White House to Convene Climate Change Panel

Several comments on this new panel:

Trump’s Pick To Lead Climate Panel Once Compared CO2 To Jews In Nazi Germany. William Happer will reportedly lead the new Presidential Committee on Climate Security.

Washington Post: White House to Set up Climate panel.

Adversarial’ reviewers recruit climate skeptics

From HuffPost: Meet The Ostriches Under Consideration For Trump’s Anti-Science Climate Panel. The list includes people who have called climate science a “cult” and claimed Earth benefits from burning fossil fuels.

6 thoughts on “White House to Convene Climate Change Panel

  1. The issue is that CO2 is a greenhouse gas that traps radiant heat, and does methane. There may well be a natural tendency for the earth to be going through a warming cycle again, but we know that CO2 is a greenhouse gas as can be easily demonstrated. Is there any question that we are emitting tremendous amounts of greenhouse gases? One must admit that our emissions must have a major impact on global warming.

    • Actually, while the absolute amount of CO2 emitted by humans IS huge, human emissions are a fraction of the CO2 emitted by the earth itself (depending on who’s counting ~5%). If you believe that CO2 is the primary cause of climate change then all we can really control is what humans emit. Given the uncertainties in both the numbers and the solutions, that implies (to me) that controlling human emissions may not work and it is far better to concentrate on preventing weather events from becoming disasters – when we can – and on being able to quickly reach a new and better normal after disasters that we can’t prevent.

      Claire and I may not agree on climate change, but I believe we are in violent agreement about the need for disaster resilience. As a [at least sometimes] practical person, I prefer to have my tax dollars spent where I think they’re most likely to do some good.

  2. Reply to update from John:
    He most decidedly is NOT denying climate change – as the video snippet shows. He has a most impressive resume – look up his bio on Wikipedia (Since CO2’s presumed role is due to its spectroscopic properties, he speaks with some authority.). He led DOE’s Office of Science, for example.

    More importantly, as I read the writ of the panel it is to determine whether and how much climate change is a danger for our national security, not whether the climate is changing. As to CO2 in the atmosphere, right now it has had mostly a positive impact on mankind: you can argue that maybe it is having some impact on rising temps and so on (in fact, Happer has written that it does have some impact that he believes is small), but there is no arguing that crop yields have increased this century by about 50% compared to last century or that desert areas such as the Sahel in Africa are shrinking. The latter are facts; the former is a construct of models that don’t even predict the past all that well. Obviously I share his frustration with those who confound justifiable doubt about the overriding role of CO2 in climate change with unjustifiable doubt that the climate is changing.

  3. Frankly, the story seems rather unfounded. No evidence is presented that Dr. Happer denies that the climate is changing. No evidence is presented that he will do less than a thorough job of the panel’s work. This “denier” designation is now beyond silly – it covers such a wide spectrum that almost any scientist (or layman) who does not hew to the ENTIRE climate-apocalypse-caused-by-CO2 religion is ipso facto a “denier.”

    Only an idiot would say that CO2 is NOT beneficial to mankind; it is essential to life. A different idiot would say the climate is not changing. Climate change is real but how much CO2 contributes to climate change is still unclear.

    Just as one small example – from 1910 to 1945 sea temps rose 0.6 deg C; CO2 rose by 11 ppm (from 300 to 311 ppm) in the atmosphere. From 1945 to 1976, global temps were flat, while CO2 rose 19 ppm. From 1976 to 2018, CO2 concentration in the atmosphere rose by 78 ppm while sea temps rose by 0.7 deg C. So any relation between CO2 concentration and global temps isn’t simple. It’s past time to stop the name-calling and treat scientists who are skeptical of some part of the new revealed religion with respect.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.