Climate Policy

[kandrathe]

Al Gore no doubt exaggerates, although he is not wrong to point out that non-AGW theories sit at the margins and not in the mainstream of climate science, nor that many of AGW's high-profile opponents are on industry payrolls, although not all.

Your statement here is what is wrong with the debate. Your assumption is that AGW science is out of the mainstream, yet that very assumption is unscientific in nature. Science is science and if done correctly proves or disproves a hypothesis. My background is computing, and I'm just saying that computers are very good at churning out unreal information. In my opinion, as someone who has built models, I see no feasible way to model the solar system, and Earth, with the atmosphere, with the clouds, with the GHG's, with the ocean, with evaporation, with the soil and vegetation and expect to have any level of realism or accuracy. Dyson is right in my opinion, that we need to go out and start measuring a heck of a lot more data.

Dyson has a skeptical mind, and that's fine. But while his doubts may slightly qualify existing science, they certainly don't overturn the basic picture: the planet is warming, it is very likely CO2 doing the lion's share of it, and it is very likely our emissions that are behind it. We continue at our peril.

Perspective. Dr. Hansen is calling for the immediate shut down of all coal fired plants (50% of the electric generation in the US), and criminal charges against oil company executives. In fact, Dr. Hansen's radical opinions are resulting in his alienation from all but the extreme fringe of activists. Dr. Dyson is calling for more science and less modeling, becoming better stewards of our land, and if necessary, using our expertise in bioengineering to develop plants that absorb more CO2. Who seems more kooky?