Cutting to the chase on climate change

My interest in global warming grows apace, both because it stands to impose some very grim effects and because it makes an interesting (if dismaying) study in culture's attitude toward science (see my post on "Climate change as a teset of empiricism and secular democracy") and how vested interests can affect same.


florida.jpg

Florida at present (left) and what it will look like if seas rise 20 feet. from Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth

The puzzle at this point is why so many people, including intelligent people with decent scientific literacy, still doubt humans are causing the earth to warm dangerously. More people these days believe this, it seems, as they feel the summers get hotter and the weather more chaotic; seeing is believing. And Al Gore's movie and book — the source of the image below — seem to be convincing a lot of people. Yet many otherwise literate folks still harbor doubts.

Doubters (or those who wish to sway them) might be interested in any of several good talking-point type summaries of the evidence that lately appeared:

George Mauser's post at the SciAm blog discusses this doubt and summarizes the reasons to dispense with it; it includes links to past discussions of the same topic.

A Real Climate post on "Runway tipping points of no return" starts by noting the media, by attending the prospect that the climate has passed a tipping point, seems to have reached a tipping point of its own; along the way, the post summarizes some of the key evidence.

The juiciest recent summaries I've seen, however, are on subscription-only sites. They are

Jim Hansen's great piece in the New York Review of Books lays out the evidence and need for immediate action with wonderful concision. It's one of the best, most readably concentrated summaries and appeals I've seen.

The New York Times runs a long summary that's also well done, though it's unfortunately behind the magazine's "TimesSelect" premium service. It'd be nice if the Times put material that's so publicly vital a bit more up front.

All highly recommended for bringing concision to either your own or your skeptical friends' thinking on climate change.

More like this

Over the past decade, best-selling books such as Malcolm Gladwell's The Tipping Point have told compelling stories of how marketers and political consultants use "influentials," "mavens," "connectors," and "navigators" to sell products and win elections. In similar fashion, following the 2008…
Next Tuesday I'll be appearing at the following event at the Century Foundation: Drop It Like It's Hot: The Politics of Global Warming SUMMER POLICY BROWN BAG LUNCH FORUM FOR NEW YORK CITY INTERNS* Featuring: Brenda Ekwurzel--Climate Scientist, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Union of…
It's almost not worth mentioning, but Mount Kilimanjaro exemplifies the central weakness of the climate change pseudoskeptic's case. Does it matter how much snow lies at the top of Africa's tallest peak? No. And for the same reason that it doesn't matter that this past January was particularly…
Allow me to be among the first bloggers to take advantage of the end of the New York Times Select subscription-only firewall, by pointing to Thomas Friedman's explanation of "why I remain a climate skeptic -- not a skeptic about climate change, but a skeptic that we're going to be able to mitigate…

how come Gore says the water will go up 20 feet and the ipcc says 1, Nasa says maybe 4 inches.

Where is the consensus?

By ghollingshead (not verified) on 15 Feb 2007 #permalink