Anthonares

As mentioned in previous entries here on Anthonares.net, 2005 has been a banner year for climate science. How unfortunate for Tom Bethell that his first chapter entitled “Global Warming” should come to the forefront now. For, as he mentioned, just as politicians had been able to start a “real” debate about the science behind global warming, the science stood up and invalidated nearly every claim the opposition has. But, it is not with an attitude of self-righteousness that I wish to approach this first chapter review. Because within Bethell’s unfortunately timed criticisms of Global Warming science lies a real problem that science must face if it is to improve its image with the public and media–transparency. Despite this important criticism, Bethell’s utterly non-transparent attempt to smear climate science and mislead the reader are the main themes of this first Chapter.

Summary of Bethell’s Main Points in Chapter 1: “Global Warming”
Bethell begins the chapter with a critique of global warming science based on its relative youth in the public arena. He notes that as recently as 1975, there were widespread predictions of global cooling that would result from all of the smog and soot in the air due to human activities. He then continues with a series of points that I will group as follows: 1) the temperature increases we’ve seen are not out of the ordinary, as supported by tree-ring evidence, 2) the temperature increases since 1970 are due to the urban “heat island effect”, 3) the temperature increases we are likely to see will be beneficial, 4) climate change scenarios are highly uncertain as they rely on “models”, 5) “Almost everyone knew that America was the principal target of the [Kyoto] treaty” and that “economic depression would be the one sure result”, 6) Tree ring temperatures have a wide range of variability and show many periods in the past 1000 years warmer than today, 7) Mann’s “hockey stick” graphs showing increasing temperature nearly exponentially were made with an uncertain methodology and were challenged by other scientists, Using Michael’s Crichton’s words in State of Fear as a jumping off point he makes a detailed claim of a scientific cabal against critics of human-induced global warming using a variety of anecdotes. He then closes the chapter with the general conclusion that climate change science was “never very good to begin with.”

General Review
Bethell continues the same general style I mentioned in the previous review of the Introduction. He frequently makes statements with no citations of sources. In fact, in this chapter he provides only 7 nearly useless citations despite citing the results of dozens of separate findings and reports. He editorializes between quotations, within factual statements, and in parentheses throughout. He makes claims that seem related but would lead to non-logical conclusions if not read carefully. Most crucially, he leaves out an enormous list of evidence compiled by thousands of researchers over nearly five decades, attacking a few pet-ideas and attempting to tar the rest of climate science with the brush of money-grubbing corrupt scientists. Less importantly, but worthy of note, he does not include any of the evidence for global warming in his chapter, not even showing the famous “hockey stick” plot of temperature increases over the last 1000 years. He does, however, find it suitable to include a quote from Ted (Unabomber) Kazynski’s Manifesto.

He makes one very good point that, though he does not really prove it, should be heeded by every scientist going forward. There seems to be a general feeling within global warming science that even if the evidence doesn’t currently support human-induced climate change as strongly as would be desired, that what is there should be stretched as far as possible in support of the theory. This is a practice that must stop. Transparency has to be introduced into the selection and rejection of papers on highly controversial subjects. Otherwise, this will continue to be a problem in this arena as well as other such as Intelligent Design.

My Response
Here is a list of items (and a few links) I could think of readily that either Bethell fails to mention or have been soundly refuted:

• Glaciers and Ice Caps are melting nearly everywhere at increased rates
• Coral reefs that have survived for thousands of years are being bleached due to hot oceans
• Snows are melting earlier resulting in peak streamflows weeks earlier than seen before
• Biota are migrating earlier, shifting their natural ranges, hatching and spawning and fawning earlier
• Across the globe, permafrost is melting
• Sea levels are rising
• Hurricanes in the Atlantic are growing more powerful
• Sea surface temperatures are increasing
• Atmospheric temperatures, previously thought to be declining, are increasing
• The last years have been the hottest on record, resulting in droughts, fires, and heat-waves
• Once-tropical diseases are migrating further northward as their carrier insects find warmer temperatures
• Global CO2 levels are higher now than they have been in the last 650,000 years, and their increases are not part of the natural cycling seen over that period
• Mann’s hockey stick still stands, as suggestive as ever

The climate science that is being conducted worldwide is some of the best work that people anywhere are capable of doing. The systems they work within are messy and difficult to measure; Nature has her own designs, after all. The conclusions that have been drawn may in some cases have overextended their support. However, there is little to no evidence against human-induced cliamte change. Again, like the Intelligent Design issue, opponents argue based on the uncertainties and remaining ignorances within the science, instead of offering up proof to the contrary. Those researchers who have not found willing publishers for their works have cried out loudly against such mistreatment but not published a single piece of compelling evidence that refutes human-induced global warming.

This warming that now appears utterly inevitable will, at first, prove beneficial to some, but as sea levels rise and the true scale of the pending ecological destruction becomes clear, everyone still around to witness it will cry out against the terrible price we, today, will have forced them to pay. Just as we mourn the loss of the American Bison herds, the endless American Chestnut forests, the great pine forests of the Upper Midwest, or the protective bayous of southern Louisiana, we and our descendants will shake our heads in shame at the actions of humanity in ’90s and ’00s. We will continue on as a species of course, our great cities and nations surely will as well. But our lives will be poorer, our lands more harsh, and our skies, waters and forests more empty than those our parents and grandparents once traveled.