[Coral-List] La Nina, and global warming
Eugene Shinn
eshinn at marine.usf.edu
Tue Nov 23 14:42:26 EST 2010
Gee! The emotions and vitriol stirred by my climate poking is
overwhelming. Why is it mainly among coral researchers? Other
disciplines, including the readers of Scientific American, seem not
nearly so excitable. The last time I saw scientists so divided was
over Continental Drift. Alfred Wegener's observation that anyone can
see by looking at a map created a huge storm back then but it was
almost entirely among geologists. I suppose that's understandable
because Wegner was a meteorologist and he was treading on another
discipline's turf. Wegener idea (we call them models now) was
basically discredited for lack of a mechanism that would explain how
the continents move. Never mind that the evidence was as plain as
well you know what. The controversy raged on well into the 1950s and
carried over and ended in the late 1960s when the magnetic stripes
and sea bottom ages were verified by the deep sea drilling project.
The climate issue may be similar because skeptics reject the CO2
explanation but have not put forward a mechanism for warming
acceptable to the AGWs.
Continental drift was something that could be solved but
unfortunately we have no surefire way to solve the climate issue. The
issue thus has taken on quasi religious status. In addition the
public and politicians are now involved while with plate tectonics
there was little money to be made, or lost, so politics and the
public stayed away. If only there was a single controlled experiment
that would prove that CO2 is or is not the cause we could all go
home. Yes we are doing a huge experiment by raising CO2 levels but
unfortunately there is no sister earth to serve as a control. We can
only correlate and everyone knows that correlation is not scientific
proof. There are also unexplained correlations to contend with.
Between 1955 and 1975 worldwide temperature dropped while CO2 level
rose, and between 1975 and 2000 temperature and CO2 rose together but
during the past decade temperature remained flat or decreased
slightly while CO2 continued to rise. The latest decline may be only
a temporary blip but we will have to wait at least 20 more years to
see what happens. Less than 30 years and it called weather but 30
years is considered climate. Lets hope it does not continue to
decline. A cold world is a really bad place.
I sent the Pew Foundation posting about the Rainbow Warriors
concern to a member of a skeptic group and received the following
reply.
"What is this stuff about "the amount of resources" that we skeptics
have at our disposal? The AGW folks have literally billions of
dollars at their disposal, at least $2 b in the U. S. alone, while
most of us toil without any support whatsoever, only focused on
maintaining integrity in our science. We are literally the
"starving artists" of science, trying to bring honesty to a
politically charged debate. If we could only bring reasonable
scientists together to look at data without defending prior
positions, we might be able to bring order out of this chaos.
Unfortunately, we can't even get both sides to the table for a
debate."
Yes there are emotions on both sides of the issue. I don't doubt
there are some industry groups funding anti AGW research but it is
peanuts compared to that being supplied by governments both here and
abroad. I still ask why so many coral researches have bought into the
AGW side of this dogfight? Lets see, are there coral researchers not
funded by various government and state governments, or NGOs? As one
writer on the list said, "The question is fundamental because where
politicians do not find an issue to be important they will not want
to allocate resources at state or federal levels to deal with it."
Ummmm. Another writer commented, "The question is how can we turn
the tide and make sure that the sciences involved in dealing with
issues directly related to climate change do not become? political
issues? Wow! Is that writer suggesting this is not already one of the
biggest political issues of all time? Remember the "I" in IPCC stands
for "Intergovernmental." Does that not tell us something?
Many national and international scientific societies (even the
Geological Society of America and AGU and so on) have signed onto
human caused global warming. Could there be a reason besides the
science? I think all of those societies are composed, and
orchestrated, mainly by scientists receiving government funding
and/or they work for universities receiving government funding. Would
granting agencies send money if they thought they were supporting
research that rejects AGW? Umm!
I as struck by Steve's comment "one of the most disturbing
aspects of this discussion is the fact that many contrarians are
scientifically literate and most certainly capable of complex
intellectual analysis." He is right on but does that not sound like
defense of a "faith based" belief rather than science? Remember
Galileo questioning the church's dictum that the sun revolves around
the Earth. I guess he just didn't realize "the science was settled."
Bruno's comments are well taken. He seems to have a cabinet full
of standard replies and websites just as do many skeptics. Clearly
battle-lines have been drawn on the climate issue but unfortunately
our National budget can ill afford a war like this. Ok I know that is
also a standard skeptic reply and I am sure there is an alternative
answer. Unfortunately there is a wealth of ad hominem accusations
flying around when concrete issues need to be discussed. But it's
hard to get both sides to the table. It does no good to kill the
messenger. The diatribe against Robert Carters co authorship of a
paper on El Nino is a good example. I still stand by his book as an
excellent way to understand the issue in balance even if it disagrees
with your faith. If each side of the issue only reads the stuff that
supports their side then there will be no progress and the battle
will rage on. In the end science becomes the looser. The public will
loose faith in us as well. Gene
--
No Rocks, No Water, No Ecosystem (EAS)
------------------------------------ -----------------------------------
E. A. Shinn, Courtesy Professor
University of South Florida
Marine Science Center (room 204)
140 Seventh Avenue South
St. Petersburg, FL 33701
<eshinn at marine.usf.edu>
Tel 727 553-1158----------------------------------
-----------------------------------
More information about the Coral-List
mailing list