Why Some People Ignore Scientist Freeman Dyson Who Says That Global Warming Is Exaggerated?

Question

"I have studied their climate models and know what they can do. The models solve the equations of fluid dynamics and do a very good job of describing the fluid motions of the atmosphere and the oceans. They do a very poor job of describing the clouds, the dust, the chemistry and the biology of fields, farms and forests. They do not begin to describe the real world that we live in."

"There's no doubt that parts of the world are getting warmer, but the warming is not global. The warming happens in places and times where it is cold, in the arctic more than the tropics, in the winter more than the summer, at night more than the daytime."

"I'm saying that the problems are being grossly exaggerated. They take away money and attention from other problems that are much more urgent and important. Poverty, infectious diseases, public education and public health. "

http://www.umich.edu/news/index.html?DysonWinCom05

♥plus futé q..., for starters, he's more eminent than all of those scientists, ha ha ha.

yes, coragryph, the government can't give funding to where one who asks for it.

where = every

Answer 1

you are correct

Answer 2

OK. Let's assume Dyson is correct and that he's not being misquoted or taken out of context in the original report.

Reducing our dependence on fossil fuels, finding clean renewable alternative energy sources, reducing emissions, lowering pollution -- how are those not good goals regardless of what conclusion you come to on global warming? And how do any of those take away from other efforts? Can we as a world only address one problem at a time?

And you notice he's not saying that climate changes aren't occurring. Just that the potential harmful effects of global warming are being exaggerated. Again, let's assume that's true.

So, if a problem only ends up costing millions of dollars of damage and hundreds of lives, rather than billions of dollars of damage and thousands of lives, does that mean we should have ignored it because it turned out to not be as bad as predicted? Or should we act to reduce even that much harm?

The steps necessary to address the problem are immensely valuable in their own right, do not interfere with other worthy goals, and will still be ultimately beneficial even if the predictions are wrong. Let alone if the predictions are right.

So, how does ignoring the problem help anyone again?

Answer 3

for more information, see bjorn lomborg

***coragryph
fossil fuels, alternative energy, and reducing pollution are all good things, its a straw man to say otherwise that someone thinks that those are bad things, but forcing companies to comply, over the assumed disaster? thats like forcing everyone in the world to buy $500 GPS units because they might get lost someday. these things dont take away, but should be added in as financially viable. let the free market decide.

again, only the ignorant say that global warming is occuring, the real problem comes from people who say that humans are definitely the total cause of it. assumeing the harmful effects are being exxagerated, it makes no sense to spend wealth on trying to prevent or curb something that is not happening so that we can use that money instead on other things. like my example above, why force people to buy expensive gps units when that money can be used to buy food and drinking water for the destitute?

your arguement of the cost of millions over billions doesnt even make sense. youre suggesting that if a major problem turns out to be a minor problem, then we should still throw the same amount of money at it? thats like destroying every dog in New York if there are three suspected cases of rabies in NYC. It is NOT worth spending wealth to reduce a minor problem, when that time, energy and thinking could be used to solve other global problems that are actually occuring, or we can actually do something about.

your next arguement that we should continue this fight even if its not true, because "it will be immensely valuable in [its] own right" is just as stupid. why dont we go recure polio, you know, just for practice. this isnt an arguement against climate research, just the sky is falling everyone will die in 10 years (al gore) kind of research.

["So, how does ignoring the problem help anyone again? "]
who says we should ignore it scarecrow? we should just be honest with ourselves about what is actually happening and not throw away wealth that could be used to solve other social wills at what could amount to nothing. i said could, so lets learn more, and not come out with research that says everything is a result of global warming, and be sure to make the press release, because i cant get more research money if its not a panic...

Answer 4

So, your sayign one 'eminent' scientist can stand against the hundreds put forward by the first poster?

Get real, we ignore him because every other scientist is saying the exact opposite

Answer 5

Economy and politics. If some of the polluting companies were shut down the economy would take a down spiral. Sad but true.

Answer 6

I see you've moved on from outright denial to minimization. Kind of like, "okay, maybe cigarettes do cause cancer, but not as often as everyone is saying."

Answer 7

Smiles wickedly... just popped in to see the goods..... hummmmmmm, SWEET!

Answer 8

How can anyone possibly ignore a question that is asked numerous times?

And why, do tell, should I believe one man over all of these scientists and their data?

^ Houghton, John T.; Y. Ding, D.J. Griggs, M. Noguer, P.J. van der Linden, X. Dai , K. Maskell , C.A. Johnson (2001). Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis. United Nations Environment Programme. Retrieved on 2006-09-28.
^ Gregory, Jonathan, Ronald J Stouffer, Sarah Raper, P. A. Stott, N. A. Rayner (2002-08-15). "An Observationally Based Estimate of the Climate Sensitivity" (PDF). Journal of Climate 15 (22): 3117-3121. Retrieved on 2006-09-27.
^ Hansen, James E.; R. Ruedy, M. Sato, and K. Lo (2005-12-15). GISS Surface Temperature Analysis Global Temperature Trends: 2005 Summation. NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies. Retrieved on 2006-09-28.
^ Baliunas, Sallie; Virginia Postrel, Steven Postrel (October, 1998). Stars in Her Eyes (Interview). Reason. Retrieved on 2006-09-27.
^ Klotzbach, Philip J.; William M. Gray (2005-12-06). Extended Range Forecast of Atlantic Seasonal Hurricane Activity and U.S. Landfill Strike Probability For 2006. Colorado State University. Retrieved on 2006-09-27.
Amstrup, Steven, Ian Stirling, Tom Smith, Craig Perham, and Gregory Thiemann (2006). "Recent observations of intraspecific predation and cannibalism among polar bears in the southern Beaufort Sea". DOI:10.1007/s00300-006-0142-5.
Association of British Insurers Financial Risks of Climate Change, June 2005, (PDF) Accessed 7 January 2006
Barnett, T. P., Adam, J. C., and Lettenmaier, D. P. (2005). "Potential impacts of a warming climate on water availability in snow-dominated regions". Nature 438: 303–309. [66]
Choi, O. and A. Fisher (2003) "The Impacts of Socioeconomic Development and Climate Change on Severe Weather Catastrophe Losses: Mid-Atlantic Region (MAR) and the U.S." Climate Change, vol. 58 pp. 149 [67]
Dyurgerov, Mark B; Mark F. Meier (2005). Glaciers and the Changing Earth System: a 2004 Snapshot. Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research, Occasional Paper #58. [68]
Emanuel, K.A. (2005) "Increasing destructiveness of tropical cyclones over the past 30 years." Nature 436, pp. 686–688. ftp://texmex.mit.edu/pub/emanuel/PAPERS/NATURE03906.pdf
Ealert Global warming - the blame is not with the plants
Hirsch, Tim. "Plants revealed as methane source", BBC, 11 January 2006.
James Hansen, Reto Ruedy, Larissa Nazarenko, Makiko Sato, Josh Willis, Anthony DelGenio, Dorothy Koch, Andrew Lacis, Ken Lo, Surabi Menon, Tica Novakov, Judith Perlwitz, Gary Russell, Gavin A. Schmidt, Nicholas Tausnev (2005). "Earth’s Energy Imbalance: Confirmation and Implications". Science. DOI:10.1126/science.1110252.
Hoyt, D.V., and K.H. Schatten (1993). "A discussion of plausible solar irradiance variations, 1700–1992". J. Geophys. Res. 98: 18895–18906. [69]
Lean, J.L., Y.M. Wang, and N.R. Sheeley (2002). "The effect of increasing solar activity on the Sun's total and open magnetic flux during multiple cycles: Implications for solar forcing of climate". Geophys. Res. Lett. 29 (24): 2224. DOI:10.1029/2002GL015880.(online version requires registration)
McLaughlin, Joseph B., Angelo DePaola, Cheryl A. Bopp, et al. (October 6, 2005). "Outbreak of Vibrio parahaemolyticus gastroenteritis associated with Alaskan oysters". New England Journal of Medicine 353 (14): 1463–1470. Retrieved on [[July 18, 2006]].(online version requires registration)
Raimund Muscheler, Fortunat Joos, Simon A. Müller and Ian Snowball (2005). "Climate: How unusual is today's solar activity?". Nature 436: E3-E4. DOI:10.1038/nature04045.
Oerlemans, J (2005). "Extracting a Climate Signal from 169 Glacier Records". Science 308 (5722): 675–677. DOI:10.1126/science.1107046.
Naomi Oreskes, 2004 Beyond the Ivory Tower: The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change - The author discussed her survey of 928 peer-reviewed scientific abstracts on climate change. Retrieved December 8, 2004. Also available as a 1 page pdf file
Revkin, Andrew C (2005). "Rise in Gases Unmatched by a History in Ancient Ice". New York Times. "Shafts of ancient ice pulled from Antarctica's frozen depths show that for at least 650,000 years three important heat-trapping greenhouse gases never reached recent atmospheric levels caused by human activities, scientists are reporting today." (November 25, 2005) [70]
Purse, Bethan V., Mellor, Philip S.; Rogers, David J.; Samuel, Alan R.; Mertens, Peter P. C.; and Baylis, Matthew (February 2005). "Climate change and the recent emergence of bluetongue in Europe". Nature Reviews Microbiology 3 (2): 171–181. DOI:10.1038/nrmicro1090. Retrieved on 2006-07-26.
Ruddiman, William F. (2001). Earth's Climate Past and Future. New York: Princeton University Press.
RealClimate Scientists Baffled
Ruddiman, William F. (2005). Plows, Plagues, and Petroleum: How Humans Took Control of Climate. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. ISBN 0-691-12164-8.
Smith, T.M. and R.W. Reynolds, 2005: A global merged land and sea surface temperature reconstruction based on historical observations (1880–1997). J. Climate, 18, 2021–2036.
UNEP summary (2002) Climate risk to global economy, Climate Change and the Financial Services Industry, United Nations Environment Programme Finance Initiatives Executive Briefing Paper (UNEP FI) (PDF) Accessed 7 January 2006
Shaviv and Veizer (2004). "Forum: Comment". Eos 85 (48): 510–511. [71]
S.K. Solanki, I.G. Usoskin, B. Kromer, M. Schussler, J. Beer (2004). "Unusual activity of the Sun during recent decades compared to the previous 11,000 years.". Nature 431: 1084–1087. DOI:10.1038/nature02995.
S. K. Solanki, I. G. Usoskin, B. Kromer, M. Schüssler and J. Beer (2005). "Climate: How unusual is today's solar activity? (Reply)". Nature 436: E4-E5. DOI:10.1038/nature04046.
Wang, Y.M., J.L. Lean, and N.R. Sheeley (2005). "Modeling the sun's magnetic field and irradiance since 1713". Astrophysical Journal 625: 522–538. [72]
Wired Careful Where You Put That Tree
Kennett J. P., Cannariato K. G., Hendy I. L. & Behl R. J.American Geophysical Union, Special Publication, Methane Hydrates in Quaternary Climate Change: The Clathrate Gun Hypothesis. 54, (2003).
Sowers T. (2006). "Late Quaternary Atmospheric CH4 Isotope Record Suggests Marine Clathrates Are Stable". Science 311 (5762): 838–840. DOI:10.1126/science.1121235.
Hinrichs K.U., Hmelo L. & Sylva S. (2003). "Molecular Fossil Record of Elevated Methane Levels in Late Pleistocene Coastal Waters". Science 299 (5610): 1214–1217. DOI:10.1126/science.1079601.
Questions about Clathrate Gun Hypothesis (source of information)