Climate change - at last someone tells it like it is

[ubiquitous]

People were talking in the 1980s about the planet being destroyed by nuclear power and nuclear weapons. I remember around 1985 reading an interview with Mick Jagger (of all people!!) who was worrying at the time that the planet would be destroyed before his (then small) children would grow up. Such pessimism was widespread at the time. Plus ca change...

 

[z104]

Can you list the end of the world is nigh newspaper selling stories over the past few years? In no particular order

Hiv/Aids- The world will be wiped out - We're still here
Bird Flu - The world will be wiped out - We're still here
Global Cooling - We're still here
Global warming -
Rising seas- We'll all be flooded/drowned - We're still here
Nuclear war- This was around for a long time - We're still here
Obesity- We'll be too heavy and the world will collapse.
The world is flat and you'll fall off the edge or be eaten by sea monsters.

Can anybody add to this list or make up new end of the world scenarios?

 

[extopia]

I think there is alot of smoke and mirrors used by government to deflect aga
P.S. People talk about the planet being destroyed, the planet will be fine and will be there long afetr us.!!
So, should people refer to the human race being destroyed and not the planet?

Absolutely - global warming of any kind will not destroy the planet. It will, however, destroy in the short term the resources mankind needs to survive. Once we wipe ourselves out (if we don't take our heads out of the sand), the planet will recover.

 

[ubiquitous]

It will, however, destroy in the short term the resources mankind needs to survive.

That's a very sweeping statement. Have you evidence to support it?

btw, how long is the "short-term"?

 

[diarmuidc]

Max McGuinness .... He concludes that science should never be a replacement for common sense.

I thought of Mr McGuinness when I read this quote:
Common sense is nothing more than a deposit of prejudices laid down by the mind before you reach eighteen. - Albert Einstein

 

[ubiquitous]

I thought of Mr McGuinness when I read this quote:
Common sense is nothing more than a deposit of prejudices laid down by the mind before you reach eighteen. - Albert Einstein

Did you read his article?

 

[diarmuidc]

Did you read his article?

No I don't have access to the Dubliner (I don't live in Ireland). I assumed that your summary of his conclusion was accurate. ("He concludes that science should never be a replacement for common sense.") If you misrepresented his position, I apologise to Mr McGuinness.

Edit:I see they have a website but couldn't find the article

 

[ubiquitous]

I didn't misrepresent his position. His article wasn't actually about climate change, but was a more general discussion of how people tend to blindly accept scientific conclusions as fact, even when the conclusions don't make sense. (He cited "scientific studies" that claimed for example that African-Americans were less intelligent, and Jewish Americans were more intelligent, than US citizens as a whole.)

I just wondered why you seemed to take such a jaundiced view of the article, and its author, as it was a reasonable and interesting article. Now that you admit that you haven't even read it, I'm still wondering.

 

[diarmuidc]

I just wondered why you seemed to take such a jaundiced view of the article, and its author, as it was a reasonable and interesting article. Now that you admit that you haven't even read it, I'm still wondering.

Well post a link and I will read it.

Like I said if the article follows the conclusion then I feel justified in my skeptical view. It's the standard journalistic approach to take a relatively inconsequential opinion that was recently hyped in the press and use that as a hammer to bash science.

"oh look some scientist claims black people are dumb, hence we can't trust science." The fact that the majority of other scientists decried Watsons claims and that the man himself denies making such claim ("More importantly from my point of view, there is no scientific basis for such a belief.") , did not influence the conclusion (and I paraphrase ubiqitous) that common sense should trump science.

From my original post I stand by my claim that common sense, gut feelings, personal dislike for certain public figures, religious faith or any other prejudice should not influence science. We have had enough of that in our past

 

[michaelm]

The Global Dimming documentary here (Environment -> Climate -> Global Dimming) is interesting. It suggests that clean air measures adopted in recent years have accelerated global warming.

 

[Remix]

I remember a priest visiting my school (many) years ago saying to the class something along the lines: "Seek out a perfect church. Join that church and realize from that day forward that church will be less than perfect"

Same thing I suppose for science. For as long as there are areas of science which contain uncertainties and require interpretation and for as long as there are humans in the loop, science will be less than perfect!