‘We don’t have a leader who is able to grasp [the issue] and say what is really needed. Instead we are trying to continue business as usual,’ say James Hansen. Photograph: Gareth Fuller/PA
The scientist who convinced the world to take notice of the looming danger of global warming says it would be better for the planet and for future generations if next week’s Copenhagen climate change summit ended in collapse.
In an interview with the Guardian, James Hansen, the world’s pre-eminent climate scientist, said any agreement likely to emerge from the negotiations would be so deeply flawed that it would be better to start again from scratch.
“I would rather it not happen if people accept that as being the right track because it’s a disaster track,” said Hansen, who heads the Nasa Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York.
“The whole approach is so fundamentally wrong that it is better to reassess the situation. If it is going to be the Kyoto-type thing then [people] will spend years trying to determine exactly what that means.” He was speaking as progress towards a deal in Copenhagen received a boost today, with India revealing a target to curb its carbon emissions. All four of the major emitters – the US, China, EU and India – have now tabled offers on emissions, although the equally vexed issue of funding for developing nations to deal with global warming remains deadlocked.
Hansen, in repeated appearances before Congress beginning in 1989, has done more than any other scientist to educate politicians about the causes of global warming and to prod them into action to avoid its most catastrophic consequences. But he is vehemently opposed to the carbon market schemes – in which permits to pollute are bought and sold – which are seen by the EU and other governments as the most efficient way to cut emissions and move to a new clean energy economy.
Read the entire article here at the Guardian:
Copenhagen climate change talks must fail, says top scientist
Icarus asked:
Do we know how much of a forcing would be required to trigger an unstoppable transition to a much warmer, ice-free world?
You mean, of, course, a “tipping point”, which is a silly Alarmist construct. A good clue would be to look at the MWP, and what caused that period to be warmer (hint, it wasn’t C02). If you absolutely must worry about climate though, worry about cooling, which is far more dangerous. Oh, wait, cooling isn’t caused by man (or is it – you Alarmists keep changing your story), so the issue isn’t so much our climate, but being able to blame mankind. Have I got that about right?
Bruce Cobb (17:07:06):
Icarus asked:
Do we know how much of a forcing would be required to trigger an unstoppable transition to a much warmer, ice-free world?
You mean, of, course, a “tipping point”…
Well to be specific I’m referring to long-term positive feedbacks involving ice sheets, vegetation changes, failure of carbon sinks etc. – anything that would amplify the original forcing to the point where a dramatic climate change would ensue even if the original forcing stopped. Palaeoclimate seems to show a lot of sawtoothiness rather than gentle changes.
Icarus: “Do we know how much of a forcing would be required to trigger an unstoppable transition to a much warmer, ice-free world?” The study I saw (using climate models with considerable warming) showed that tipping points exist for certain areas, but not the world as a whole. While many Arctic areas would warm considerably, there would be large variations in water vapor feedback for the warmer parts of the world. Temperate and tropical zones would tip in both directions, some turning into desert and some desert (e.g. the Sahara) greening over. All these were local tipping points (dryness causing more dryness and wetness causing more wetness).
Also Icarus, you may want to consider that the world was 2-3 C warmer 5000 to 8000 years ago, but there was no world-wide tipping point then.
The church of Mannmade global warming is having a church split.
James Hansen has taken some followers and split.
No doubt that Jim will get his wish (sorta like OZ) – and to prove it here’s the latest Harris Poll showing a huge drop in the number of people who believe in GW:
Big Drop in Those Who Believe That Global Warming Is Coming
http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/pubs/Harris_Poll_2009_12_02.pdf
I would vote for Sarah Palin for POTUS for no other reason than she would have the cajones to fire this jerk.
Icarus (16:38:28): You raise Pascal’s Wager. Richard Dawkin’s has proposed an anti-Pascal Wager which, in environmental guise, might be expressed thus:
“Suppose we grant that there is indeed some small chance that [a dangerous tipping point is nigh]. Nevertheless, it could be said that more probably everyone will lead a better, fuller life if you bet on it not happening than if you bet on it happening and therefore squander your precious time and resources on worshipping [the one true God of The Environment], sacrificing to Him, fighting and dying for Him, etc.”
Pascal’s Wager is, in my view, much overplayed.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=121026851&ps=cprs
Who’s going to answer Holdren? You?
Bones:
That Harris poll was conducted November 2 through 11, before the CRU emails came to light. I wonder what the results would look like now?
The man isn’t a scientist as we think we understand the term – he’s a bureaucrat. Whoever decides anything, pro or con, on the advice of a well-nourished self-protecting bureaucracy, probably deserves what he gets.
See “The war on the weather”:
http://vulgarmorality.wordpress.com/2009/11/29/the-war-on-the-weather/
“In an interview with the Guardian, James Hansen, the world’s pre-eminent climate scientist…”
Not any more.
Steve Schapel (15:25:58) :
As I understand it, this is the attitude that Hansen has consistently taken for a long time. This article does not indicate any change, and should come as no surprise.
I agree. The only “problem” I have with Hansen is (I think) he is wrong and has invested to much of his life in a silly model to be able see past it. Hansen believes in science and also happens to really believe in AGW. Unlike Gore, Mann etc. Hansen expects AGW will win out in an honest scientific debate.
If Hansen want this Copenhagen summit to fail, all he has to do is to publish his code and raw data used.
Hansen should be evaluated by a mental health professional.
April, I was just going to say the very same thing. Boy, this guy really is nuts!
Now I know what to get him for Christmas. A failed climate conference. I will get him some socks as well though 🙂
Maybe he’s nervous about coming to the new european empire in case we have another look at his sworn expert witness evidence at the Kingsnorth power station trial.
Political posturing when one should be seeking defense counsel.
O/T but I could not find anywhere more appropriate.
Ed Miliband is Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change here in the UK.
This Saturday, I’ll be holding the first ever ministerial mass phone call and I want you to join me.
I’ll let you know where negotiations are up to and take questions about the Copenhagen summit at 10am on Saturday.
http://www.edspledge.com/could-you-give-me-a-call
When I head out to Copenhagen, I want to tell world leaders about the depth of support for a deal and the passion of the people in this campaign – including you.
I am sure some of your more knowledgable British readers would have more impact than I ever could.
A couple of questions for Icarus.
The Earth has had much higher levels of C02 and temperatures in the past without the planet going into runaway warming situation. Why is this so?
And please look at the alarmists failed prediction and shifting “tipping points” to help you realise why some of us are so sceptical of AGW. Read the links below and ask yourself if these predictions / forecasts have failed so miserably in the past why should we believe anything you warn us about catastrophic AGW? Don’t give me models I want facts.
Hansen’s Failed Prediction
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/10/22/a-little-known-but-failed-20-year-old-climate-change-prediction-by-dr-james-hansen/
Failed Predictions Galore
http://www.c3headlines.com/predictionsforecasts/
http://theresilientearth.com/?q=content/global-warming-predictions-invalidated
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/sci;326/5953/716
Shifting Tipping Points
http://www.climatedepot.com/a/3826/Not-again-Another-10year-climate-tipping-point-warning-issued–Despite-fact-that-UN-began-10Year-Climate-Tipping-Point-in-1989
http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=SJ&s_site=mercurynews&p_multi=SJ&p_theme=realcities&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&p_topdoc=1&p_text_direct-0=0EB7304FF9A84273&p_field_direct-0=document_id&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&s_trackval=GooglePM
It is hard to trust Hansen even when he is predicting Copenhagen will fail. Does it matter what China promises? How exactly would you go about enforcing emissions reductions in China? India? EU?
Why do you suppose that every time I think of Copenhagen I am reminded of Macbeth? “it is a tale. Told by an idiot, filled with sound and fury, signifying nothing…”
Eric (skeptic) (17:24:32):
Icarus: “Do we know how much of a forcing would be required to trigger an unstoppable transition to a much warmer, ice-free world?”
The study I saw (using climate models with considerable warming) showed that tipping points exist for certain areas, but not the world as a whole. While many Arctic areas would warm considerably, there would be large variations in water vapor feedback for the warmer parts of the world. Temperate and tropical zones would tip in both directions, some turning into desert and some desert (e.g. the Sahara) greening over. All these were local tipping points (dryness causing more dryness and wetness causing more wetness).
Interesting. I need to read more about this.
Also Icarus, you may want to consider that the world was 2-3 C warmer 5000 to 8000 years ago, but there was no world-wide tipping point then.
Do you have any evidence to back that up? My understanding is that the world hasn’t been warmer than it is now in the 12,000 years since the last glaciation, and that you’d have to go back millions of years to find a time when it was 2 – 3°C warmer. I could be wrong.
India says take any legally binding agreement from COP15 and put it where the sun don’t shine: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/India-not-to-sign-legally-binding-emission-agreement/articleshow/5296856.cms
@Icarus You may wish to review the pollen, etc. that was present in more northern climates during both the Roman warming period and the Medieval warming period. The Vikings really did have working farms on Greenland during the Medieval period. They did a dig on one recently and came up with sheep manure and all the rest. You may also wish to review the artifacts that have been recovered from the Alps. Some of the alpine passes were used as trade routes complete with Roman garrison stations to exact taxation on the trade routes.
Butch (03:26:43) :
Why do you suppose that every time I think of Copenhagen I am reminded of Macbeth? “it is a tale. Told by an idiot, filled with sound and fury, signifying nothing…”
Because you were educated with allegory? History and literature contain the real warnings for the present. The future’s not ours to see, Que Sera Sera. 🙂
It’s why generations of children were educated with such things as Aesop’s Fables and Grimm’s Fairy Tales before saturating them in Sesame Street.
No one was ever before arrogant enough to try to control the future beyond their own three score and ten.
Perhaps this cultural arrogance is a function of not having enough children to realize how little control we really have of anything. Teenagers teach you that. I think these scientists are transhumanists, whether they know it or not.