"How much nonsense can I stand on a Monday morning?
If there is climate change and if there is a human component in it, so what? Exactly what is going to change here? Nothing at all. We are not moving our society back to the mid 1800's or the 1900's. We didn't ratify Kyoto because it couldn't work. All the rest of the world did ratify it but none of them lived up to it because it couldn't work. China, India and Russia are not going backwards and neither should we.
The danger is in the Cassandras who insist this means this is catastrophic. With rising seas swamping cities and the the end of life as we know it. I am not buying a word of that and neither should anyone else. The problem is not from the "deniers" it is from the irresponsible fear-mongering by the luddites in our world from the East Anglia scientists who cooked the books to that noted scientist Al Gore. This hysteria is unfounded and in fact gives credence to the "deniers" because it is clear those fanning the fears of global warning have their own separate political agenda.
I am reminded of the hue and cry that the old spill in Gulf would cause problems that would affect everyone in the world. Some even called it the end of life as we know it. The result, not much of anything. Science indeed."
If there is climate change and if there is a human component in it, so what? Exactly what is going to change here? Nothing at all. We are not moving our society back to the mid 1800's or the 1900's. We didn't ratify Kyoto because it couldn't work. All the rest of the world did ratify it but none of them lived up to it because it couldn't work. China, India and Russia are not going backwards and neither should we.
The danger is in the Cassandras who insist this means this is catastrophic. With rising seas swamping cities and the the end of life as we know it. I am not buying a word of that and neither should anyone else. The problem is not from the "deniers" it is from the irresponsible fear-mongering by the luddites in our world from the East Anglia scientists who cooked the books to that noted scientist Al Gore. This hysteria is unfounded and in fact gives credence to the "deniers" because it is clear those fanning the fears of global warning have their own separate political agenda.
I am reminded of the hue and cry that the old spill in Gulf would cause problems that would affect everyone in the world. Some even called it the end of life as we know it. The result, not much of anything. Science indeed."
Here is my response to you Michael, both as a scientist and a citizen:
I recently learned, that when asked to name a prominent scientist, most Americans will mention Al Gore or Bill Gates. Did you know Al Gore is not a scientist? Not even close. He is an activist and a politician. He majored in Government at Harvard and then attended law school at Vanderbilt. If Wikipedia is to be believed, he didn't even do particularly well in those science and math classes he did take.
Or were you being facetious there, Michael? I would like to believe that your entire comment is the type of sarcasm that doesn't play well in written form, but I suppose that would make me a "denier" of what is proving to be the general opinion on climate change, sadly even amongst readers of the New York Times.
Do you know what they had plenty of in the mid-1800's and 1900's? Fossil fuels. Coal. Horse-driven carriages. Dependency on foreign oil. Dependency on a dwindling oil supply in general. Child labor. Droughts. Floods. Smog. Have we really moved so far forward? Sure, we drive cars now! Everywhere. We've increased our oil dependence (and we pay through the nose). And child labor, that's generally frowned upon in the U.S. these days (Let's ignore Maine for the time being). Maybe we have less smog now than the 1960's, why? Because of catalytic convertors. A change in technology that improved both our enjoyment walking outside in cities and our health. But oh was it once controversial to write laws requiring that vehicles have them. The more things change...
Michael, do you know how we can truly move society forward instead of staying stagnant? Renewable energy sources. I am not talking about churning butter and grinding flour in a wind-mill. I am talking about wind turbines. I am talking about solar cells. and hydrogen power. and biofuels. and more efficient AC to DC electrical conversions. To power your car and your laptop and your microwave and charge your cell phone and your ipad that you are reading and commenting on the New York Times Online at 11:06 am instead of working. How much nonsense CAN you stand on a Monday, Michael?
As for the Cassandras, well Michael, I agree. Scientists project that under several different global warming scenarios the sea level will rise by 0.5m to 1.4m above 1990 levels over the next century. What do you read in the news? "Fighting a losing battle with the sea". Or Is Boston headed under-water? Yonkers, that means you, too. What these articles fail to emphasize is that they are presenting worst-case scenarios. Does that mean you shouldn't be alarmed? No. The sea level IS rising. The science tells us that. But thankfully, Michael, you'll be dead if and when Yonkers becomes an underwater themepark. But I hope your grandchildren are good scuba divers. What these articles should emphasize is that this projected sea level rise isn't set in stone. Just like the gulf oil spill didn't "end life as we know it". (Though some Gulf Coast industries will likely disagree with you). We have the power to mitigate, to innovate. And Mr. Krugman's point was that instead of spending all this time, energy, and money denying the science is true on one hand or obfuscating the science and warning of doomsday on the other hand, we could be putting our efforts towards mitigation and solving our future problems. But as human beings we only care about the here and now.
Our forefathers, those white-haired men who walked and rode horses everywhere, who grew their own food, they wrote the constitution with the future in mind. A constitution which has remained valid and useful (a few items excluded) to this day. We can learn from the past to move forward here Michael. We can choose as a society to have foresight. We can say, "thank you scientists for your projections, I believe you, but I won't let this come true" and we can move our society ahead. Science, indeed.
