I will be rolling out version 3.0 of my presentation on climate that has already been around the Internet and back a couple of times. Called “Don’t Panic: The Science of the Climate Skeptic Position”, it will be given at 7PM in the Pruyne Lecture Hall at Amherst College on March 7, 2013. Come by if you are in the area.
- What does it mean when people say “97% of scientists agree with global warming?” This statement turns out to be substantially less powerful when one understands the propositions actually tested.
- The greenhouse gas effect of CO2 is a fact (did I surprise you?) but it is a second, unproven theory of strong positive feedbacks in the climate that causes the hypothesized catastrophe.
- The world has indeed warmed over the last century, but not enough to be consistent with catastrophic forecasts, and not all due to CO2
- While good science is being done, the science behind knock-on effects of global warming (e.g. global warming causedSandy) is often non-existent or embarrassingly bad. Too often, the media is extrapolating from single data points
- The “precautionary principle” ignores real negative effects of carbon rationing, particularly in lesser developed countries.
The tone of the global warming debate is often terrible (on both sides). The speaker will assume those who disagree are persons of goodwill. The speaker will not resort to ad hominem attacks or discussion of funding sources and motivations.