global warming
tlambert | April 24, 2009It is fire scientists for talking to the media:
Leading Government scientist Jim Salinger, an international pioneer in climate change research, has been sacked for what he says is talking out of turn to news organisations.
Looks like the denialists in ACT are running the show.
More discussion at Hot Topic.
scientificactivist | April 24, 2009Earlier I published a post about an interesting article by Andrew Revkin in today's New York Times about industry's willful ignorance of global warming science. There was an interesting quote in there that I didn't mention earlier about how journalistic practices enabled this campaign of misinformation:
George Monbiot, a British environmental activist and writer, said that by promoting doubt, industry had taken advantage of news media norms requiring neutral coverage of issues, just as the tobacco industry once had.
Will Bunch of Attytood already has some good commentary about this quote as…
scientificactivist | April 24, 2009The idea stated in the title of this blog post is not novel--far from it, in fact. We have known for a long time that the auto industry, the oil industry, and others with a vested interest have engaged in a long-running campaign of misinformation to discredit the science behind global warming. Manufacturing doubt is a common strategy employed by those whose agenda falls on the wrong side of scientific fact. This includes creationists, pseudoscientists, global warming denialists, HIV denialists, and, very notably, the tobacco industry's notorious decades-long campaign to deny the link between…
gregladen | April 21, 2009Monica sent me a link to a Faux News story on global warming, which makes the claim that global warming is not real because ice is expanding, and not contracting, in Antarctica. It also makes the claim that 90 percent of the earth's ice and 80 percent of the earth's fresh water is in Antarctica, which I assume is mentioned because it would make Antarctica seem more important than other parts of the world, and thus the "fact" that global warming is not happening there is proof of ... whatever.
I'd like to clarify.
To start with, let's get the fresh water thing straight. Most of the fresh…
mikethemadbiologist | April 20, 2009Julian Sanchez, writing about global warming, makes an excellent point about how denialists are able to be so successful (italics original; boldtype mine):
Come to think of it, there's a certain class of rhetoric I'm going to call the "one way hash" argument. Most modern cryptographic systems in wide use are based on a certain mathematical asymmetry: You can multiply a couple of large prime numbers much (much, much, much, much) more quickly than you can factor the product back into primes. A one-way hash is a kind of "fingerprint" for messages based on the same mathematical idea: It's really…
illconsidered | April 17, 2009This just reported today from the Washington Post:
The Environmental Protection Agency issued a proposal today finding greenhouse gas emissions pose a danger to the public's health and welfare, a determination that could trigger a series of sweeping regulations affecting everything from vehicles to coal-fired power plants.
In a statement issued at noon, EPA administrator Lisa P. Jackson said, "This finding confirms that greenhouse gas pollution is a serious problem now and for future generations."
She added, "This pollution problem has a solution -- one that will create millions of green jobs…
nisbetmc | April 16, 2009
Just how important is it to engage religious audiences on climate change? As a newly released Pew analysis indicates (above) there is not much variation in climate perceptions across religious affiliation. Most notably, among Evangelicals, a plurality or 34% believe that global warming is happening and is due to human activities. Moreover, the gap between Evangelicals and the religiously unaffiliated on acceptance of human-induced global warming is only roughly 20%.
Considering that the gap on the same question between college educated Republicans and college educated Democrats is a striking…
tlambert | April 13, 2009The Guardian has two stories about a poll they conducted of the people who attended the recent Copenhagen Climate Change Conference.
Almost nine out of 10 climate scientists do not believe political efforts to restrict global warming to 2C will succeed, a Guardian poll reveals today. An average rise of 4-5C by the end of this century is more likely, they say, given soaring carbon emissions and political constraints. ...
The poll asked the experts whether the 2C target could still be achieved, and whether they thought that it would be met: 60% of respondents argued that, in theory, it was…
tlambert | April 11, 2009The collapse of the Wilkins Ice Shelf has prompted the Australian to launch yet another attack on scientists -- it seems they are "tabloid media ambulance-chasing" and the ice shelf collapse was entirely natural.
every natural phenomenon, such as the ice shelf split this week, is interpreted as a disaster and all who do not agree are denounced as an enemy of the planet. And so it is easier for people in public life to acquiesce rather than address the evidence - as Mr Garrett's Lateline performance proves. The result is the intellectual equivalent of tabloid media ambulance-chasing. We are at…
tlambert | April 10, 2009In my post on the Washington Post's refusal to correct this false statement by George Will:
According to the University of Illinois' Arctic Climate Research Center, global sea ice levels now equal those of 1979"
I also referred to the "University of Illinois' Arctic Climate Research Center". But the correct name, clearly given at the bottom of the page is the "Polar Research Group". I regret the error.
See also corrections from James Hrynyshyn and others, but not, of course, from George Will.
nisbetmc | April 8, 2009Readers of this blog should find the arguments in Tom Friedman's column today familiar. On climate change, Friedman argues that it's time to switch focus from cap and trade to a carbon tax, a policy that most Americans can understand.
But switching policy is not enough, you also have to switch the frame from a dominant focus on impending catastrophe to a focus on economic development or "American renewal." Here's how Friedman explains this economic development frame:
We need a price on carbon because it will stimulate massive innovation in the next great global industry -- E.T. -- energy…
tlambert | April 6, 2009Back in 2001 The Discovery Institute paid for advertisements with a list of a hundred scientists who disputed the theory of evolution via natural selection. A notable feature of their list is that the vast majority of the people were not biologists.
Now The Cato Institute has paid for advertisements with a list of a hundred scientists who dispute the scientific consensus about global warming. A notable feature of their list is that it contains only a handful of climatologists. There's Lindzen, Spencer, Michaels and ... well that's about it. Of the 619 contributing authors of Working Group…
tlambert | April 3, 2009
Folks are commenting on John Shimkus' act with Monckton at the Congressional hearing on adaptation to climate change. For example, PZ Myers:
Shimkus explain how he knows CO2 is not a problem. It's because the Bible is the inerrant word of his god, and he knows god isn't going to end the world with global warming.
Steve Benen
There's a genuine policy discussion to be had about climate change. If policymakers like Shimkus and Barton represent the mainstream of House Republican thought, this discussion won't be bipartisan. Indeed, for humanity's sake, it can't be.
Kevin Grandia:
Republicans…
tlambert | April 2, 2009George Will's shameless dishonesty about global warming continues. Will responds to the very tardy publication by the Washington Post of a letter from the WMO correcting Will's misrepresentation of their data by again misrepresenting WMO data.
Carl Zimmer:
Does the Post read its own letters? Does it remember them? Do they think if you add the phrase "statistics" you can continue to mislead on the exact same point emphasized by Jarraud? Perhaps Will's editors think if they put a link in Will's misleading statement, it somehow makes it right. Did they actually look at the linked document? If…
scientificactivist | April 2, 2009After writing a global warming denialist piece for his Washington Post column back in February that was totally eviscerated for running roughshod over anything actually resembling the truth, it looks like George Will is at it again. Fortunately, Carl Zimmer is already on the case:
Today, George Will is back on the subject of global warming. The occassion for his column is the alleged uselessness of energy-efficient light bulbs. The column is basically a cut-and-paste job on a recent New York Times article on the bulbs-the same newspaper that Will claimed in an earlier column is "a trumpet…
nisbetmc | April 1, 2009For those unable to attend next week's talk at the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, there is a call in number to listen to the presentation and discussion. See details on the talk here. Audio will also follow online.
Also if you are a non-NASA staff member and would like to attend, here are the details. Leave a comment in the space below and I will email you back with the staff contact information:
[Non-staff] will need to contact me at least a day ahead of time so that I can let security know how many people to expect. I'll need a couple of days for foreign nationals, since I'd have to get…
nisbetmc | March 31, 2009On April 8 at noon, I will be giving a talk on climate change communication at the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, MD. Below are the details. The talk is open to all NASA staff as well as the public.
Communicating Climate Change: Why Frames Matter to Public Engagement
Bldg 8, Management Conference Center
Time: 12:00 PM
Building broad based public engagement on climate change requires a more careful understanding of the U.S. public's views on the issue as well as a reexamination of the assumptions that have traditionally informed public communication efforts. In this…
scientificactivist | March 28, 2009Compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs), or "energy saving light bulbs", are much more energy efficient than conventional light bulbs, and they have a significantly longer lifetime. On top of that, replacing your conventional bulbs with CFLs won't just save energy, but will also save you money. Most importantly, this is one small action that we can all contribute to the fight against global warming.
However, yesterday's New York Times included an article by Leora Broydo Vestel entitled "Do New Bulbs Save Energy if They Don't Work", which hypes up concerns about compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs) not…
tlambert | March 25, 2009George Monbiot has the latest on David Belllamy's descent into crankdom:
Among other gems, Bellamy's interview contained the following marvellous assertion of independence: "peer-reviewed journals - it's the last thing I would use now."
tlambert | March 23, 2009It's tough to shorten a post that's already shortened itself with the title above, but Tintin at Sadly, No! is equal to the task. And he fixed a video from Craig Idso as well.