Charles Krauthammer has written an excellent article about global warming that reflects my thoughts on the subject. He starts it with these two paragraphs:
I'm not a global warming believer. I'm not a global warming denier. I'm a global warming agnostic who believes instinctively that it can't be very good to pump lots of CO2into the atmosphere but is equally convinced that those who presume to know exactly where that leads are talking through their hats.
Predictions of catastrophe depend on models. Models depend on assumptions about complex planetary systems -- from ocean currents to cloud formation -- that no one fully understands. Which is why the models are inherently flawed and forever changing. The doomsday scenarios posit a cascade of events, each with a certain probability. The multiple improbability of their simultaneous occurrence renders all such predictions entirely speculative.
Global warming is probably happening in some places to some degree, but whether it is long term or man-made, and what its ultimate effects will be, are impossible to tell. Anybody who has worked with models can tell you that they can be extremely useful, but are incredibly prone to produce results desired by the person running the model.
It is to our advantage to reduce carbon emissions, and every other "unnatural" activity, but in doing so we must weigh the costs and benefits. Those who present dire pictures of what will happen without strict controls on carbon emissions have not come close to making a defensible argument for their position.
Mr. Krauthammer's entire column can be found at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/29/AR2008052903266.html
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment