Home

Climate Change - Critical Reviews

Bruce Parker

May 2010

It is a well established fact that the global mean temperature has been increasing since about 1970. And there is almost universal agreement that the global mean temperature will continue to rise as the greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere continue to increase. The main argument regarding climate change is about whether the impact of the rising temperatures will be minor, tolerable, or catastrophic. The average American does not have the time or background to understand the complexities in sufficient detail to reach a truly informed conclusion as to the expected impacts of climate change. Hence, he/she must rely on “experts” to sift through the complexities and make recommendations as to what concentration of greenhouse gases our atmosphere can tolerate without resulting in catastrophic changes to the Earth’s climate.

Most climatologists believe that if we continue to emit greenhouse gases at ever increasing rates (“business as usual”) the Earth’s climate will change in catastrophic ways by the end of this century (and possibly well before 2050). If this is the case, then the “experts” who disagree must have some flaws in their arguments. What is needed then are the following:

· A guide to examining the writings of the “experts” to help determine which ones can be “trusted”. For example, when reading many of the books by the “climate denialists”, the arguments sound very convincing to those who are not well versed in climate change issues and many come away with the feeling that we have do not have to worry about climate change. It is only when they are looked at critically – or when someone else can point out the flaws – that the reader can learn to look skeptically at the books content. (see “How to Critically Review a Book/Article on Climate”)

· For each “major phenomenon”, readers should be able to access “facts” grouped in three ways – relevant, not relevant, and incorrect. Additionally, it would be helpful to have a section on topics that ”need further study”. (See sample: “Greenland Ice Melt – Relevant and Irrelevant Factors”)

· Detailed analysis of articles and books on climate change, analyzing in detail each statement to see how it conforms to the above “principles”. Such an analysis of the entire range of opinions (from “deniers” to “alarmists”) would both educate people on climate change issues and help people determine for themselves both which experts can be “trusted” (See sample: “Climate of extremes: global warming science they don't want you to know” – note that this sample is far from complete and just a very rough draft. It is intended to provide a “straw man” to discuss what the best approach would be.)