There has been some buzz of late over the idea that with a recent paper, MIT hurricane guru Kerry Emanuel is backing down from the stance that global warming has intensified recent hurricanes. But after reading the paper, I just don't see it. Sure, Emanuel admits he might be wrong but that's no more and no less than any other scientist might do.
I explain in a lot more detail over at The Daily Green.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
It's really amazing how many awards are being showered on MIT hurricane theorist Kerry Emanuel (image credit Donna Coveney, MIT News Office) at this year's American Meteorological Society meeting. Emanuel assuredly deserves it in a scientific sense, but I can't help but think that the timing of…
One of the most salient features of cranks is their inconsistency. A major difference between someone who is trying to reason scientifically and someone who has a fixed belief they are trying to defend against rational inquiry is the scientific thinker is looking for synthesis. They want things…
Without a doubt, 2005 was the year that ignited a fierce and lasting debate over the extent to which global warming might be increasing the strength of hurricanes. That's largely thanks to two back-to-back scientific papers, published in the leading journals Nature and in Science, which provided…
Althought I haven't read it, I've heard great things about the book Freakonomics, co-authored by (and about the work of) University of Chicago economist Steven Levitt. Levitt is supposed to be a true original thinker, and has really shaken up the somewhat traditionalist field of economics.
And…
Chris - KE's changed position certainly isn't a "conversion" (i.e., he hasn't gone over to the dark side), but going from "Yes, GW has caused an increase in storm frequency and intensity" to "We need more research to answer that question" is most definitely a case of "backing down" from the earlier stance. He hasn't re-affirmed his 2005 view and simply admitted that he might be wrong -- he's not affirming anything except that the current evidence doesn't warrant drawing a conclusion at this time.
That's a hopeful reading, Bob. There are reasons to think the models could have some issues regarding the likely future extent of climate zone shifts, ocean circulation changes and stratification. Wait for that shoe to drop.