[Coral-List] La Nina and global warming

[Greg Challenger]

"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."   Steve Mussman
 
First let me point out I am not a contrarian.  I think there is a lot of compelling evidence. Nonetheless, I find this statement disturbing.  Isnt it a good thing that those who question the certainty of any scientific conclusion be scientifically literate?  I understand folks feel their data and conclusions are absolutely correct, but has anyone ever been absolutely correct about any data or conclusions?  
 
I thoroughly enjoy Gene's comments and am not so sure that those who question can be dismissed so easily.
 
Regards,

 
 
Greg E. Challenger
Marine Scientist/Principal
Polaris Applied Sciences, Incorporated
12525 131st Ct NE Kirkland, WA 98034 
425-823-4841 
425-823-3805 fx 
206-369-5686 cell 
visit us at: www.polarisappliedsciences.com
 



 
> Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2010 13:39:52 -0500
> From: sealab at earthlink.net
> To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> Subject: [Coral-List] La Nina and global warming
> 
> Got to admit, Gene's climate change "pokings" can sometimes be disquieting.
> But at the same time this discourse should be vigorously encouraged. 
> The positions that he conveys, though inciting consternation, stand as a 
> reminder of the extent and complexity of the task at hand.
> No one seriously involved in the debate relating to anthropogenic 
> climate change is suggesting that the skeptics are "dummies". Quite the contrary,
> 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. Though Gene seems to preclude many members of congress
> from this group, politicians will simply continue to do what politicians do. 
> That is to say, they will position themselves on the issues based on what is
> most likely to result in prolonging their incumbency. 
> Again this realization prioritizes the need for more effective communication
> by the scientific community directly designed to affect public opinion.
> If the best climate science becomes more clearly expressed, it will change public
> opinion and the politicians will follow. Expecting insightful political leaders 
> to courageously rise up and advance the fight on principle will likely prove futile.
> But don't underestimate them, our politicians can understand the science.
> Its just that first and foremost their interests lay in the next election cycle,
> not in the ramifications of policy positions that may not damage their prospects
> for decades. 
> 
> As Gene mentioned, the political winds have recently changed.
> Perhaps he is spot on to suggest that the focus of concern should be to assure
> that pure science weathers this storm. For although there is little evidence of 
> adequate resolve, I hesitate to envision the resulting turmoil engulfing future
> generations if science surrenders. 
> 
> Steve
> _______________________________________________
> Coral-List mailing list
> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list