We’re getting a little break down in the southeast from the long and intense heat wave that has dogged us for so much of July. Things are still rough out west. Listening to the radio talk about California’s power grid in the midst of all this sticky, I was reminded of something that happened in January, 2004. On the 14th of that month, Al Gore gave a speech about global warming on the coldest New England day in 1/2 century. And, my, did the Jackals hoot… and hoot.
But now, I hoot back… because it turns out that all of the Global Warming Skeptics Republican Party hacks have been spending the dog days of the hottest first half of the year on record in the U.S., doing what? You guessed it… denying global warming.
It’s all kind of silly, really – I mean, yes the fact of global warming probably did contribute to many of these heat waves and to overall milder winter temperatures, but it is possible to have a warm year without it – just as it is possible to have a cold New England day in spite of global warming (or, possibly, because of it). But it’s the old goose and gander thing.
I read back through the comments from my post of 2 years ago, from one of my conservative guests who paid attention to scientists instead of Rush Limbaugh. I wish the conservative establishment had his attitude:
However, pretending that the situation does not exist is even worse. Better that we recognize the situation, and react to it like good capitalists.
Now, I understand that a lot of regular joes don’t know enough about climate science to justify a belief one way or another. And that’s just a problem for education – just like was once the case with giving little kids aspirin for their fever. But if you don’t know, you aren’t compelled to dispute, and if you are talking about it – from the Oval Office or on TV, the Radio, or the internet before an audience of hundreds of thousands – you aren’t doing anybody any favors by choosing the position to tout based on the “(R)” next to your name. Facts aren’t supposed to be partisan. The willingness of some folks to push the anti-science line just to support a partisan agenda, is endlessly troubling to me. I hope all their listeners decide to give them the boot.
Very good points. I agree with your conservative commentator that there are two important issues that need to be separated: Is global warming happening? And if so, what should we do about it? An enormous amount of the reaction to global warming on the conservative side doesn’t take this into account, with comments like, “Global warming nutcases would have us shut down all our power plants!”
I think this is also characteristic of other scientific issues that are bugabears for some brands of conservatives. I’ve heard, for example, “Evolution can’t be true, because it would call into question the value of Jesus’ having died on the cross for us.” Huh? We have to evaluate science as science, I think, and consider policy implications only afterwards.
And in fairness, the issues is not so much if Global Warming is real, but if it is, is it something that humans are contributing to or is it just happening organically.
Sure, the main reason we’re interested in the issue is because it may be relevant to our future prosperity, and if it is, we can do something about it (prepare for disaster, if nothing else). Speaking as someone who runs experiments, I’m always thinking, “Hey, if this works out the way I hope it does, it could really have interesting implications for X!” But that desire shouldn’t interfere with how I interpret my data.
By the way, it’s been in the 90s over here in Raleigh, and muggy as hell.
But if we were now experiencing the absolute coldest summer in recorded history it would be because of …………global warming.
That is why the non-scientific guys like myself just chuckle and open up another beer while we ponder the ramifications of Myrtle Beach being 5 miles closer in 200 years.
And by the way, it is hotter than hell here in Northeast Georgia for whatever reason.
No. It wouldn’t be good evidence against global warming, but it would not likely be because of global warming. If we were experiencing the most coldest *winter*, then that would be *consistent with*, and *possibly because of global* warming, yet would not be, by itself evidence for global warming.
The hot summer this year is one tiny data point among a much larger collection of data, which, taken together, *is* evidence for global warming. At least so say the people who have spent some time observing the climate and making efforts to understand it. But, the hot summer, by itself – though likely caused at least in part by global warming – is not, by itself evidence of global warming.
Does any of that make sense?
And Rick – that’s the *political* issue, but it isn’t the scientific issue any longer.
When it comes to global warming, I\’m one of the regular Joes smijer mentions: I don\’t have the background to judge the research myself, so I\’ll have to trust what I see coming out of either politicians\’ mouths or reports from the National Academy of Science. This also means that when someone says, \”Jeez, it\’s hot today, I think it must be global warming,\” I\’m just noncommittal. That is, everything I\’ve read says it\’s happening, but should I expect it to be visible on the tiny scale I can see? That would be like hearing that the crime rate has gone up by 5% in the past year and deciding to cross the street whenever I\’m downtown and see someone scruffy-looking.
Special Shout Outs To Corker and Condi…
Bob, you need to read this post from smijer:Facts arent supposed to be partisan. The willingness of some folks to push the anti-science line just to support a partisan agenda, is endlessly troubling to me. I hope all their listeners……