Heretic
One of the smartest guys I know is coming out with a new book! And...in this essay...he has some interesting things to say about "climate change".
My first heresy says that all the fuss about global warming is grossly exaggerated. Here I am opposing the holy brotherhood of climate model experts and the crowd of deluded citizens who believe the numbers predicted by the computer models. Of course, they say, I have no degree in meteorology and I am therefore not qualified to speak. But I have studied the climate models and I know what they can do. The models solve the equations of fluid dynamics, and they do a very good job of describing the fluid motions of the atmosphere and the oceans. They do a very poor job of describing the clouds, the dust, the chemistry and the biology of fields and farms and forests. They do not begin to describe the real world that we live in. The real world is muddy and messy and full of things that we do not yet understand. It is much easier for a scientist to sit in an air-conditioned building and run computer models, than to put on winter clothes and measure what is really happening outside in the swamps and the clouds. That is why the climate model experts end up believing their own models.
Addendum: The debate rages. Is the data correct? Flawed? Is politics overshadowing real science? Stay tuned...
Addendum (August 17, 2007): Wired has a note up. Alun Anderson (writing at The Edge) answers Dyson's comments.
Addendum (November 20, 2008): Dyson still expresses his disbelief.
Posted by Fred Kiesche at August 12, 2007 07:17 AMIn the community of climate change modelling all are welcome to join the fun, however, no one, not even the venerated Freeman Dyson, gets a free lunch. If he truly believes what he claims, then honesty demands he back it up with some kind of analysis or research. That's how science works, claims of heresy notwithstanding. Someone with his stature should be able to whistle up a group of grad students to put muscle behind a claim like this... shouldn't he? Regardless of the outcome we'll all learn something and THAT is the point after all.
Posted by: Ron Fischer at August 12, 2007 10:30 PMMy (trying real hard to be non-political) thoughts...
(1) Climate change is less "science" than "politics". Neutrality is not found here. It's more like a debate on religion at times.
(2) Are humans changing the Earth's climate? Yes. But...
(3) The Earth's cliimate changes all the time. Look back over geological time...is what we have had the last several decades "normal"?
(4) If we are having an impact, how can we lessen or reverse the impact? I think that many simple things are being ignored.
(5) Even if we stop everything, the climate will still change. We need to be able to adapt to ride out changes that are adverse to us.
(6) Too many eggs in one basket. Yet another reason to find a way offworld.
Posted by: Nameless Blog Poster at August 12, 2007 10:34 PM