Over the years, Andrew Revkin has perceptively identified “slow drip” environmental stories as a category unto itself. These range from the tragic to the banal. It’s bad enough that these “slow drip” stories receive little sustained coverage; it’s worse when you write about them and nobody seems to notice. John Fleck, the superb science writer…Continue Reading…
Let’s see, there’s the latest Monckton buffoonery, which everybody is rolling around in at Lucia’s. There’s all the “rubbish” piling up in the blogyard of my favorite climate curmudgeon. RPJ is calling out Lomborg–again. Planet Gore, delightfully linking (yet again) to a picture of that famous Google Earth shot of Thomas Friedman’s house, wonders And…Continue Reading…
An extraordinary op-ed by four climate scientists, headlined “The Science Behind Climate Science,” asserts: The urgent need to act cannot be overstated. Climate change caused by humans is already affecting our lives and livelihoods “” with extreme storms, unusual floods and droughts, intense heat waves, rising seas and many changes in biological systems “” as climate scientists…Continue Reading…
The Economist, in a rather one-sided article, is dubious about the increasingly touted link between climate change and human conflict. It’s true that the “climate wars” narrative is starting to take on a life of its own. I’ve even used the term as a headline in a post. But it’s also obvious (from the comment…Continue Reading…
The previous thread on climate skeptics is a marvel in many ways, but I find myself looking for a segue into more productive territory. Fortunately, one commenter has laid out a path: It would be nice if all sides of this discussion would recognize that there are rational reasons for skepticism as well as for…Continue Reading…
That’s the clever tagline to an excellent cover story on climate skeptics in the new issue of Skeptic magazine. Alas, the actual article, which aims to distinguish between “Climate Skeptics” and “Climate Deniers,” is available only on newstands or by subscription. But because I’ve been trying to puzzle out the distinction myself of late, I’m…Continue Reading…
In the public sphere, where the various running debates on climate science and climate policy are most fiercely fought, the uncertainty factor is often downplayed or glossed over. Subsequently, it gets little attention in the media. And that’s a shame, because in the decision-making sphere, the uncertainty factor is very much on the minds of…Continue Reading…
With the climate change debate becoming increasingly hard-nosed and polarized, perhaps it’s time the main players in climate science reconsidered their tactics. Right now, force meets force. This has largely deteriorated into a never-ending rhetorical battle of insults between climate scientists and skeptics. (Climate activists, taking their cue from the hostile landscape, are more transparent,…Continue Reading…
Guess who’s asking the hard questions on climate science and policy. The U.S. military and geopolitical/security specialists. Earlier this week, an array of of defense, national security and climate experts took part in a conference hosted by the Scripps Oceanography Center for Environment and National Security. This was the symposium agenda and here’s the opener…Continue Reading…
Does climate science have a confirmation bias problem? Or is it the bias of climate skeptics that is the problem? I suppose how you answer that might reflect your own bias. And so, in light of recent posts that explored issues of trust and polarization, maybe it’s a good time for us to examine the…Continue Reading…