"Jim Hansen, a climate change expert at the Goddard Institute for Space Studies, takes issue with NASA administrator Michael Griffin's views on global warming during an interview with Madeleine Brand. Griffin told NPR's Morning Edition that he isn't sure global warming is a problem we must tackle, a view Hansen says is "remarkably uninformed."
Shouldn't a NASA administrator be reasonably informed? I mean, essentially everyone who accepts the reality of global warming knows that it's a problem we have to tackle. How did this guy become a NASA administrator, anyway? Does anyone know who appointed him?
2007-06-01 05:43:17 · 10 answers · asked by Dana1981 7 in Environment ➔ Global Warming
Sources:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=10577221
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=10571499
2007-06-01 05:43:55 · update #1
Aha so he is a Bush Appointee. I suspected as much. Thanks for that information, ii and Thomas.
Certainly he's entitled to his opinion, but frankly it's a stupid one.
2007-06-01 05:58:00 · update #2
From what I've read about Dr. Griffin on Wikipedia, it looks like he believes that global warming exists, but just doesn't see it as a problem. Dr. Griffin was a Bush appointee on 2005, and his global warming views sound roughly consistent with that of the administration.
If you take a look at Dr. Griffin's experience and education, it looks like climate has never been a focus of his studies or work. Most of his experience comes from physics, math, and engineering rather than atmospheric science. He appears to be an intelligent man, but "remarkably uninformed" might be an excellent way to describe his take on climate issues.
2007-06-01 05:53:19 · answer #1 · answered by RMJ 2 · 3⤊ 0⤋
The NASA administrator wasn't uninformed. He correctly didn't think that NASA is the appropriate body to address the issue and he wasn't sure that, given millenia of global climate change unrelated to humans -- both heating and cooling -- that we even know what to do or how to do it.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=10571499
I have concerns about global warming, but am not really sure how much to attribute to human activity. So, I just do my part to try to reduce my human imprint on the planet because that makes sense to me. If global warming is the result of our overuse of fossil fuels, then I have been doing the right thing harping about the need to conserve energy so that future generations would have resources available to them. Humans are pretty wasteful.
2007-06-01 05:57:23 · answer #2 · answered by BAL 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I'm not sure that he's misinformed. He might only be an administrator and not a scientist but I imagine he's pretty keyed up on the subject.
He was after all only expressing an opinion which everyone should be able to do whatever their beliefs about global warming.
Griffin doesn't dispute anthropogenic global warming, in fact he says there is 'no doubt' it is happening. His opinion is that whilst it is very real, it's not something we should be concerning ourselves with. Makes you wonder if he has any kids.
2007-06-01 05:52:40 · answer #3 · answered by Trevor 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
"He has been an adjunct professor at the University of Maryland, Johns Hopkins University, and George Washington University, where he taught courses in spacecraft design, applied mathematics, guidance and navigation, compressible flow, computational fluid dynamics, spacecraft attitude control, astrodynamics and introductory aerospace engineering. He is the lead author of more than two dozen technical papers, as well as the textbook, 'Space Vehicle Design.'"
He's certainly not just a political appointee, being an expert in spacecraft design.
Of course, that makes him lamentably badly qualified to comment on planetary physics and climatology. There's no sign in his official bio that he has ever studied the subject in any depth, although his first degree was in physics, so he should at least know about the laws of thermodynamics.
2007-06-01 08:09:34 · answer #4 · answered by co2_emissions 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
In Europe, a heat wave in 2003 killed 35,000 people.
Changed weather patterns leads to droughts and floodings. Storms will be more frequent and severe. I certainly think that this is worth combating. I do not blame Mr. Griffin for having an opposing view but the fact that he aired that view, which is opposite of the view of NASA, while officially representing NASA in an interview strikes me as politically motivated.
2007-06-01 06:58:01 · answer #5 · answered by Anders 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
"Remarkably uninformed"? On what, Jim Hansen's opinions? Oh, I'm sorry, the Gospel according to Jim...
I think Michael Griffin should get with the program. Let's spend trillions of dollars chasing the solution to a problem that no one knows how to solve because it hasn't been properly defined to begin with...overconsumption of resources dumped into this folly won't negatively impact the environment, won't lead to starvation or poverty, won't create political tensions leading to global war due to the oppression of emerging Asian economies.
In this fable, WE are the emperor, and Hansen and his ilk are the tailors weaving us all the most beautiful set of new clothes. Can't you see how beautiful these clothes are? You can't? How "remarkably uninformed" you must be!
Ecofascists fall into lock-step by voting thumbs down!
2007-06-01 07:18:02 · answer #6 · answered by 3DM 5 · 0⤊ 3⤋
The best thing about the story is that people at NASA are blaming NPR for asking the question. It is the typical tactic of someone who screwed up to try to shift the blame.
2007-06-01 05:52:16 · answer #7 · answered by Your Best Fiend 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
He is not uninformed. He just has a different opinion. People always use a few types of insults for anyone they violently disagree with; stupid, dirty or cowardly. The terrorists are called cowards even though they willingly sacrifice their lives to complete their missions. Griffin is called "uninformed" which is a polite way of calling him stupid.
2007-06-01 06:21:01 · answer #8 · answered by campbelp2002 7 · 0⤊ 3⤋
You are remarkably uninformed... in that you think that someone disagreeing with your favored viewpoint has to be wrong.
Hanson is also remarkably uninformed in the same way.
There's a possibility that the net effect of global warming could be POSITIVE for mankind...
We just get inundated with the negative hype.
2007-06-01 05:54:36 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
umm Bush could have nominated Mickey Mouse for that position.
Just because he is an administrator nominated by Bush, that doesn't mean he is qualified to make scientific decisions outside his expertise.
http://www.nasa.gov/about/highlights/griffin_bio.html
2007-06-01 05:51:28 · answer #10 · answered by jj 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋