Climate: & the discipline of science, as we know it

[G_j]

http://www.whistlerquestion.com/madison/WQuestion.nsf/0/3583A6215EC70B3388256FB20078456D?OpenDocument

Climate-change science keeps ticking

By David suzuki

If you didn’t know what the Kyoto Protocol was all about a few weeks ago, you’d be hard pressed not to know now. The international agreement to reduce the heat-trapping emissions that are causing global warming has been all over the news since it came into force last week. Leading up to the big day, I expected to hear from “both sides” of the issue in the media — those who felt that the agreement was an important first step to address a huge challenge for humanity, and those who felt that the targets would be too difficult to achieve in a short timeline. What I didn’t really expect was how the “climate change isn’t happening” people crawled out of the woodwork, bleating about myths and conspiracy theories that somehow seemed to involve nutty left-wing scientists, government bureaucrats and the French.
Naïvely, I had assumed that this discussion was largely over, since these people had such little credibility. But there they were, being interviewed on television, in newspapers and on the radio — sometimes right alongside legitimate climate scientists or politicians. Over and over, they made bizarre pronouncements about how the science was uncertain and how humanity’s hand in global warming could not be proven. This continued insistence on “proof” even in the face of overwhelming evidence is simply bizarre. To say that we don’t know enough about climate change to prompt action is to say that the entire discipline of science, as we know it, should not be trusted. Uncertainty is inherent in the scientific process. Currently, the vast majority of scientific evidence tells us that human activities are causing climate change and that it could have very serious consequences if we don’t do something about it. Of course, the science could all be wrong — but I wouldn’t bet our future on it.

Anyone who wants to know the real story on the current state of climate science should simply pick up a science journal. Or, to cut to the chase, read a short article by the University of California’s Naomi Oreskes, published in the journal Science in December. Her analysis of all 928 peer-reviewed climate studies published between 1993 and 2003 found that not a single one disagreed with the general scientific consensus position on climate change.

<snip>
Our climate is a very complicated system. We don’t know everything about how it works, but we’re learning more each day. What we do know tells us that, by dumping vast quantities of emissions into the atmosphere, we are disrupting our climate in ways that may make it increasingly inhospitable. The Kyoto Protocol, by itself, won’t stop this from happening, but it’s the first step toward an energy economy that could. That won’t stop some people from bleating their conspiracy theories and claims that everything is going to be just fine. Given how disturbing the real science is, I sincerely wish they were right. Take the Nature Challenge and learn more at www.davidsuzuki.org.

[retnavyliberal]

1. Well, sure. The same scientists that are giving us this "global warming"

myth are also spouting all that bs about, yano.... the earth being more then 6000 years old! /sarcasm

[Desertrose]

2. The challenge is not all that difficult really....

from the link above....

The David Suzuki Foundation has researched the 10 most effective ways 
we can help conserve nature and improve our quality of life.

1. Reduce home energy use by 10%
2. Choose an energy-efficient home & appliances
3. Don't use pesticides
4. Eat meat-free meals one day a week
5. Buy locally grown and produced food
6. Choose a fuel-efficient vehicle
7. Walk, bike, carpool or take transit
8. Choose a home close to work or school
9. Support alternative transportation
10. Learn more and share with others

The Challenge is to pick at least three steps and sign up by clicking the button below. It's an easy and effective way to make a difference.


I loved watching Suzuki when we lived in Canada!!

:hi::loveya: G_j
:hug:DR

[G_j]

3. an excellent list

I love Suzuki too.
He is way cool. He truly loves his work and makes one want to find out more about our world and the universe. The 'joy of science'..

:hi::loveya: DR
:hug:G_j

[Lisa]

4. the great thing is, many of the items on the list address multiple issues

Cutting back on fossil fuel use will reduce smog and ground level ozone. It will also save money and lessen the amount of damage caused by extraction of petroleum and gas, e.g. the coal-bed methane fiasco in the Pacific Northwest. And, of course, depending on dictatorial governments like Nigeria and Saudia Arabia for continued energy production.

Not using pesticides on your lawn will mean less poison going into the environment, and your kids won't come in contact with potential carcinogens.

Buying locally-made food creates jobs in your community -- as does using public transit.

Demanding better urban design will reduce gasoline use, make neighborhoods more comfortable (e.g. having grocery stores, banks, and other services within walking distance). The walking will allow you to exercise and relieve stress at the same time.

If this were a trade-off between "having a job" or "having a safe environment", there wouldn't be any good way to solve the problem. But all these solutions are converging on an economy -- and on a society -- which seems to be more efficient, caring, democratic, and able to provide long-term security -- domestically and globally.



The one-tonne challenge (which was started by an environmental group, including some of my former students) -- and is now part of the official Canadian government plan:

http://www.climatechange.gc.ca/onetonne/english/#

[G_j]

5. thanks Lisa, I didn't know the One-Tonne Challenge

was part of the official Canadian government plan.
I wish the US was making any sort of effort at all.
We just keep making and driving bigger and more wasteful cars.
:-(