The broad theory of man-made global warming is acceptable in the purely
qualitative sense. If humans continue to fill the atmosphere with carbon
dioxide, there can be little doubt that the average temperature of the world
will increase above what it would have been otherwise. The argument about the
science is, and always has been, whether the increase would be big enough to be
noticed among all the other natural variations of climate. The economic and
social argument is whether the increase, even if it were noticeable, would
change the overall welfare of mankind for the worse.
Attempts to resolve the arguments are plagued with problems, a lot of which are
inherently insoluble. There are many aspects of the behaviour of the natural
climate system and of human society that are unpredictable in principle, let
alone in practice. But perhaps the biggest of the underlying problems, and it is
common to both arguments since it inevitably exists when there is large
unpredictability and uncertainty, is the presence of strong forces encouraging
public overstatement and a belief in worst-case scenarios.
Read more at the Australian Financial Review
Saturday, June 23, 2012
Science held hostage in climate debate
Labels:
Agenda 21,
AGW,
climate science,
Global Warming
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 comments:
Post a Comment