This is a well written essay by the New York times on Freeman Dyson. Dyson is one of the world’s most eminent physicists. As many WUWT readers know he is a skeptic of AGW aka “global warming”, even going so far as to signing the Oregon Petition, seen below.
This part really spoke to me:
What may trouble Dyson most about climate change are the experts. Experts are, he thinks, too often crippled by the conventional wisdom they create, leading to the belief that “they know it all.” The men he most admires tend to be what he calls “amateurs,” inventive spirits of uncredentialed brilliance like Bernhard Schmidt, an eccentric one-armed alcoholic telescope-lens designer; Milton Humason, a janitor at Mount Wilson Observatory in California whose native scientific aptitude was such that he was promoted to staff astronomer; and especially Darwin, who, Dyson says, “was really an amateur and beat the professionals at their own game.”
You can read an essay about his views on climate change, posted here on WUWT on 11/05/2007.
Excerpt: from the NYT article:
IT WAS FOUR YEARS AGO that Dyson began publicly stating his doubts about climate change. Speaking at the Frederick S. Pardee Center for the Study of the Longer-Range Future at Boston University, Dyson announced that “all the fuss about global warming is grossly exaggerated.” Since then he has only heated up his misgivings, declaring in a 2007 interview with Salon.com that “the fact that the climate is getting warmer doesn’t scare me at all” and writing in an essay for The New York Review of Books, the left-leaning publication that is to gravitas what the Beagle was to Darwin, that climate change has become an “obsession” — the primary article of faith for “a worldwide secular religion” known as environmentalism. Among those he considers true believers, Dyson has been particularly dismissive of Al Gore, whom Dyson calls climate change’s “chief propagandist,” and James Hansen, the head of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York and an adviser to Gore’s film, “An Inconvenient Truth.” Dyson accuses them of relying too heavily on computer-generated climate models that foresee a Grand Guignol of imminent world devastation as icecaps melt, oceans rise and storms and plagues sweep the earth, and he blames the pair’s “lousy science” for “distracting public attention” from “more serious and more immediate dangers to the planet.”
“The climate-studies people who work with models always tend to overestimate their models,” Dyson was saying. “They come to believe models are real and forget they are only models.”
If only we could get James Hansen to spend an afternoon with Freeman Dyson. (h/t to Alexandre Aguiar )
New York Times Magazine Preview
By NICHOLAS DAWIDOFF
FOR MORE THAN HALF A CENTURY the eminent physicist Freeman Dyson has quietly resided in Princeton, N.J., on the wooded former farmland that is home to his employer, the Institute for Advanced Study, this country’s most rarefied community of scholars. Lately, however, since coming “out of the closet as far as global warming is concerned,” as Dyson sometimes puts it, there has been noise all around him. Chat rooms, Web threads, editors’ letter boxes and Dyson’s own e-mail queue resonate with a thermal current of invective in which Dyson has discovered himself variously described as “a pompous twit,” “a blowhard,” “a cesspool of misinformation,” “an old coot riding into the sunset” and, perhaps inevitably, “a mad scientist.” Dyson had proposed that whatever inflammations the climate was experiencing might be a good thing because carbon dioxide helps plants of all kinds grow. Then he added the caveat that if CO2 levels soared too high, they could be soothed by the mass cultivation of specially bred “carbon-eating trees,” whereupon the University of Chicago law professor Eric Posner looked through the thick grove of honorary degrees Dyson has been awarded — there are 21 from universities like Georgetown, Princeton and Oxford — and suggested that “perhaps trees can also be designed so that they can give directions to lost hikers.” Dyson’s son, George, a technology historian, says his father’s views have cooled friendships, while many others have concluded that time has cost Dyson something else. There is the suspicion that, at age 85, a great scientist of the 20th century is no longer just far out, he is far gone — out of his beautiful mind.
But in the considered opinion of the neurologist Oliver Sacks, Dyson’s friend and fellow English expatriate, this is far from the case. “His mind is still so open and flexible,” Sacks says. Which makes Dyson something far more formidable than just the latest peevish right-wing climate-change denier. Dyson is a scientist whose intelligence is revered by other scientists — William Press, former deputy director of the Los Alamos National Laboratory and now a professor of computer science at the University of Texas, calls him “infinitely smart.” Dyson — a mathematics prodigy who came to this country at 23 and right away contributed seminal work to physics by unifying quantum and electrodynamic theory — not only did path-breaking science of his own; he also witnessed the development of modern physics, thinking alongside most of the luminous figures of the age, including Einstein, Richard Feynman, Niels Bohr, Enrico Fermi, Hans Bethe, Edward Teller, J. Robert Oppenheimer and Edward Witten, the “high priest of string theory” whose office at the institute is just across the hall from Dyson’s. Yet instead of hewing to that fundamental field, Dyson chose to pursue broader and more unusual pursuits than most physicists — and has lived a more original life.
Actually, I think these passages
“…Beyond the specific points of factual dispute, Dyson has said that it all boils down to “a deeper disagreement about values” between those who think “nature knows best” and that “any gross human disruption of the natural environment is evil,” and “humanists,” like himself, who contend that protecting the existing biosphere is not as important as fighting more repugnant evils like war, poverty and unemployment…”
“…Dyson has always been strongly opposed to the idea that there is any such thing as an optimal ecosystem — “life is always changing” — and he abhors the notion that men and women are something apart from nature, that “we must apologize for being human.” Humans, he says, have a duty to restructure nature for their survival…”
are much more important as a condemnation of what AGW is really all about.
The funniest part (in my opinion) is when Hansen says “There are bigger fish to fry…” about the greatest living Physicist. Indeed the Greeks were right: hubris comes before the fall.
evanmjones, the reason WWII did not see a major spike in CO2 output was 2 fold. First, the buildup really began in 1937, and was more a transition from one product to another. Plants making cars began making tanks, plants making desks made riffles, etc. Second is MAN IS NOT THE MAIN REASON CO2 IS GOING UP. Or the Temp either. Remember the temperature started to rise in the 1800s before lights, or cars or anything modern. When you start with the lowest temperatures in the last 1000 years, a rise, even a modest one like the 20th century seems dramatic. (relativity is a wonderful thing)
Excellent article. It’s good to see that Freeman Dyson has not succumbed to the kind of pessimism expressed by James Lovelock re the future of the world.
Robert Bateman: “In a world of blind models, the one-eyed observer is king.”
That’s terrific, very well put.
Waaaaaay o/t but did anyone else catch this? I think a commenter in a previous thread alluded to this possibility.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=aFYk4zIrQRms&refer=home
Farmers Want Obama to Make Carbon a Cash Crop Under Climate Law
Rex Woollen grows corn and soybeans. In 2007, the Wilcox, Nebraska, farmer started cultivating a new commodity: carbon.
By not tilling his 800 acres, Woollen by some estimates keeps 470 tons of carbon per year in the ground and out of the atmosphere. Because of that, Woollen gets carbon credits he can sell on the Chicago Climate Exchange. At first, neighboring farmers were skeptical…
… etc.
It puzzles and pains me that Camille Paglia, whom you cited elsewhere in your blog, can be rated higher than this man as an intellectual. Not that those ratings mean anything – they’re just popularity contests – but to my mind, Dyson is the model of an engaged, rational, scientific mind. His book review in the NYRB in which he discusses AGW in general, is very much worth reading, and is online at:
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/21494
Should we be making policy on it? If your answer is “yes,” then your motives are purely ego and control, and have absolutely nothing to do with saving Earth…Earth can save itself, whether we’re here or not.
Alarmist policy, no. Realist policies, yes. Alarmist policies state that man should be nature’s servant and stay within Eden’s limits. I think humans can be nature’s master, and I support a post-human future because solar systems don’t support biological life forever. There are many natural events that wipe life out in the blink of an eye. So let’s escape the cycle of destruction.
There will be times when we will need climate science to guide policy. For example, if we were going to decide to irrigate a desert or create new rivers and channels, or even make a species or disease extinct (do Aids, malaria, mosquitos, sharks, etc serve a purpose or can nature live better without them?) we would need advanced climate science and biology to tell us what would happen if we were going to pursue that course of action.
Terraforming will be very important future. Climatology will be part of that, so it deserves to be well funded for those reasons.
Oh dear, journalists. Mr Dyson is indeed a very distinguished physicist, but the journo can’t resist this inanity: “… thinking alongside most of the luminous figures of the age, including Einstein..”. Check the dates – it was decades after Einstein had made his contributions to Physics. But since Einstein is the only physicist of whom many of his readers will have heard, his name is dragged irrelevantly into the tale. Warming sceptics really ought to remember that the dim fatuousness of journalism is part of the opposition they face.
Aron (02:52:27), very well put. Thanks.
Robert Bateman (03:35:54), Agreed. I work in a coal fired plant in California and our emissions are extremely low (Except CO2).
Accurate motitoring of furnace temperatures, Electrostatic Precipitators, and wet scrubbers remove nearly all of the soot, sulphur, NOX, and even CO.
Clean coal is not a myth.
I have spent a good deal of time studying the history of science. Freeman Dyson is the last great giant of the 20th century revolution in science.
But the great James Hansen says he “hasn’t done his homework”. Unlike the aforementioned, Dyson realizes he could be wrong. Putting this as simply as possible; If you can’t convince Dyson, who is a political ally, than you are wrong.
It isn’t Dyson who hasn’t done his homework, when he tells you the models are junk you can count on it. Dyson is an expert, probably the expert, on mathematical models.
http://abcnews.go.com/Travel/story?id=7177299&page=1
The chunks of ice clogging the Missouri river are so large they have to blow them up!
evanmjones (22:43:41) wrote :
“Evan, You may recall I’ve offered you a guest post on this subject. – Anthony”
“No, I didn’t. And I’ll be happy to! I’ll be in touch. I’ll even dig up some nice, smoky WWII pictures.”
Hurry up evanmjones! I am very interested in reading what you write on this subject and I am always interested in old pictures.
Smokey (03:35:02) wrote:
Eric,
“The fact that AGW is real does not make it…”
Great job Smokey! That post was worth reading and I agree with you.
I am glad that we can call AGW what it really is: A Religion. It is an ideology based on faith whose profits are seeking to gain control of other human beings and their lives.
Remember, I give a portion of my life to my employer in trade for money, and he who confiscates or controls my money controls my life. I will take my chances with AGW rather than give up the contol of my life to highly flawed people who believe in a ridiculous religion.
DJ (21:58:23) :
“The fact that he signed the discredited Oregon petition speaks volumes – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oregon_petition.”
REPLY: “…At least Mr. Dyson has the COURAGE to put his name to his belief, unlike you “DJ”.”
– Anthony Watts
Thank you Anthony for allowing me to give my uneducated opinion on your forum.
Mark A. Mudgett
@ur momisugly evanmjones (22:27:33) :
I have many issues with the IPCC CO2 estimates. The ice core data is suspect as it’s well documented that the ice does not perfectly seal in trapped gases.
Furthermore, CO2 has been measured many times using many different techniques beginning in the 19th century. None of those documented observations were used by the IPCC.
And are we to believe nobody measured CO2 during the 1930’s and 1940’s? No, but the IPCC choose to not use that data.
The 1930s are the warmest decade on record and coincided with a global economic depression. What was the CO2 level then? Was it high or low? Was it trending up or down?
Seems very suspect to me, too. It’s as if the IPCC selected the datasets to use in order to arrive at predetermined results.
In a previous era:
“This list contains persons burned by various religious groups, after being deemed heretics.”
[…]
Giordano Bruno
Giordano Bruno was an Italy philosopher, priest, astronomer/astrologer, and occultist. Bruno is perhaps best known for his system of mnemonics and as an early proponent of the idea of extrasolar planets and extraterrestrial life….
(1548–1600)
http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/List_of_people_burned_as_heretics
When Al Gore illustrated in AIT the sea rising 20 feet, the IPCC was only talking about 2 feet. I gather their defense was that whilst they say 2 feet, they can’t “rule out” 20 feet.
Well I can’t “rule out” aliens invading so gimme $MONEYS for alien defense lasers.
It seems all too common that environmentalists take the science and use it in disingenuous ways.
Cracks in the AGW orthodoxy do seem to be multiplying, and widening. Who would have ever guessed an article like this appearing in the very bastion of AGW ideology, the NYT? They are to be commended, I suppose for doing so, though perhaps it is because they see the true writing on the wall – the long-overdue death of the AGW monstrosity.
Meanwhile, Tom Friedman on his so-called “Climate Progress” blog gives his spittle-flecked, liberally ad hominem-laced view of the article, referring to him as a “climate crackpot”, and “nutty”, as well as the “most uncivil, unjustified ravings.”
He pontificates:
“Shame on the NYT, shame on the reporter, Nicholas Dawidoff, for publishing this crackpot’s crap for millions to read and possibly think is credible.
Amazingly, having called Dyson every name in the book, he accuses Dyson of slandering Hansen.
Here’s yet another big failure of investigative journalism and scientific research.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/highlands_and_islands/7963088.stm
It says climate change is killing off the cranefly and that the Peak District has seen an increase in temperature of 1.9C in the last 35 years.
When I saw that number I knew right away it wasn’t climate change as that rate of warming is over five times higher than the rate of warming per decade averaged out across the UK.
So it is no surprise to see that the area they sampled is between Sheffield to the east and Greater Manchester to the west. Both of these urban areas have grown at a faster rate than the rest of England as wealth and development has spread northwards.
It’s not climate change or global warming. Again, it is warm winds carried over from urban heat islands.
There is no danger at all to those species from that urban warming. The cranefly is a migratory species that covers most of northern Europe and likes to invade warm homes. The birds that the article mentions are also migratory and have a varied diet. The golden plover isn’t even native to England. It was originally native to the Americas and Eurasia and like the pheasant was introduced to Britain by humans. It is a very adaptable bird.
A good story on a True American Icon.
Thanks.
I imagine few people here have read, The Starship and the Canoe, a unique double-biography of Freeman Dyson and his son, George Dyson, written by well-known environmentalist Kenneth Brower.
In the 60’s, while Freeman helped flesh out the details for NASA-funded Project Orion, a Chicago-sized, atomic-powered spaceship, his son George essentially “droped out” and became a back-to-nature devotee, obsessed with his own project – creating a baidarka, a bark canoe, on a gigantic scale.
It’s a good book, contrasting the two men, both of whom obsess about building something unique.
Green energy plans in disarray as wind farm giant slashes investment
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/natural_resources/article5977714.ece
Wind Turbines in Europe Do Nothing for Emissions-Reduction Goals
The climate hasn’t in fact profited from these developments. As astonishing as it may sound, the new wind turbines and solar cells haven’t prohibited the emission of even a single gram of CO2.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/business/0,1518,606763,00.html
Regarding the BBC article I linked to.
Conversely, the BBC ran this article two years ago saying there was an explosion in the population of daddy longlegs.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/5386164.stm
Since global temperatures have fallen since, how could they run an article three years later saying climate change was killing the species off without questioning local urban heat island effects?
maz2 (06:21:33) : “Giordano Bruno was an Italy philosopher, priest, astronomer/astrologer, and occultist. Bruno is perhaps best known for his system of mnemonics and as an early proponent of the idea of extrasolar planets and extraterrestrial life….
My distant relative was burned by the Church because he did not subscribe to the Earth as the center of the universe. He was a proponent of Copernicus’ Sun centered universe view. He travelled extensively throughout Europe and was lured back to Italy by the Church who punished him for his heresy. Perhaps being a skeptic runs in the family.
Love it. I wonder who but the NY Times could reach The Grand Warming Mufti by phone?
This is a very good article: Kudos to Nicholas Dawidoff and to the NYT editiors who let it run. Many, many thanks for bringing it to my attention. The only things I normally trust in the NYT and BG are the ball scores!
Dyson appears to have the admirable ability to cut through the twaddle and get to the heart of an issue. No wonder all his instincts scream that catastrophic AGW is unproven and doubtful.
I think this explains a lot about movements like this:
http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/03/financebrain.html
Many (maybe most) people are ‘wired’ to simply accept experts advice. I see this in the markets all the time. One comment on that link was interesting – that this might be natures way of allowing “decisionmaking energy to be conserved.”
The Sun Speck is barely visible. There appears to be a larger speck same longitude, but in the South, but that one doesn’t show on the magnetogram