Thoughts Before The Alarm Sounds

A recent letter in the local newspaper included a remark which is practically an article of faith for climate change deniers. I believe it is also a problem for many believers. The writer stated that because “weather forecasters today can’t predict the weather accurately for the next two weeks,” computer models attempting to follow climate change are also inaccurate. Such models may well be inaccurate, but not because of any connection between the two disciplines; meteorology and climatology are completely unrelated studies. According to Wikipedia, meteorology is the interdisciplinary scientific study of the atmosphere, while climatology is the study of weather conditions averaged over a period of time. Meteorologists work with the degrees and interactions of variables that exist in the atmosphere – such things as temperature, air pressure, water vapor, etc. Their range of inquiry is restricted to the short term: days or weeks. Their tools consist of sensors of all...

      If you have been following my blog, you know that I am not very happy with President Obama's approach to solving the country's problems. But at least his activities are grounded in reality – I do not believe they are based on a disbelief of modern science. I cannot say the same about any of his Republican rivals, and that has me concerned.      The recent hurricane has people asking the question: Was Irene a result of global warming? And the answer has two parts: (1) No one knows, and (2) That's the wrong question. It is impossible for anyone to say whether a particular phenomenon is a result of global warming; hurricanes have been around since long before global warming began.      The proper question is: Should we expect more such catastrophic phenomena as a result of global warming? And the answer is: Absolutely, including not only hurricanes, but also extremes of temperature, droughts, floods and tornados. ...

      A recent poll by researchers at George Mason University indicates that 55% of meteorologists believe in human-induced global warming, 25% don’t believe, and 20% don’t know.       This parallels a recent CNN poll of the general public – when asked “. . . from what you have heard or read, do you believe increases in the Earth's temperature over the last century are due more to the effects of pollution from human activities, or natural changes in the environment that are not due to human activities?", 50% replied human activities, 46% said natural causes, and 5% were unsure.       On the other hand, a survey published in 2009 by Peter Doran and Maggie Zimmerman of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Illinois at Chicago, of 3146 Earth Scientists found that more than 97% of specialists on the subject (i.e. "respondents who listed climate science as their area of expertise and who also have publishe...

      In Kentucky, a recently introduced bill would encourage teachers to discuss “the advantages and disadvantages of scientific theories,” including “evolution, the origins of life, global warming and human cloning.” I agree that a discussion of the last item on the list is an excellent topic for a class in ethics, although I am not sure there is such a class in public schools. Too many right-thinking people think that is a job for the parents.       Perhaps teachers should take the legislature at its word and discuss the advantages and disadvantages of scientific theories. Period.       The advantage, of course, is that such theories express the most up-to-date knowledge we have of how the universe works. And they work. Eliminate all scientific theories and we are suddenly back in the dark ages – no television, no radio and no travel that is not dependent upon horsepower, to name a few things.   ...

      According to a recent poll conducted by Yale University, the percentage of respondents who believe climate change is happening dropped from 71% in 2008 to 57% in 2010, while those who do not believe climate change is happening rose from 10% to 20% over the same period. The rest “don’t know.”       Given the assumption that climate change is real, the percentage that think it is due to human activities dropped from 57% to 47%, while those who think it is natural rose from 33% to 36%. Again, the rest don’t know.       This is in spite of the increasing barrage of dramatic pictures of cracking and shrinking polar ice caps at both poles, the poleward migration of warm water animal and vegetable species, and the gradual submersion of low lying islands. How much proof does one need?       I believe the decline in belief in climate change is due to the recent release of emails from U.K ...

      Deniers to the contrary, there is no rational doubt that the globe is getting warmer. Dramatic pictures of cracking and shrinking polar ice caps at both poles, the poleward migration of warm water animal and vegetable species, and the gradual submersion of islands testify to the fact. Already natives of Papua New Guinea's Carteret island are being moved to Bougainville island as their homeland disappears under rising seas.       No one can say for sure how long the seas will continue to rise, but it is estimated that a rise of 50 centimeters, about 19 inches, would overflow the heavily populated coasts of countries such as Bangladesh, and cause low-lying island states like the Indian Ocean's Maldives and South Pacific's Kiribati and Tuvalu to disappear. Two uninhabited Kiribati islands, Tebua Tarawa and Abanuea, were engulfed in 1999, according to the South Pacific Regional Environment Programme, and the island of Tepuka Savilivil...