I often think back to how this blog started. It’s stupid because it is just an electronic opinion space but if you start a wordpress blog and write an awesome post, you will get 8 views for your reward. Views, the food of journalists. Write the magic words and the world will find you.
Nope, screw that, too much engineer in me.
I think Joshua has earned some respect here. He’s highly critical of ‘skeptic’ views, yet has proven thoughtful enough to change his mind. My number one most respected trait in others. Now please don’t assume that this blog is about changing minds, most of us at the Air Vent (on all sides) would rather let loose our opinions than spend time maximizing our result. I don’t know if Joshua is 18 or 80 but my guess is 20. I guess this because of his still flexible mind, good thought skill yet limited information. Intelligent, opinionated yet not in full grasp of the gray areas of life. This is not a slight nor is it proof of my own grasp, although I/we the embattled do understand our role in the matter.
Some of you old farts and managers out there will get the logic. Sorry for calling you around-the block folks out, but gray hair comes with both understanding and responsibility.
So Jeff –
You disagree with Giaever, and you agree with the APS: Global warming is, in fact “incontrovertible.”
Giaever, being the recently resigned scientist from the necessarily politically motivated APS. Of course it is confusing to Joshua how we can be the “denialists” as described by Real Climate could refuse to deny global warming. To be fair, he is more sophisticated than that. Joshua is predisposed to assume our ‘belief’ and is looking for the keystone to yank – can’t really blame him. Public schooling has assured that predisposition IMO. To make it worse, we the unwashed don’t agree with each other, the consensus does ‘agree’ , so how can we claim understanding? The short answer is that we don’t any more than he/they.
Our singular message IMHO is that when you see wide consensus style agreement, you are seeing wide external pressures and it isn’t up to us to chew that piece of tough meat for the younger crowd.
September 15, 2011 at 7:38 pm e
Actually, I used the Google:
Emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are changing the atmosphere in ways that affect the Earth’s climate. Greenhouse gases include carbon dioxide as well as methane, nitrous oxide and other gases. They are emitted from fossil fuel combustion and a range of industrial and agricultural processes.
The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring.
So thus far you agree with the APS and disagree with Giaever. But then…..
If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth’s physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now.
Because the complexity of the climate makes accurate prediction difficult, the APS urges an enhanced effort to understand the effects of human activity on the Earth’s climate, and to provide the technological options for meeting the climate challenge in the near and longer terms. The APS also urges governments, universities, national laboratories and its membership to support policies and actions that will reduce the emission of greenhouse gases.
So my guess is that you agree and disagree with both the APS and Giaever.
My reply is on the other thread but it doesn’t matter one lick. What matters is the detail of the problems addressed. So many threads get caught up in what is or isn’t AGW. This thread should be about Joshua’s rational curiosity and nothing more. He is far from alone. One of my top five favorite posts was actually a regression by RomanM which I inelegantly beat into a global temp average. The reason it is one ofmy favorites is two-fold, first it shows more warming (more trend) from the same data than climate science(always), the second is that Roman’s methods are statistically superior. A confusing bit of data for a young believer to read from an alleged denialist (me/us). The consensus should adopt the approach immediately.
As clear as CO2 warming.
What isn’t clear is that the 0.8C of warming we’ve seen is 100% man made. No serious climate scientists claim 100% of the trend is AGW, to my knowledge. On the nonintuitive yet diametrically opposite side, what is clear is that we humans can’t stop AGW no matter what we do. There is only ONE single technology which can make any difference engineering wise, and that is nuclear. This tech would have to be implemented in a fashion more aggressively than man has ever imagined. Of course it will not be. Thus, we have no choice. Humanity will continue to produce ever more CO2, we will see the result, and we will discover its power. Like so much in nature – which we are part of – we are powerless to stop it.
Hopefully our newly industrialized society is smart enough not to self-immolate along the path.