CLIMATE CHANGE: How much doubt is there?

After writing about climate change skeptics I have realized that most people don’t pay a lot of attention to the details of the issue. Sadly, this is why the few skeptics can manipulate public opinion so easily. Someone once said of the advertising industry that if you state something often enough it will become the truth. The fact is that a vast majority of qualified scientists, the science academies of all developing countries and the public pronouncements of governments, are all on the same page in raising alarm bells over climate. Sadly, a few industry funded individual are able to create the opinion that the science of climate change is false.

Hard evidence of climate instability is solid, as published in the 2007 report of the Nobel winning IPCC. Since the writing of the report the news has become even more alarming, and this last winter was by far the warmest and driest since records began. Arctic ice is melting faster than previously seen, the world’s glaciers are receding still and ocean acidification proceeds apace. A 2005 global survey of 442 glaciers from the World Glacier Monitoring Service found that only 26 were advancing, 18 were stationary, and 398 were retreating. Overall, about 90 percent of the world's glaciers that scientists have measured are shrinking as the planet warms.

It is true, as loudly trumpeted by the skeptics, that there was a major error in the aforementioned IPCC report regarding the rate of melting of the Himalayan glaciers. It was stated that they could very likely disappear by 2035. The error was picked up by another scientist – that is how science works and has done for centuries. There are no better skeptics than in the scientific community who never accept anything without scrutinizing and testing the data meticulously. The Himalayan glaciers are indeed receding, just not as quickly as the report specified. It seems that the original item was taken from a statement given by the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) with little or no cross checking, and then found its way into the report. The astonishing thing should be that so few errors were actually found in a document that size.

The other big problem for climate action resulted from something that has since been labeled “Climategate” - so named since every conspiracy theory since Watergate has become a something-gate.

One of the most prestigious climate change investigation centers in the world, called the Hadley Center in Essex, England, was a victim of computer hacking. Someone stole about 1,300 e-mails, dating back about 10 years, and found a small handful that could be construed as conspiratorial. In one the writer said he would do his damndest to see that someone else’s work was not published. In another a scientist said he has replicated a “trick” to validate the well known hockey stick graph of global temperature. Scientist often use such euphemisms as this between themselves.

The end result has been the establishment of an independent investigation of the scientists involved. It will most likely vindicate them with a slap on the wrist and make the science of climate change even more convincing than previously. To say that the science has received a mortal blow is absurd, given the amount of data gathered already and accumulating by the day.

Regarding the public acceptance of climate change: A 2009 George Mason University survey divided the USA (probably similar to Canada) into “six Americas”.

• 18% are fully convinced and already taking action (the Alarmed)
• 33% are convinced but have made few changes yet to their lives (the Concerned)
• 19% consider it a likely problem (the Cautious)
• 12% are apathetic (the Disengaged)
• 11% are unsure (the Doubtful)
• 7% are certain climate change is a hoax (the Dismissive)

The major problem for the science is that those 7% are very vocal, well funded and determined.  The world renowned columnist George Monbiot has called the “the unpersuadables” since it appears that absolutely nothing will convince them to change their opinions. We will all come to regret their success in doing one damaging thing – postponing real progress on moving into a Green Economy.

As the world economy continues to splutter and is only kept afloat due to the massive subsidies from governments it should be apparent that the only way forward is to create a new economic foundation. This economic system must be based on some old values like thrift, minimal waste and greater individual responsibility for communal problems. A society based on the self aggrandizement of the individual (greed, over consumption and sedentary people) could never become sustainable or even healthy. It is helpful to reflect on this handy definition of insanity: doing the same things and assuming a different outcome. The modern term is “thinking outside the box”, but that is frequently misinterpreted, especially if it entails discomfort or insecurity.

Help NAIT and the City of Edmonton by joining this Saturday with the 4th annual EARTH HOUR at www.earthhour.org , both are sponsors for this event. Organizers are hoping for a billion participants around the world this year. Starting at the international dateline and rippling around the world on the 27th March at the local time of 8.30 - 9.30 pm, it will continue to raise public awareness of the issues. Do your sanity a favour, take a break from the tread mill for an hour and preserve a whole slew of energy at the same time.