Saturday, October 13, 2007

Trop d'Allégresse Climatique


I am somewhat dismayed to find my estimable colleague François Mitterrand (reincarnated), a reader of this blog and a self-described "left-wing Sarkozyste" of generally sound views, denouncing the award of the Nobel Peace Prize to Al Gore as a lamentable exercise in political correctness. Tonton is evidently skeptical about global warming, and in expressing his skepticism he is entirely within his rights, but the authorities he cites in his post as "les vrais scientifiques de cette planète," namely, Claude Allègre and a certain Web site, do not represent the full range of sober scientific opinion on the issue. I heartily recommend that M. Mitterrand acquire and read the recent book by Kerry Emanuel, the eminent MIT expert on the subject. It might well enlarge his views. Or he might want to look at some of the papers listed in this review of the career of Princeton climate scientist Michael Oppenheimer.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Hi Arthur,
I am more than just "skeptical" about global warming. I don't believe at all in the dominant thesis. It doesn't mean that I don't believe Climate Change is an issue, it means that the official thesis that Mr Gore has used in a film full of mistakes is the perfect way to prevent any useful action to be taken. Claude Allègre explains it in his book (Ma vérité sur la planète) and that's exactly what's happening with the 'global warming' hoax...
Kindest regards,

http://mitterrand.2007.over-blog.com/

Unknown said...

Tonton,
Thanks for your reply. I don't think that Gore is best viewed as pushing a "dominant thesis." I think he's a publicist, who drew unprecedented attention to an important issue that was being dismissed by "dominant politicians" in the United States. For some background on the forces he was and is up against, read Paul Krugman's column in today's Times:
http://select.nytimes.com/mem/tnt.html?_r=1&emc=tnt&tntget=2007/10/15/opinion/15krugman.html&tntemail1=y&oref=slogin
"Full of mistakes" is, I believe, an exaggeration. Indeed, a British court that was asked to bar the film from use in schools on account of errors in the film came to the conclusion that the errors were insufficient to warrant such action. Not that courts should be the judge of good science--but Gore, I repeat, is not doing science, merely calling attention to the work of scientists. Claude Allègre's views are worthy of attention, but so are the views of the eminent scientists I mentioned in my post, whose conclusions are very different from Allègre's. In any case, I am pleased to learn that you take the issue seriously.

Anonymous said...

The debate is about the influence on CO2 emissions on the climate change and I think there is no evidence that this is linked. That should lead big nations to prepare for the changes that will happen as it already happened in the past (that's why I am eager to consider more a geologist point of view...). Actually Gore and the people like him are supporting an "anti-progress" view that means that against climate change we need to stop the growth of our economy in Occident! That's nonsense, and that's what Allègre and others are denouncing. As I had a look and the links you provided, I strongly and friendly advise you to read his book.
Take care.

Unknown said...

Gore is most emphatically NOT supporting an "anti-progress" view. Michael Oppenheimer, one of the scientists I cited, is part of a group of scientists consulting with power companies and other industries in the United States about ways to decrease their noxious emissions without increasing their costs. But this is not the place to argue the details of environmental science and policy or sort out allegations of "no evidence." I appreciate your comment and will take your recommendation to learn more about Allègre's views.