August 15, 2008

SLAPPIN' TICKELL:

Warming warnings get overheated: Alarmist predictions of climate change like Oliver Tickell's are not just bad science – they stop us thinking rationally about solutions (Björn Lomborg, 8/15/08, guardian.co.uk)

Much of the global warming debate is perhaps best described as a constant outbidding by frantic campaigners, producing a barrage of ever-more scary scenarios in an attempt to get the public to accept their civilisation-changing proposals. Unfortunately, the general public – while concerned about the environment – is distinctly unwilling to support questionable solutions with costs running into tens of trillions of pounds. Predictably, this makes the campaigners reach for even more outlandish scares.

These alarmist predictions are becoming quite bizarre, and could be dismissed as sociological oddities, if it weren't for the fact that they get such big play in the media. Oliver Tickell, for instance, writes that a global warming causing a 4C temperature increase by the end of the century would be a "catastrophe" and the beginning of the "extinction" of the human race. This is simply silly.

His evidence? That 4C would mean that all the ice on the planet would melt, bringing the long-term sea level rise to 70-80m, flooding everything we hold dear, seeing billions of people die. Clearly, Tickell has maxed out the campaigners' scare potential (because there is no more ice to melt, this is the scariest he could ever conjure). But he is wrong. Let us just remember that the UN climate panel, the IPCC, expects a temperature rise by the end of the century between 1.8 and 6.0C. Within this range, the IPCC predicts that, by the end of the century, sea levels will rise 18-59 centimetres – Tickell is simply exaggerating by a factor of up to 400.


It's a comfortable 67 degrees here today, perfect weather for the parent/kid soccer match, which we lost on a penalty kick. Stupid game....

Posted by Orrin Judd at August 15, 2008 2:26 PM
blog comments powered by Disqus
« COMMENTING | Main | SEEMS LIKE A LOT OF TROUBLE FOR A CLUMP OF CELLS, EH?: »