I made a decision this morning to read Gareth’s book before reading these posts. It occurred to me that here was someone prepared to invest a large amount of his own money in the pursuit of answers to this huge question of global warming and that in itself is unusual.
The reality may be that the very best “brains” in the world are snapped up by those that can afford to put the top graduates into research programs where they may work for months or even years on middle to high salaries. Who can afford to do this and what are their interests …the saving of the planet or do they have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Peter

Intimidated? No, but given pause for sober reflection…

It’s encouraging that you have found someone that you feel you can rely on, in Gareth Morgan, who has gathered together good information and opinion. Many of us found people like him long ago and have benefited from their wisdom, in the same way that you are from his.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

icehawk Says:
July 17th, 2009 at 9:59 pm

> That’s really funny. As far as I can tell you refuse to listen to any organisation that’s already looked at the science and realised what’s going on, and were only willing to trust Gareth’s book because he started ignorant. Anyone else is “warmist”.

Of course, the IPCC started out uncertain too, though obviously not completely ignorant as it was made up of leading scientists from a range of disciplines. It’s just that they’ve had more time and person-power to gather information and work out what’s going on.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

PS: As I’ve explained, Gareth’s book isn’t Gareth’s opinion of AGW. The book is the result of hiring highly reputable scientists from *both* sides of the debate, putting them in a room together, and having them argue until they stop making sense.

If you’ve got a more balanced source, then produce it.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

>>both bjchip and icehawk have turned their all-seeing eyes on you now

Am I supposed to be intimidated by this?

>>That’s really funny. As far as I can tell you refuse to listen to any organisation that’s already looked at the science and realised what’s going on, and were only willing to trust Gareth’s book because he started ignorant. Anyone else is “warmist”.

As you’ll see, I’m keen to see what BJ thinks of the book. I think what you mean is that I take YOUR sources with a grain of salt. I’ve explained why I’m suspicious of the IPCC. Between their politics and their failed predictive models, they have demonstrated that they’re unreliable. I don’t discount them, I’m wary of them.

For this is a question of science. I realise for Greens it’s almost entirely a question of politics.

Global warming is real.

As for catastrophic AGW, the jury is still out. That is the truth, but your politics doesn’t allow you to accept it.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

I remember when I was in mid teens in the mid 90s and the global warming issue first became common knowledge there was four ways it could go:

1). We do nothing and climate change happens – disaster and rich till it happens.
2). We do something and climate change happens – disaster averted and slightly poorer.
3). We do nothing and climate change doesn’t happen – no disaster and rich.
4). We do something and climate change doesn’t happen – opps no disaster and poorer.

We know it is option 1, happening faster than we thought and with the spectre of feedbacks your typical nightmare and the argument is lets do nothing anyway and enjoy the wealth on the way down..? Or my favourite the new libertarian line, severe GW is good because think of how much our economies will benefit as we adapt…

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

icehawk

Is your garret dusty and dank? Is its floor littered with crushed aspirations and broken dreams? Do you sleep curled on a lumpy kapoc mattress jammed into the corner and does a streetlight shine through a grimy pane and fall gently on your balding pate, like the kiss of a muse?

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Peter – both bjchip and icehawk have turned their all-seeing eyes on you now. I suggest you capitulate. Your resistance is futile and painful to watch.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

“I’d like to make movies though…..(who wouldn’t)”

I thought that too, until I become involved in a production company.

Imagine an art-form in which you must organise and schedule dozens (if not hundreds) of other people, almost all of whom are essential at their critical point, and very expensive hired equipment, following an extremely tight schedule, using very large sums of money, in a very short period, in order to create your artwork which then you must sell via complex and rapacious distribution system of many middle-men in order for your art to ever be seen. I can’t now see why anyone in their right mind becomes a movie director. I’ll stick to my garret and my word-processor.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Mark – excellent.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

BP,

“What I’m referring to is the clearly defined ideology of on warmist and denier.

I’m neither. I’m a layman trying to determine which part of the scientific debate I need to listen to. I still don’t know, but I’m getting closer.

That’s my ideology.”

That’s really funny. As far as I can tell you refuse to listen to any organisation that’s already looked at the science and realised what’s going on, and were only willing to trust Gareth’s book because he started ignorant. Anyone else is “warmist”.

If someone had shown up on this blog 2 years ago posting the things you now about global warming then you, BP, would have called that someone a “warmist” and refused to believe them.

For year’s we’ve been telling you that it’s not just the IPCC claiming global warming is real. Here in NZ, try New Zealand’s academy of science, the Royal Society of New Zealand. Or our govt body devoted to the study of climate, NIWA.

Refusing to listen to anyone who has actually chosen a side in the debate isn’t being “objective” – it’s being absurd.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Blue Peter,

You say two things above that I agree with.

“I’m not convinced by anyone exhibiting certainty about this matter.”

and

“If the temperature range is at the top end of the scale (6% plus), there is probably nothing we can do. We’re already toast. But I don’t think we are, from the conclusions I’ve seen.”

What I don’t see is how this can lead you to the conclusions you reach.

When it comes to disasters, uncertainty is not your friend. Risks suggest you should act to mitigate them, not that you should ignore them. You’re saying that there is a real issue, and that we don’t know how bad it will be, and concluding that our response should be at lower end of what may be necessary.

Of course cost-benefit analysis is required. But every time one’s been attempted, the skeptics slam it. Stern Report, anybody?

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

and much of their land is now referred to as ‘the mosquito coast’….land that has been chemically fertilized repeatedly suffers a structural breakdown (ie from loam to hard-pack soil), drops a metre or so in height, and rainwater tends to run off without penetrating the soil (Australia’s big problem). Something that could easily happen here.
Fly – nothing about Great Expectations here – just you’ll keep your nom-de-plume, ideas etc safe, as i will – have asked frog to pass on my eddress and hope you find time to tell me a little more

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

turnip28 – the Mayan collapse is interesting in that the rain you mention resulted in… the wide spread and irreversible loss of topsoil. More rain can sound like a good thing, but if you have begun to exploit steep land (as we have surely done here in NZ) then increasing rainfall means goodbye topsoil and when that happens it’s game over. The only cultivated places that can survive are low lands. Happy days.
I found your ‘dead civilization’ comment is hugely significant. We have already done extensive damage to our little country, but all is not lost yet…
Many other places in the world are completely scr*wed. Once the soil is gone, civilization is history.
In France, (some farmers in the past) collected soil from the lowest point of their sloping farms and transported it back to the highest, every year. Now a days, we are to clever for that…

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Bluepeter said: “How on earth did we survive the medieval warm period”

This just shows BP’s “White” world view.

The effects of the medieval warm period killed millions, for example they wiped out most of the Mayan’s.

Mayan civilization fell apart during the warm period 850-1300 AD, why? rain.

A couple of years ago my wife and I spent 2 weeks travelling around in Belize and Guatemala visting different Mayan sites, one that stands out is Caracol in Belize, this city probably supported 100,000 people at its height. The water for this city came from rainwater captured in large cisterns, the archeologist use the cisterns when they are onsite digging to this day, there is no other freshwater sources, many of the mayan cities were built to only harness rainwater so changes in rain fall could leave the people very hungry and very thirsty.

The population density of that part of the world 1000 years latter is still lower than when the Mayans were at the height of their civilization.

Note the above is also why I personally have a negative view on global warming and its outcome for civilization, our current civilization is too complex to cope with the changes if the Mayans civilization couldn’t adapt to save its self why are we so arrogant to think we can.

After that vacation I became very interested in perma-culture and all things green. There is nothing more eye opening to all things green than walking over the site of a dead civilization.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

e-wire away Mark. Hope I haven’t over stated my case

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

So FireFly – me cryptic, no…generally not – in fact oft get accused of being too straightforward – which is a compliment (long as I’m not trampling on someone’s feelings).
Zounds, but you are creative –
Am going to clock off for the mo – as it’s Friday – and leaving my computer on-line gives my friends kids a chance to grab my address book and announce my death, arrest, marriage, impecunity etc etc (have to watch them critters)….one Great Book hey??…..!!!
I’ll ask Frog to forward my e-wire and we can swap notes if you like…..sounds fascinating!

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Hullo Mark: I have so you must – mine are serialized and contemporary
I’m a long time ‘Owls’ admirer. ‘The Edge of the Alphabet’ too.
I’ve a movie also, in fact two! They’re short and professionally filmed and maybe you’ve seen them but I’ll keep their titles close to my chest for now.
I’m building material for my one great book – it will have limited appeal, but should be useful to the survivors
I’ve read Steinbeck (natch) but not ‘Totilla Flat’. I’ll get that out rather than Gareth Morgan’s.
You have a passion for the cryptic?

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Hullo Fly: I will if you will – one completed hmmm…an oz version of John Steinbeck’s ‘Tortilla Flat’ will give you a good idea of where that’s at – many think the great NZ novel may be Graham Billing’s “The Chambered Nautilus”. I tend to agree, though Janet Frame and “Owls Do Cry” is possibly a fair contender.
Anyway – being in A&R for most of my professsional life I know what authors get paid in NZ and Oz, and since I don’t need chump change and don’t wanna be ‘known’ any more than already, it’s on the back-burner.
However – living in the country as you do, loans itself to the pursuit of Literary activity – give it some thought – I’d like to make movies though…..(who wouldn’t). Cheers, Regards m

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Nice one. Will be interested to hear your analysis, BJ.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)