Watermelons: The Green Movement’s True Colors

http://www.amazon.com/Watermelons-Green-Movements-True-Colors/dp/0983347409/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1310202668&sr=8-1

I almost feel sorry for ordinary members and supporters of the Act party. Most of them base their support on a shared belief in laissez faire free market capitalism; a preference for a small, ‘non-interventionist’ state; and a form of social liberalism that gives primacy to the rights of the individual.

That’s not a worldview that I could ever sign up for, but nor is it one that gives cause for offence in an open democracy.

http://blog.greens.org.nz/2011/07/09/donald-brash-racism-and-political-advantage/

Climate science is actually one of the most fascinating areas of human knowledge to explore.

It encompasses geophysics, geochemistry, geology, statistics, computer modelling to name a few.If you care to take the post-modern view, it also encompasses human psychology and politics.

It”s hard to imagine how you could become “expert” in this subject. Bob Carter alluded to this in his keynote at the Heartland Conference (crank conference in Gareth-speak)

I feel very bitter when I get called a “denier” for expressing this passion and interest in the nature around us.

Land use changes,

Changes and variability in climates brought about by natural causes.

Walker has inadvertently given substance to the non-AGHGe factors by putting them in print – thanks Bryan, keep it up.

Which leaves AGHGe in the Australian (and Walker preferred) version. But recent “overwhelming scientific evidence” is pointing to a benign effect hence the (“partial and provocative” according to Hulme) attempt to reinstate alarm in pliable minds, “Climate change is real, we are causing it, and it is happening right now”.

I agree, with only a little qualification the Hulme version is more representative of the issue and certainly a more responsible appraisal.

Walker ends with resounding “alarm”:-

If it comes across as alarming, that’s because it is alarming, not because the scientists have chosen to present it as such.

Just how alarming is bluntly stated by Joe Romm in a post on Climate Progress [blah-de-blah]

“But if we keep listening to the deniers and delayers, if we fail to sharply reverse our current emissions path nationally and globally, then we are headed toward 5°C (9°F) planetary warming by century’s end and 850+ ppm — with sea level rise of 4 to 6 feet or higher, rising perhaps a foot a decade or more for centuries, the U.S. Southwest and one third of the Earth’s habited land a permanent Dust Bowl, half or more species extinct, and much of the ocean a hot, acidic dead zone…”

Very alarming indeed.

The overwhelming scientific evidence tells us that human greenhouse gas emissions, land use changes and aerosol pollution are all contributing to regional and global climate changes, which exacerbate the changes and variability in climates brought about by natural causes. Because humans are contributing to climate change, it is happening now and in the future for a much more complex set of reasons than in previous human history.”

I think he finds it too woolly and vague, and prefers the simplified version for the public, presented by the Australian scientists:

The overwhelming scientific evidence tells us that human greenhouse gas emissions are resulting in climate changes that cannot be explained by natural causes. Climate change is real, we are causing it, and it is happening right now.”

I have watched Mike Hulme do various presentations on video, and although he is a bit “post modern” for me, he does come across as one of the more reasonable guys in the pack.

I don’t have too much of an issue with his comments above (apart from the greenhouse gas bit – I don’t see much “overwhelming evidence there)

Clearly, though, this has offended Mr Walker. Really, Bryan needs to stop reading climate porn and actually look at the science.

(it just occurred to me that the term “climate porn” was actually coined by Mike Hulme)