Notable & Quotable October 25, 2007; Page A23 John Christy of the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (co-recipient of this year's Nobel Peace Prize) responds to questions by CNN anchor Miles O'Brien: O'BRIEN: I assume you're not happy about sharing this award with Al Gore. You going to renounce it in some way? CHRISTY: Well, as a scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, I always thought that -- I may sound like the Grinch who stole Christmas here -- that prizes were given for performance, and not for promotional activities. And, when I look at the world, I see that the carbon dioxide rate is increasing, and energy demand, of course, is increasing. And that's because, without energy, life is brutal and short. So, I don't see very much effect in trying to scare people into not using energy, when it is the very basis of how we can live in our society. O'BRIEN: So, what about the movie ["An Inconvenient Truth"]; do you take issue with, then, Dr. Christy? CHRISTY: Well, there's any number of things. I suppose, fundamentally, it's the fact that someone is speaking about a science that I have been very heavily involved with and have labored so hard in, and been humiliated by, in the sense that the climate is so difficult to understand, Mother Nature is so complex, and so the uncertainties are great, and then to hear someone speak with such certainty and such confidence about what the climate is going to do is -- well, I suppose I could be kind and say, it's annoying to me. O'BRIEN: But you just got through saying that the carbon dioxide levels are up. Temperatures are going up. There is a certain degree of certainty that goes along with that, right? CHRISTY: Well, the carbon dioxide is going up. And remember that carbon dioxide is plant food in the fundamental sense. All of life depends on the fact carbon dioxide is in the atmosphere. So, we're fortunate it's not a toxic gas. But, on the other hand, what is the climate doing. And when we build -- and I'm one of the few people in the world that actually builds these climate data sets -- we don't see the catastrophic changes that are being promoted all over the place. For example, I suppose CNN did not announce two weeks ago when the Antarctic sea ice extent reached its all-time maximum, even though, in the Arctic in the North Pole, it reached its all-time minimum. URL for this article: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119327669836770826.html
Hmmm ... I guess you have to subscribe either on-line ($79) or to both print and online ($99) to access the full article. It looks like Christy is concerned about the alarmism and over-simplification of the issues of climate change. I suspect many a scientist shares that view, even though they are probably glad to see the exposure to the issue. The fear is always that government will do something stupid that looks like it will help, when it won't help.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Oct 29 2007, 10:29 PM) [snapback]532319[/snapback]</div> The scientific (climatology and biology fields) community is not over-simplifying the issue. Read enough journals and that becomes very evident and that is also why you do not see quite the frantic behavior you do with non-scientists or the media. Even the folks at RealClimate are rather tame compared to the Gore-type torch bearers. Sir James Lovelock is one scientist who definately raises his voice in an effort to bring global warming to the forefront of policy manking. His lastest book "The Revenge of GAIA" was rather scary. I do respect him though.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(F8L @ Oct 29 2007, 10:54 PM) [snapback]532283[/snapback]</div> F8L, The point of the posting was to point out: 1. His surprise in that the Nobel Prize was given to Al Gore for "promotional activities' and not performance as it normally is. 2. With his computer climate data sets that he builds, he doesn't see the catastrophic changes in the world's climate that are being promoted all over the place. Being a Nobel Prize winner, I would say his opinion does carry a little weight. 3. And finally, the media bias in that they only report negative news i.e., CNN's lack of reporting two weeks ago that Antarctica's sea ice extent reached it's all-time maximum. Was that news seen in any headlines anywhere?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Sliderule @ Oct 30 2007, 11:47 AM) [snapback]532471[/snapback]</div> The media (especially television) is not interested in objective reporting. They are only concerned about what will get ratings. That is why when you watch weather reports at local stations in the winter you will hear them scream that the wind chill temp (or "feels like temp") is 20 below, then very quietly say the actual temp is 10 above. 20 belows sounds worse than 10 above, so that is what makes their headlines. It is the same no matter what the subject is.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Sliderule @ Oct 30 2007, 12:47 PM) [snapback]532471[/snapback]</div> 1. the Nobel Peace Prize continue to lose its significance - this is just another dent in its being. That is what happens when you have five guys stuck in the baltic region for too long - they lose focus on person and place and time - they had so many people to choose from - the least of which was the Monks in Burma - and they chose al gore - and why - for promotional capabilities - i guess they did not have a chance to recognize him for inventing the internet... I am emailing a list of candidates for next years prize: 1. President Armadjihad of Iran 2. President Putin of Russia - especially if the # of journalists and opponents KIA increases 3. Castro 4. Mugabe - did he win that one already?? 5. Kim is Ill of NoKo - 6. President Assad - would be a better shot if Israel did not destroy his nuclear program 7. The Flat Earth Society
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Sliderule @ Oct 30 2007, 09:47 AM) [snapback]532471[/snapback]</div> Good deal. Just didn't understand you point. Add a little dialog in with the post next time so we know how to approach the subject. #1 I am also suprised and I am not sure I agree with the decision. #2 There are a number of other people who create and work on similar models who do see "catestrophic" effects. #3 I really despise our media so no arguements from this corner.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(F8L @ Oct 29 2007, 10:39 PM) [snapback]532321[/snapback]</div> Damn F8L - how do you ever find so much time to read all of these books?! I'm lucky if I get a chance to skim a journal abstract here and there!
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TimBikes @ Oct 30 2007, 11:21 PM) [snapback]532792[/snapback]</div> I buy a lot of em on CD so I can listen to them during my 1.15hr commute to work 2 days a week and I usually have easy classes or I read a ton during the summer. This semester is tough and I have not cracked open a non-text book. lol So right now I have "The Art of Happiness" ~ The Dali Lama and the "tao te ching" playing when I'm not rocking out to latin pop hits. :lol:
