Several years ago, the BBC aired an excellent program called, “Science Under Attack.” It was hosted by UK Royal Society President Paul Nurse, who examined why public trust in key scientific theories has been eroded – from the theory that man-made climate change is warming our planet, to the safety of GM food, or that HIV…Continue Reading…
In case you hadn’t heard, the state of the planet is not good. At a big gathering earlier in the year, an assortment of esteemed, professional worriers reaffirmed this diagnosis and warned: Without urgent action, we could face threats to water, food, biodiversity and other critical resources. I don’t take these concerns lightly. Global changes…Continue Reading…
Are we at a crossroads in the climate debate? Will the renewed attention being paid to global warming in the wake of Hurricane Sandy be a lasting “teachable moment,” or more of a Groundhog Day-like moment? What do I mean? Let’s recall the wave of media (and science) coverage that followed Hurricane Katrina in 2005. It served as…Continue Reading…
The debate over climate change is well known for excesses on all sides. Those who claim that the issue is a hoax actually have a lot in common with those who see climate change in every weather extreme. The logic behind such tactics is apparently that a sufficiently scared public will support the political program…Continue Reading…
A blogger at Daily Kos rewinds back to the 1988 vice presidential debate and discovers that a question about global warming was posed to Dan Quayle about the the “Greenhouse Effect”: I guess that’s what they called it back then, before Global Warming and Climate Change became popular…There was no, do you think it is…Continue Reading…
Two bits of climate news caught my attention today. One comes from Grist’s David Roberts, who says: Yikes: Avoiding dangerous climate change is still possible, but just barely. Whew. Good to hear us humans are still mathematically in the race to avert climate doom. But then I saw this article from ClimateWire, reporting: India is poised to…Continue Reading…
A continuing concern of climate science is the subject of a new paper in Nature: Thawing of Arctic permafrost could release significant amounts of carbon into the atmosphere in this century. When this issue last gurgled up to the media’s attention in late 2011 in sensationalist fashion, science journalism watcher Charlie Petit wrote that Andy Revkin provided…Continue Reading…
To frack or not to frack seems like a good question to ask in the context of the climate debate. To ignore it or dismiss it out of hand won’t make it go away. And now that Michael Bloomberg and a leading environmental organization are teaming up to make fracking environmentally friendly, you can bet…Continue Reading…
Nearly a year ago, I wrote that the “new normal” for climate communication and much reportage and analysis implies a connectivity between global warming and weather-related catastrophes. Well, that was then. Courtesy of James Hansen, we’ve entered new terrain in the climate debate. What that looks like at the moment is the subject of a post by me that just went up at Discover.
In a 2006 NYT op-ed, environment writer Gregg Easterbrook pronounced: based on the data I’m now switching sides regarding global warming, from skeptic to convert. In 2011, in an essay titled, “Confessions of a Climate Change Convert,” conservative blogger D. R. Tucker said: I was defeated by facts. While others have made similar conversions over the last…Continue Reading…