Considering John Kerry’s Failure to Communicate with and Confront GOP.
I made these remarks after finishing a review of some deceptive opining by Mike Hulme.
It occurs to me I'd like to share the same message over here
since I seriously am looking for someone to work for.
citizenschallenge - at - gmail com
Watching GOP Rep. Thomas Massie April 9th questioning of John Kerry I was struck by how much Massie’s questioning and attitude resembled a smug entitled middle schooler, gotcha games and all. It was laughable. If not for the societal tragedy of having such a know-nothing in such a position of power.
That’s why I vowed to give his little theater a closer look when I could. Now I can and of course it turns out more convoluted and time consuming than expected. Instead of the single post I had originally envisioned, I’m going to have to go with installments.
My first post was a closer look at the person who was at the heart of Massie's “pseudoscience” word play. Namely, Trump’s climate “brain trust” the infamous William Happer a man who’s a firm believer in taxes being more important than truthfully understanding climate science. A one time physicist who in old age hires himself out to attack active scientists.
William Happer is motivated by extreme right wing political passions and a paycheck. He is the poster boy of a Professional Pseudoscientist if there ever was one.
That collection serves as supporting information for this second installment where I’ll focus on Rep Massie’s bizarre and basically unhinged insinuation that climate science is pseudoscience.
As for Massie’s middle school gotcha game with Kerry, it was smoke’n mirrors. But that’s just fine for the Republicans. Confusion and inaction are their goals.
Kerry was the pathetic failure in that he didn’t have the wherewithal to turn the table on Massie. Use the moment to switch to kindergarten mode. Treat Massie as the kindergartener intellect that he is! Then very carefully respond to Massie cynical questions.
For instance, the fact that Kerry wasn’t sharing his opinion, he was sharing the well known Considered Expert Opinion, which is widely available.
Publicly enunciate how Massie was simply playing a cynical game of diversion. Point out that Massie didn’t have anything substantive to offer.
Point out that playing political theater is wholly inappropriate in a process devoted to understanding something as critically important to our future wellbeing as climate science understanding.
Why not ask GOP’s Massie what he thought qualified an engineer to second guess life long experts in their varied Earth Science fields.
_____________________________________
Quoting GOP’s Massie claims Kerry’s college degree and climate sciences are pseudoscience.
Massie: “Isn’t it true you have a science degree from Yale?”
Kerry: “Bachelor of arts degree.”
Massie: “Is it a political science degree?”
Kerry: “Yes, political science.”
Massie: “So how do you get a bachelor of arts in science?”
Kerry: “It’s a liberal arts education and degree.”
Listening to Kerry’s flustered and fumbling away this precious teaching moment was another heartbreaker - I had the wish Kerry could yield the floor to me.
Thus, I’ll take on some super parliamentary powers and try to describe how that scene could have unfolded in a more productive fashion. Okay so in real life I’m sure I’d have needed some serious condensing, but hey, this is just an exercise and flight of logic.
GOP’s Massie: “So it’s not really science. I think it’s somewhat appropriate that somebody with a pseudoscience degree is here pushing pseudoscience in front of our committee today.”
Kerry: “Are you serious? I mean is this really happening here?”
Here Democrats should have stopped the proceeding to formally consider what the Kentucky US Representative Thomas Massie just said and did!
From Massie’s position of power and authority he implies climate science is pseudoscience. That is too important to ignore! It demands an immediate clarification before any sort of constructive dialogue is possible.
US Representative Massie please explain why you just now referred to Climate Science as “pseudoscience”?
Rep. Massie can you tell us what you know about the history of climate science?
Can Massie tell us anything about how the physical properties of greenhouse gases in our atmosphere where established?
Can Massie offer any insights into post WWII Air Force atmospheric studies and how they established exact numbers on how greenhouse gases reacted to the sun’s insolation and the Earth’s own infrared radiation?
CO2 Science - Blue team: "Pruitt, it's certain as certain gets! It's the physics! Don't you know?
CO2 Science - Pruitt, proof is in the pudding! Impossible Modern Marvels
Schooling Pruitt's Red Team about our planet and its climate engine (FCFP)
Can GOP’s Massie describe what our atmosphere does and how humanity’s ever growing society is changing that atmosphere?
What about the cascading consequences of energizing an enclosed global heat and moisture distribution engine?
Do you understand such things?
Can Massie describe any of those consequences?
I ask because I’m looking for some reason to understand how you, Massie can venture such an outrageously stupid and dishonest claim. Pseudoscience indeed.
Please Mr. GOP, what is it that you actually do know about climate science?
We The People have a right and pragmatic need to know about your own level of competence, or lack thereof, to intelligently discuss your ability to sit judgement on climate science.
To be continued in a later post.
Please consider the following short summary of the history of climate science and what real scientists, (as opposed to politicized engineers), have to say about it. This is followed by a list of bona fide scientific organizations that have studied the science and had composed well considered statements explaining the outlines of the situation and the growing problem facing humanity’s future security.
Here are gathered in chronological sequence the most important events in the history of climate change science. (For a narrative see the Introduction: summary history.) This list of milestones includes major influences external to the science itself. Following it is a list of other external influences.
1800-1870
Level of carbon dioxide gas (CO2) in the atmosphere, as later measured in ancient ice, is about 290 ppm (parts per million).
Mean global temperature (1850-1890) is roughly 13.7°C.
First Industrial Revolution. Coal, railroads, and land clearing speed up greenhouse gas emission, while better agriculture and sanitation speed up population growth.
1824
Fourier calculates that the Earth would be far colder if it lacked an atmosphere. =>Simple models
Fourier calculates that the Earth would be far colder if it lacked an atmosphere. =>Simple models
1859
Tyndall demonstrates that some gases block infrared radiation, and notes that changes in the concentration of the gases could bring climate change. =>Other gases
1879
International Meteorological Organization begins to compile and standardize global weather data, including temperature. =>International
International Meteorological Organization begins to compile and standardize global weather data, including temperature. =>International
1896
Arrhenius publishes first calculation of global warming from human emissions of CO2. =>Simple models
1897
Chamberlin produces a model for global carbon exchange including feedbacks. =>Simple models
1870-1910
Second Industrial Revolution. Fertilizers and other chemicals, electricity, and public health further accelerate growth.
1914-1918
World War I; governments learn to mobilize and control industrial societies.
1920-1925
Opening of Texas and Persian Gulf oil fields inaugurates era of cheap energy.
1930s
Global warming trend since late 19th century reported. =>Modern temp's
Milankovitch proposes orbital changes as the cause of ice ages. =>Climate cycles
1938
Callendar argues that CO2 greenhouse global warming is underway, reviving interest in the question. =>CO2 greenhouse
1939-1945
World War II. Military grand strategy is largely driven by a struggle to control oil fields.
1945
US Office of Naval Research begins generous funding of many fields of science, some of which happen to be useful for understanding climate change. =>Government
1955
Phillips produces a convincing computer model of the global atmosphere. =>Models (GCMs)
1956
Ewing and Donn offer a feedback model for quick ice age onset. =>Simple models
Plass calculates that adding CO2 to the atmosphere will have a significant effect on the radiation balance. =>Radiation math
1957
Launch of Soviet Sputnik satellite. Cold War concerns support 1957-58 International Geophysical Year, bringing new funding and coordination to climate studies. =>International
Revelle finds that CO2 produced by humans will not be readily absorbed by the oceans. =>CO2 greenhouse
1958
Telescope studies show a greenhouse effect raises temperature of the atmosphere of Venus far above the boiling point of water. =>Venus & Mars
1960
Mitchell reports downturn of global temperatures since the early 1940s.=>Modern temp's
Keeling accurately measures CO2 in the Earth's atmosphere and detects an annual rise. =>CO2 greenhouse The level is 315 ppm. Mean global temperature (five-year average) is 13.9°C.
1962
Cuban Missile Crisis, peak of the Cold War.
1963
Calculations suggest that feedback with water vapor could make the climate acutely sensitive to changes in CO2 level. =>Radiation math
First meeting of experts concerned with global warming warns that a rise in sea level is likely, with "immense flooding" of shorelines. =>Impacts
1965
Boulder, Colorado meeting on causes of climate change: Lorenz and others point out the chaotic nature of climate system and the possibility of sudden shifts. =>Chaos theory
1966
Emiliani's analysis of deep-sea cores and Broecker's analysis of ancient corals show that the timing of ice ages was set by small orbital shifts, suggesting that the climate system is sensitive to small changes. =>Climate cycles
1967
International Global Atmospheric Research Program established, mainly to gather data for better short-range weather prediction, but including climate. =>International
Manabe and Wetherald make a convincing calculation that doubling CO2 would raise world temperatures a couple of degrees. =>Radiation math
1968
Studies suggest a possibility of collapse of Antarctic ice sheets, which would raise sea levels catastrophically. =>sea rise, ice, floods
1969
Astronauts walk on the Moon, and people perceive the Earth as a fragile whole. =>Public opinion
Budyko and Sellers present models of catastrophic ice-albedo feedbacks. =>Simple models
Nimbus III satellite begins to provide comprehensive global atmospheric temperature measurements. =>Government
There’s much more at The Discovery of Global Warming compiled by Spencer Weart of the American Institute of Physics - https://history.aip.org/climate/timeline.htm
Representative Massie can you explain what a “systems science” is and how that pertains to Earth’s biosphere? For that matter can you explain what our biosphere is? Or how our global weather systems impact this biosphere?
Furthermore, on what expertise does your flippant dismissal rest? Dr. William Happer’s writings?
Are you aware that Happer’s alleged physics has been roundly and repeated rejected by practicing experts in their respective fields? With full blown explanations attached!
Please explain why you believe Dr. Happer’s opinion is better than the scientific community’s considered learned opinion?
Joint Statements on Climate Change from National Academies of Science Around the World
________________________________________________________
The Science of Climate Change (Statement of 17 National Science Academies, 2001)
Following the release of the third in the ongoing series of international reviews of climate science conducted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Chang (IPCC), seventeen national science academies issued a joint statement, entitled "The Science of Climate Change," acknowledging the IPCC study to be the scientific consensus on climate change science.
The seventeen signatories were:
- Australian Academy of Sciences
- Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium for Sciences and the Arts
- Brazilian Academy of Sciences
- Royal Society of Canada
- Caribbean Academy of Sciences
- Chinese Academy of Sciences
- French Academy of Sciences
- German Academy of Sciences, Leopoldina
- Indian National Science Academy
- Indonesian Academy of Sciences
- Royal Irish Academy
- Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei (Italy)
- Academy of Sciences Malaysia
- Academy Council of the Royal Society of New Zealand
- Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
- Turkish Academy of Sciences
- Royal Society (UK)
________________________________________________________
Joint science academies’ statement: Global response to climate change (Statement of 11 National Science Academies, 2005)
Eleven national science academies, including all the largest emitters of greenhouse gases, signed a statement that the scientific understanding of climate change was sufficiently strong to justify prompt action. The statement explicitly endorsed the IPCC consensus and stated:
“…there is now strong evidence that significant global warming is occurring. The evidence comes from direct measurements of rising surface air temperatures and subsurface ocean temperatures and from phenomena such as increases in average global sea levels, retreating glaciers, and changes to many physical and biological systems. It is likely that most of the warming in recent decades can be attributed to human activities (IPCC 2001). This warming has already led to changes in the Earth's climate.”
The eleven signatories were: Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
________________________________________________________
Joint science academies’ statement on Growth and responsibility: sustainability, energy efficiency and climate protection (Statement of 13 National Science Academies, 2007)
In 2007, thirteen national academies issued a joint declaration reconfirming previous statements and strengthening language based on new research from the fourth assessment report of the IPCC, including the following:
“In 2005, the Academies issued a statement emphasizing that climate change was occurring and could be attributed mostly to human activities, and calling for efforts to tackle both the causes of climate change and the inevitable consequences of past and unavoidable future emissions. Since then the IPCC has published the Working Group 1 part of the Summary for Policymakers of its fourth assessment report, and further reports are expected later this year from IPCC. Recent research strongly reinforces our previous conclusions. It is unequivocal that the climate is changing, and it is very likely that this is predominantly caused by the increasing human interference with the atmosphere. These changes will transform the environmental conditions on Earth unless counter-measures are taken.”
The thirteen signatories were the national science academies of Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, Italy, India, Japan, Mexico, Russia, South Africa, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
________________________________________________________
A joint statement on sustainability, energy efficiency, and climate change (Statement of 13 individual National Science Academies and the African Academy of Sciences, 2007)
In 2007, the Network of African Science Academies submitted a joint “statement on sustainability, energy efficiency, and climate change:”
“A consensus, based on current evidence, now exists within the global scientific community that human activities are the main source of climate change and that the burning of fossil fuels is largely responsible for driving this change. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reached this conclusion with '90 percent certainty' in its Fourth Assessment issued earlier this year. The IPCC should be congratulated for the contribution it has made to public understanding of the nexus that exists between energy, climate and sustainability.”
The thirteen signatories were the science academies of Cameroon, Ghana, Kenya, Madagascar, Nigeria, Senegal, South Africa, Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe, as well as the African Academy of Sciences.
________________________________________________________
Zmian klimatu, globalnego ocieplenia i ich alarmujących skutkow: “Climate change, global warming and its alarming consequences” (Statement of the Polish Academy of Sciences, December 2007)
In December 2007, the General Assembly of the Polish Academy of Sciences (Polska Akademia Nauk), issued a declaration endorsing the IPCC conclusions, and stating (in translation):
The problem of global warming, climate change and their negative impact on the human life and the functioning of the whole society is one of the most dramatic of contemporary challenges. The most recent studies indicate that the content of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere increased in the last century by about 25%. If you add to that a similar increase in the presence in the atmosphere of other harmful gases generated by human activity, overall, the effective increase in the amount of these gases in the period under consideration is about 40% and the specific acceleration gained over the past decades. This makes that the situation extremely worrisome...
It is the duty of science and Polish state authorities to develop thoughtful, organized and active efforts in the implementation of these ideas. Priority should be given to vast and diversified areas of research, including physical and biochemical mechanisms of climate change and their mathematical modeling. It should also develop appropriate technical measures and rules for their implementation, and legal and economic regulations limiting the emission of so-called greenhouse gases in all areas of economic activity of the state.
It is also necessary to take measures aimed to understand society-scale threats and response measures. The General Assembly of the Academy calls on national scientific communities and the state authorities to actively support Polish participation in this important endeavor.
We believe that the right step to counteract the effects of global warming require, under the auspices of the Polish Academy of Sciences, a Special Program to counteract climate threats and their consequences…
________________________________________________________
Joint Science Academies’ Statement: Climate Change Adaptation and the Transition to a Low Carbon Society (Statement of 13 National Academies of Sciences, June 2008)
In 2008, the thirteen signers of the 2007 joint academies declaration issued a statement reiterating previous statements and reaffirming
“that climate change is happening and that anthropogenic warming is influencing many physical and biological systems.”
Among other actions, the declaration urges all nations to
“(t)ake appropriate economic and policy measures to accelerate transition to a low carbon society and to encourage and effect changes in individual and national behaviour.”
The thirteen signatories were the national science academies of Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, Italy, India, Japan, Mexico, Russia, South Africa, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
________________________________________________________
Climate change and the transformation of energy technologies for a low carbon future (Statement of 13 National Academies of Sciences, May 2009)
In May 2009, thirteen national academies issued a joint statement that said among other things:
“The IPCC 2007 Fourth Assessment of climate change science concluded that large reductions in the emissions of greenhouse gases, principally CO2, are needed soon to slow the increase of atmospheric concentrations, and avoid reaching unacceptable levels. However, climate change is happening even faster than previously estimated; global CO2 emissions since 2000 have been higher than even the highest predictions, Arctic sea ice has been melting at rates much faster than predicted, and the rise in the sea level has become more rapid. Feedbacks in the climate system might lead to much more rapid climate changes. The need for urgent action to address climate change is now indisputable.”
The thirteen signatories were the national science academies of Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, Italy, India, Japan, Mexico, Russia, South Africa, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
________________________________________________________
Health Effects of Climate Change (Statement of the Inter Academy Medical Panel / 42 National Academies of Sciences, 2010)
Statement on the health co-benefits of policies to tackle climate change
It is widely agreed that human activities are changing Earth’s climate beyond natural climatic fluctuations. The emission and accumulation of greenhouse gases associated with the burning of fossil fuels, along with other activities, such as land use change, are the principal causes of climate change…
Climate change poses a significant threat to human health in many direct and indirect ways…
Although there are some uncertainties about the magnitude of climate change and its impacts, there is widespread consensus that to mitigate climate change and reduce its impact on health, near term deep cuts in global greenhouse gas emissions are needed. Actions should be greatest in those high-income countries that have benefited most from burning fossil fuels. The longer we delay, the more severe the impacts on health, the environment and the economy; and the greater the future cost of mitigation. Since some degree of climate change is now inevitable, countries will have to adapt to the associated health risks...
Signatories
- Academia Nacional de Medicina de Buenos Aires
- Academy of Medical Sciences of Armenia
- Austrian Academy of Sciences
- Bangladesh Academy of Sciences
- Academia Boliviana de Medicina
- Brazilian Academy of Sciences
- Chinese Academy of Engineering
- Academia Nacional de Medicina de Colombia
- Croatian Academy of Medical Sciences
- Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts
- Academy of Scientific Research and Technology, Egypt
- Académie Nationale de Médecine, France
- The Delegation of the Finnish Academies of Science and Letters
- Union of German Academies of Sciences and Humanities
- Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher, Leopoldina
- Academia de Ciencias Medicas, Fisicas y Naturales de Guatemala
- Hungarian Academy of Sciences
- Indonesian Academy of Sciences
- Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei
- TWAS, academy of sciences for the developing world
- Islamic World Academy of Sciences
- Science Council of Japan
- African Academy of Sciences
- Kenya National Academy of Sciences
- The National Academy of Sciences, Rep. of Korea
- Akademi Sains Malaysia
- National Academy of Medicine of Mexico
- Nigerian Academy of Science
- National Academy of Science and Technology, Philippines
- Polish Academy of Sciences
- The Caribbean Academy of Sciences
- Russian Academy of Medical Sciences
- Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts
- Academy of Science of South Africa
- National Academy of Sciences of Sri Lanka
- Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
- The Tanzania Academy of Sciences
- Thai Academy of Science and Technology
- Turkish Academy of Sciences
- Uganda National Academy Sciences
- Academy of Medical Sciences, UK
- Institute of Medicine, US NAS
________________________________________________________
Climate Change: Evidence and Causes (Joint Statement of the Royal Society and the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, February 2014)
The Royal Society and the US National Academy of Science jointly published the document “Climate Change: Evidence and Causes.” Given their similar missions to “promote the use of science to benefit society and to inform critical policy debates,” the Academies “offer this new publication as a key reference document for decision makers, policy makers, educators, and other individuals seeking authoritative answers about the current state of climate-change science.”
________________________________________________________
U.K. Science Communiqué on Climate Change (Joint Statement of the Royal Society and member organizations, July 2015)
In July 2015, the Royal Society and member organizations issued a joint “U.K. Science Communiqué on Climate Change.” In part, that statement reads:
“The scientific evidence is now overwhelming that the climate is warming and that human activity is largely responsible for this change through emissions of greenhouse gases.
Governments will meet in Paris in November and December this year to negotiate a legally binding and universal agreement on tackling climate change.
Any international policy response to climate change must be rooted in the latest scientific evidence. This indicates that if we are to have a reasonable chance of limiting global warming in this century to 2°C relative to the pre-industrial period, we must transition to a zero-carbon world by early in the second half of the century.
To achieve this transition, governments should demonstrate leadership by recognising the risks climate change poses, embracing appropriate policy and technological responses, and seizing the opportunities of low-carbon and climate-resilient growth.”
Signatories
- The Academy of Medical Sciences (UK)
- The Academy of Social Sciences (UK)
- The British Academy for the Humanities and Social Sciences
- The British Ecological Society
- The Geological Society (UK)
- The Challenger Society for Marine Sciences
- The Institution of Civil Engineers (UK)
- The Institution of Chemical Engineers
- The Institution of Environmental Sciences
- The Institute of Physics
- The Learned Society of Wales
- London Mathematical Society
- Royal Astronomical Society
- Royal Economic Society
- Royal Geographic Society
- Royal Meteorological Society
- Royal Society
- Royal Society of Biology
- Royal Society of Chemistry
- Royal Society of Edinburgh
- Society for General Microbiology
- Wellcome Trust
- Zoological Society of London
________________________________________________________
Facing critical decisions on climate change (Joint Statement of the European Academies Science Advisory Council and its 29 members, 2015)
Facing critical decisions on climate change in 2015
The science of climate change reported by the IPCC Fourth Assessment (2007) and Fifth Assessment (2014) have been thoroughly evaluated by numerous national academies (e.g. Royal Society/National Academy of Sciences, Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences) and by international bodies. Advances in science and technology have increased our knowledge of how to mitigate climate change, uncertainties in the scientific analysis continue to be addressed, co-benefits of mitigation to health have been revealed, and new business opportunities have been found. EASAC remains concerned, however, that progress in turning this substantial evidence base into an international policy response has so far failed to match the full magnitude and urgency of the problem…
Even if emissions of GHG stopped altogether, existing concentrations of GHG in the atmosphere would continue to exert a warming effect for a long time. Whatever measures are put in place to reduce the intensity of global human-induced climate forcing, building resilience through adaptation will be necessary to provide more resilience to the risks already emerging as a result of climate change…
Signatories/Members of the European Academies Science Advisory Council
- Academia Europaea
- All European Academies (ALLEA)
- The Austrian Academy of Sciences
- The Royal Academies for Science and the Arts of Belgium
- The Bulgarian Academy of Sciences
- The Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts
- The Czech Academy of Sciences
- The Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters
- The Estonian Academy of Sciences
- The Council of Finnish Academies
- The German Academy of Sciences Leopoldina
- The Academy of Athens
- The Hungarian Academy of Sciences
- The Royal Irish Academy
- The Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei
- The Latvian Academy of Sciences
- The Lithuanian Academy of Sciences
- The Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences
- The Norwegian Academy of Science and Letters
- The Polish Academy of Sciences
- The Academy of Sciences of Lisbon
- The Romanian Academy
- The Slovak Academy of Sciences
- The Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts
- The Spanish Royal Academy of Sciences
- The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
- The Swiss Academies of Arts and Sciences
- The Royal Society
- The Federation of European Academies of Medicine (FEAM) (Observer)
[This list is not a complete summary of the many individual or joint statements of national academies of sciences. Please send additions and corrections to pgleick@pacinst.org)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
22 National Science Academies Urge Government Action on Climate Change
Georgina Gustin _ MAR 13, 2018
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Global Warming: Is the Science Settled Enough for Policy?
Published on Sep 15, 2008
July 24, 2008 presentation by Stephen Schneider for the Stanford University Office of Science Outreach's Summer Science Lecture Series.
Professor Schneider discusses the local, regional, and international actions that are already beginning to address global warming and describe other actions that could be taken, if there were political will to substantially reduce the magnitude of the risks.
No comments:
Post a Comment