The debate is over
Sunday, March 25th, 2007Writing about: Global Warming – pile o’ shite, 25/03/07, Mike’s Blog
I can’t comment on that blog, so I’ve emailed the author. Normally I wouldn’t bother, but I just find it sad when supposedly intelligent people make bald assertions because they don’t like the answer otherwise.
Mike,I really wouldn’t rely on Wikipedia as any arbiter of what is correct or not.
The kind of rabid finger-pointing to which Melanie Phillips is prone does nothing to further our understanding. Saying that the current state of science is “utter garbage” would be amusing if it wasn’t so serious. The information she quotes is 10 years out of date; if it was worth the effort, I could comprehensively rebut each and every one of her points. Of you could just have a look through http://www.realclimate.org/
Her article predates the recent IPCC panel report – the authoritative presentation of the current understanding of the science. If you’re really interested in the current state of the science, their summary for policymakers (http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM2feb07.pdf) is well worth a read.
“Few people were around with the technology to start an iceage centuries ago, so in a similar way, we are not causing global warming..”
What a fallacious argument! We are emitting teratonnes of CO2. CO2 causes increased solar capture. Increased solar capture causes increased surface temperatures. This is all well-understood. The devil is in the details – how much effect will it have? What will be the effect of changing fauna? What’ll happen if the permafrosts thaw? Asserting that “we are not causing global warming” is trivial and wrong. The current argument is all about how much damage anthropogenic global warming will cause.
Incidentally, I’ve blogged this too (http://www.maxhammondphotos.org.uk/blog/)
Max
—
Max Hammond
