Climate Myths
brianlux
Posts: 42,038
Bringing up the subject of climate change always seems redundant to me. Someone could tell me I need to find something else to think about and I would have a hard time arguing with that... except... it really is a relevant subject and the situation is not going to go away.
There is a wealth of information on the internet, in scientific journals and in books about what science has learned about climate change and what is causing it. I've often wished for one source that encapsulates this information and serves to dispel the efforts of corporately sponsored organizations who go to great lengths to try to convince people climate change is either not real, not a problem, not caused by human activity (i.e. anthropogenic), or- in some odd cases- that it is good for us.
So I was very pleased to come across a new book that does just that; Climate Myths, The Campaign Against Climate Science by John J. Berger. Berger is not a politician. Berger is a graduate from Stanford, has a masters in energy and natural resources from UC Berkeley and a Ph.D. in ecology from UC Davis. He is well respected in his field, written several books, and served as a consultant on energy and natural resource issues to government, scientific, academic and non-profit organizations as well as the U.S. Congress and National Academy of Sciences.
If you sincerely care about the subject of climate change and are in doubt that human activity is the major cause of the present rapid changes in the world's climate, I highly recommend reading this book. If you are like me and would like a good, reliable resource that compiles straightforward information that dispels the efforts of corporate sponsored climate deniers, this book serves as an excellent resource.
There is a wealth of information on the internet, in scientific journals and in books about what science has learned about climate change and what is causing it. I've often wished for one source that encapsulates this information and serves to dispel the efforts of corporately sponsored organizations who go to great lengths to try to convince people climate change is either not real, not a problem, not caused by human activity (i.e. anthropogenic), or- in some odd cases- that it is good for us.
So I was very pleased to come across a new book that does just that; Climate Myths, The Campaign Against Climate Science by John J. Berger. Berger is not a politician. Berger is a graduate from Stanford, has a masters in energy and natural resources from UC Berkeley and a Ph.D. in ecology from UC Davis. He is well respected in his field, written several books, and served as a consultant on energy and natural resource issues to government, scientific, academic and non-profit organizations as well as the U.S. Congress and National Academy of Sciences.
If you sincerely care about the subject of climate change and are in doubt that human activity is the major cause of the present rapid changes in the world's climate, I highly recommend reading this book. If you are like me and would like a good, reliable resource that compiles straightforward information that dispels the efforts of corporate sponsored climate deniers, this book serves as an excellent resource.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
Variously credited to Mark Twain or Edward Abbey.
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
I might have to read that. I'm fascinated by the subject and I'd like to learn more about it. Actually, I NEED to learn more about it. However, just because he's no politician, doesn't necessarily mean he doesn't have an agenda. How do we know he's just out for truth and not pushing something?
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
I recommend you google his name and see who's been signing his checks and why. You have a healthy skepticism that should be satisfied.
That doesn't necessarily negate anything he says. But, it is fair to ask the question you are asking.
How do you know I'm not pushing an agenda and telling you what I have learned about climate science not because I care about it but because I like to start circular arguments? At some point, Hugh, we need to start trusting people who study these things. How many books, how many article, how much massive collected data do we need to provide before people will listen and understand? The evidence is overwhelming. It's all over the place and vast majority of publishes scientists agree with it.
Edson, see my response to Hugh above. If you don't like this guys credential, I can provide another scientists view, and another and another and another. The vast majority of published scientists agree with what this book says. How much information do I have to provide? The evidence is overwhelming... and I'm overwhelmed by the frustration of knowing what is coming down while we argue the fine points. The car is speeding toward the brick wall and we'll argue all the while until we hit and it's too late to even slow down.
Sorry for being so dramatic. :oops:
Brian, if you noticed, I specifically said it doesn't discount anything. I respect you, and even if I didn't I still try to read and listen to as many view points as possible. But, you'd have to agree knowing where a view point is coming from is critical to accepting it. Simple acceptance to me is not real. It's simply being yet another psychophant following the crowd (so to speak).
So, all I said was - google and answer your question (you'll notice I didn't say what in it he should look for. He should decide that for himself).
Always consider the source. But, that does not necessarily mean to negate it solely on that fact (well, unless it's MSNBC). Ignoring something BECAUSE of the source is a good way to become stupid. It's just one consideration of the facts.
Brian, I know you are passionate about this topic, so I need to let you know that I'm not trying to argue with you. I'm trying to learn about it, because I admittedly don't know that much on this topic. For the last several years I have just taken it as gospel that climate change as cause by humans is a fact. I'd like to learn more about it, to try to learn why we think it is caused by us. I mean, it recently hit me that all the data we have (that I know of) is based on the last 150 years, which in relative terms, is practically a millisecond in time if anything at all.
I'm sure the vast majority of scientists are correct. I'd just like to know what they've got. I'm a skeptic in all facets of life. I have a thirst for knowledge.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
I keed, I keed.
I'm waiting for the movie though.
This is a good point. I'm guilty of being overly skeptical at times about agendas, etc. But what you say is the truth. Otherwise you do nothing and learn nothing because there is always a reason to be skeptical.
there's nothing wrong with, and I'd actually encourage people to, vet the folks who study these things. I think that's one of the main keys of being informed.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
No I agree. But at some point you are going to have to read and trust somebody.
based on all the information gathered and making an informed conclusion, yes.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Hugh, it's true that specific climate data only goes back about 150 years but general climate trends have been measured into the millions of years using antarctic ice core samples that measure chemical changes over the eons. Scientist understand fairly clearly that the prior major climate changes in the past were caused by cataclysmic events such as the K-Pg extinction event which ended the Mesozoic Era caused by blocked sunlight due to a impact by massive meteor. This is evidenced by the 110 mile wide Chicxulub crater in Mexico.
We would be wise to react to the rapid rate at which climate is changing today the same way we would react to any cataclysmic event, the beginnings of which, indeed, are what we are living through right now.
This looks excellent. Thanks for the heads up. Look forward to seeing it!
THANK YOU. this is the information I was looking for.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Your welcome! Here's Berger's web site with more info on the book I mentioned:
http://www.johnjberger.com/John_J._Berg ... 12%29.html
and here's a site that has a ton of info on climate. Although some of it is rather technical, there are good articles for the layperson as well:
http://www.realclimate.org/
the greenhouse effect (suggest searching on it)
basically, heat comes from the sun - hit the earth and bounces back into space ... greenhouse gases such as co2 and methane act as blankets and trap the heat ... although water vapour is also a greenhouse gas and is the most abundant ... it's proportion has been relatively stable over time ... by increasing greenhouse gases into the atmosphere - we are artificially warming the planet ...
now - on that alone we have what is global warming ... what are the impacts of global warming?
climate change, rising sea levels, decreased sea ice to name a few
climate change
so, beyond the basic impacts associated with a warmer planet ... climate change refers to the overall impacts to weather patterns ... how does this work? ... basically weather is caused by a multitude of variables ... of which the most significant is temperature ... temperature variations creates changes in pressure ... changes in pressure create wind ... etc. so, it reasons that by artificially increasing the temperature - you are affecting weather ... hence the notion that we will have more extreme weather events while at the same time altering traditional weather patterns over the long haul
sea ice ... should hopefully be self explanatory as well as in conjunction to sea level rises ...
so ...you see, the historical temperatures or history of the earth is secondary ... the temperature charts show a significant correlation between greenhouse gases and temperature ... which essentially corroborates the basic scientific principle of the greenhouse effect ... something that doesn't require centuries of temperature data to prove ... you can do it as a science experiment anywhere ...
thank you polaris.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
So how much more greenhouse gas is in the atmosphere today as compared to on this date 300 years ago?
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Why do believe that is that relevant?
exactly ... still missing the point ... :(
OMG- you were able to interpret that statement!
(Note to self: Wake up before you post!)
Again, know1:
Why do you believe that is relevant?
It recently came to my attention that the book I referred to in the above post will be officially released by Northbrae Books in just under a month from now. For more information on John J. Berger and his excellent work go to:
http://www.johnjberger.com/John_J._Berg ... urces.html
http://grist.org/business-technology/tu ... newsletter
:P
that is probably true ...
edit: related to the article ... they opened up a tesla dealership inside the busiest mall here ... their initial estimates were that they were going to sell 50 cars a month ... they've sold 200 ... which is a huge number ...
In the end, it will all come down to the technology getting cheaper so it is more economical to buy an electric car. Spending $30K to get a car that would be $20K with a gas motor doesn't appeal to the masses. And that's the problem. The people that really need the savings when filling up can't afford the electric cars.
I believe that.