This is a long but excellent presentation of The Climate Desk, originally posted HERE where there is a blog post by Chris Mooney giving more details.
climatenexus on livestream.com. Broadcast Live Free
A recent post of mine on the topic is HERE.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
The EPA has removed climate science from its site in order that the site contents better reflect Donald Trump's perspective.
From Chris Mooney and Juliet Eilperin at the Washington Post:
The Environmental Protection Agency announced Friday evening that its website would be “undergoing changes” to…
Mother Jone's Climate Desk has an excellent and important interview with Jennifer Francis and Kevin Trenberth. I can't really comment on it now due to lack of time but I think it is time for me to update my AA->QR->WW linkage post based on this discussion. I'll also bring this into my next…
Live at 9:30 AM Eastern THIS MORNING:
Featuring Obama campaign surrogate Kevin Knobloch and former Republican congressman and Delaware governor Mike Castle.
Moderated by ScienceDebate.org's Shawn Otto and ClimateDesk Live's Chris Mooney.
TUNE IN HERE FOR LIVESTREAM
Thursday, November 1, 2012
The…
For readers who are interested in learning more about the communication battles over science policy, I gave the following talk to the American Institute of Biological Sciences back in May, and now AIBS has posted a video of the lecture, complete with an interactive version of the powerpoint slides…
Progress!
The "empirical/theoretical" divide may be useful for purposes of helping foster peace at this stage. But all of the key data on climate change are empirical, going all the way back to Bell Telephone Labs' announcement in 1959, that there was a tight correlation between the histories of human industrial activity / CO2 emissions, and global temperature rise. Both climatologists and meteorologists have both theory and empirical data going for them.
I wonder about a possible next step. Perhaps some kind of collaboration that brings both fields together for a common goal. It might be something along the lines of climatologists offering to help meteorologists with specific practical tasks, such as estimating how climate change affects local and regional weather. Or it might be research questions such as studying the jet stream.
In any case, when the weather forecasters most Americans see on TV every night, start saying routinely, that certain violent and costly weather events are occurring more frequently as a result of climate change, that will get heard and listened to and acted on. It will translate to pressure on elected officials who were formerly neutral or hostile.
Humans have a remarkable talent for just managing to squeak by, when one or another crisis looms. As a result of which, I tend to think that we'll "get the message" with sufficient time to avoid the worst consequences. That doesn't mean the next couple of centuries will be easy, only that in the end we'll make it as long as we put in the effort.
I have noticed that the TV weathermen who previously mentioned that global warming is not real have at least stopped saying that even if they have not changed their thinking.
It is just plain incompetence to be a weather forecaster and not understand climate change.