in the context of calling human-induced global warming into question. I was suspicious that Wunsch might have been misrepresented, and sure enough, I now find where (I think) the quotation was coming from. It's a long and nuanced piece--written before the latest IPCC report--that does discuss a lot of the scientific complexities, but also ends on this note:

Thus at bottom, it is very difficult to separate human induced change from natural change, certainly not with the confidence we all seek. In these circumstances, it is essential to remember that the inability to prove human-induced change is not the same thing as a demonstration of its absence. It is probably true that most scientists would assign a very high probability that human-induced change is already strongly present in the climate system, while at the same time agreeing that clear-cut proof is not now available and may not be available for a long-time to come, if ever. Public policy has to be made on the basis of probabilities, not firm proof.


More like this

As I noted previously on this blog, while in Vancouver I did a radio show on global warming in which one of many "skeptic" callers used the example of noted MIT oceanographer Carl Wunsch, and an alleged quotation from him, to cast doubt on the latest science. Having come across Wunsch's name…
RP Sr joins the ranks of people telling us its been hot/cold somewhere on earth in some month, but more interestingly points to an essay by Carl Wunsch. Its one of a series, by various worthies, including TIm Palmer. I'm not quite sure what the point is, though... they don't seem to be much good…
It am de Pope, he be at it agen. Dere be no stopping dis righteous Pontifex. Just for the moment, he's saying things that I broadly agree with, but that doesn't mean I'm going to start being happy with religious authority. There was a one-day "seminar" or "workshop" or "event", Protect the Earth,…
There is a very interesting article on that provides an example of something a bit uncommon in the climate wars: an intelligent and well reasoned disagreement with the IPCC. (h/t to Climate Etc.) The article is well worth the read in its entirety, but its central point is a relatively…

Off topic, but the Carl Wunsch article you link to contains the following:

It has been argued that during the Neogene period (about 24 to 1.8 million years ago), that the entire Earth froze over.

which came to be as quite a surprise. I had of course heard of Neogene glaciations, but never one for which it was suggested the entire Earth froze over. I would appreciate it if someone could point me to the source.

All they can do is cherry-pick and misrepresent, Chris. It's all dey gots. Nothin' else.



Wunsch is a really really smart guy who takes various provocative positions. I wouldn't say he is a contrarian, rather the kind of valuable scientist who is prepared to take well reasoned shots at reigning paradigms. In particular, he has done this with Milankovitch:

and the general view of abrupt climate change:

I'd say that both of the above papers are essential reading for everyone interested in palaeoclimate.