Spring Break
Want to talk about climate change? Then start with facts
John Calderazzo
Issue date: 4/6/09 Section: Opinion
Ian Bezek's recent column about "the elaborate hoax" of climate change is shameful and packed with absurd, sweeping statements unsupported by fact.Â
Let's focus on his headline argument that "31,000 scientists" have signed a petition saying that there's "no convincing scientific evidence" that human-caused greenhouses gases now or in the foreseeable future will cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere. Bezek calls this one of several attacks that during "the past year" that have dented "the orthodoxy" of global warming. Â
Yes, there really was such a petition, sponsored by an outfit called The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, whose total of six faculty members work out of Cave Junction, Ore. They did this 11 years ago -- a lifetime in science -- with a cover letter written by 86-year-old Frederick Seitz, a once genuinely-distinguished physicist -- not climate scientist -- who in 1979 began work as a paid consultant for the R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, advising their "research" program. Â
Numerous critics of this petition note that its conclusions are barely if at all peer-reviewed and that its signees include dentists, dead people and many others similarly "qualified" to form a knowledgeable opinion on climate science. Peer review, as opposed to off-the-cuff and uninformed opinion, is the glue that holds together genuine science and scholarship.Â
Check out www.realclimate.org, a fine Web site about climate science produced by legitimate climate scientists, for this critique and other debunkings of the more absurd arguments from the climate change denial world.
In fact, there's an overwhelming and growing scientific consensus (not "orthodoxy," not the end of any discussion) on human-caused climate change and the need to do something about it. The American Geological Institute says 97 percent of climatologists believe that human activity is warming the globe. In 2007, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fourth Assessment report unanimously concluded that there's a 90 percent certainty that "Human-induced warming of the climate system is widespread." Â
Let's focus on his headline argument that "31,000 scientists" have signed a petition saying that there's "no convincing scientific evidence" that human-caused greenhouses gases now or in the foreseeable future will cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere. Bezek calls this one of several attacks that during "the past year" that have dented "the orthodoxy" of global warming. Â
Yes, there really was such a petition, sponsored by an outfit called The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, whose total of six faculty members work out of Cave Junction, Ore. They did this 11 years ago -- a lifetime in science -- with a cover letter written by 86-year-old Frederick Seitz, a once genuinely-distinguished physicist -- not climate scientist -- who in 1979 began work as a paid consultant for the R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, advising their "research" program. Â
Numerous critics of this petition note that its conclusions are barely if at all peer-reviewed and that its signees include dentists, dead people and many others similarly "qualified" to form a knowledgeable opinion on climate science. Peer review, as opposed to off-the-cuff and uninformed opinion, is the glue that holds together genuine science and scholarship.Â
Check out www.realclimate.org, a fine Web site about climate science produced by legitimate climate scientists, for this critique and other debunkings of the more absurd arguments from the climate change denial world.
In fact, there's an overwhelming and growing scientific consensus (not "orthodoxy," not the end of any discussion) on human-caused climate change and the need to do something about it. The American Geological Institute says 97 percent of climatologists believe that human activity is warming the globe. In 2007, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fourth Assessment report unanimously concluded that there's a 90 percent certainty that "Human-induced warming of the climate system is widespread." Â
Viewing Comments 1 - 10 of 27
jimmy
posted 4/06/09 @ 8:03 AM MST
Nice try professor. Who would go to a climate change lecture by a political science professor? Your response does absolutely nothing to prove or disprove "global warming. (Continued…)
Registered Independent
posted 4/06/09 @ 11:55 AM MST
Ah, no, Professor Calderazzo. You have misstated facts. Ian's article addressed "global warming", that was it's title.
You are attempting to change the subject to "climate change", which is why you used this substitute phrase innumerable times. (Continued…)
Thomas Anderson
posted 4/07/09 @ 10:05 AM MST
The axis of Collegian online "libertarianism"- Jimmy, Arvensis, and Registered Independent! You three are the masters of misconstruing ones arguments to fit into your own agendas. (Continued…)
Registered Independent
posted 4/07/09 @ 1:45 PM MST
Response to Thomas Anderson,
What a tongue lashing, why I'm almost in tears.
Far from being a tirade on my part yesterday, that was good-natured ribbing. (Continued…)
Chunk
posted 4/07/09 @ 2:19 PM MST
Now now, Thomas, Registered Independent has already stated that it's not fair to change terminology. He and Ian like attacking "global warming," so stop trying to use the term "climate change. (Continued…)
Registered Independent
posted 4/07/09 @ 8:08 PM MST
Response to Chunk,
Actually that would be "She and Ian".
You say you feel under "attack"?. Bingo! How delightful, and with so little effort expended. (Continued…)
jimmy
posted 4/07/09 @ 9:16 PM MST
"Climate Change is going to affect millions of people who live in poorer regions than the United States. Thus, political action becomes fundamental to the equation of mitigating the effects of climate change and necessitates experts such as Doctor Betsill to become involved. (Continued…)
Registered Independent
posted 4/08/09 @ 8:11 AM MST
Thanks Jimmy.
The scientific prediction of a lighter hurricane season this year than last year, doesn't appear to support "global warming".
But I bet if one is determined enough, it can somehow be crammed in under the broad umbrella term of "climate change". (Continued…)
Arvensis
posted 4/08/09 @ 5:35 PM MST
Would anybody agree that that term "climate change" is analogous to: "rainy wetness"?
If it rains, it will be wet. If there is climate, it will change. (Continued…)
jimmy
posted 4/09/09 @ 6:48 AM MST
"I certainly can't say either way for sure."
That is exactly the point. There is nothing conclusive about "global warming."
Post a Comment