One really has to laugh at the repackaging attempt by AAAS. Meanwhile:
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) Releases “What We Know” and Kicks Off Initiative to Recognize Climate Change Risks
March 17, 2014 – (Washington, DC) The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) is announcing the launch of a new initiative to expand the dialogue on the risks of climate change. At the heart of the initiative is the AAAS’s “What We Know” report, an assessment of current climate science and impacts that emphasizes the need to understand and recognize possible high-risk scenarios.
“We’re the largest general scientific society in the world, and therefore we believe we have an obligation to inform the public and policymakers about what science is showing about any issue in modern life, and climate is a particularly pressing one,” said Dr. Alan Leshner, CEO of AAAS. “As the voice of the scientific community, we need to share what we know and bring policymakers to the table to discuss how to deal with the issue.”
Nobel laureate Dr. Mario Molina, distinguished professor of chemistry and biochemistry at the University of California, San Diego and Scripps Institution of Oceanography and co-chairs, Dr. Diana Wall, distinguished professor of biology and director at Colorado State University’s School of Global Environmental Sustainability and Dr. James McCarthy, Alexander Agassiz Professor of Biological Oceanography at Harvard, chaired the climate science panel that generated the report. They, along with the 10 panelists spanning climate science specialties, will engage in the initiative in various ways, from speaking engagements to testimonial on a forthcoming interactive web site to knowledge sharing with other professionals. The initiative encourages Americans to think of climate change as a risk management issue; the panel aims to clarify and contextualize the science so the public and decision-makers can be more adequately informed about those risks and possible ways to manage them.
“This new effort is intended to state very clearly the exceptionally strong evidence that Earth’s climate is changing, and that future climate change can seriously impact natural and societal systems,” Dr. McCarthy said. “Even among members of the broader public who already know about the evidence for climate change and what is causing it, some do not know the degree to which many climate scientists are concerned about the risks of possibly rapid and abrupt climate change — that’s something we are dedicated to discussing with multiple audiences, from business leaders and financial experts to decision makers in all walks of life.”
Bob Litterman, former Goldman & Sachs Co. executive and senior partner at Kepos Capital, has participated in discussions with the panel on how to accurately measure climate-related risks and the need for a language to talk about climate change through the lens of risk management.
“Scientists have developed a solid understanding of how the climate is responding to the build-up of greenhouse gases, but they recognize the considerable uncertainty about the long-run impacts — especially potential economic damages. Economists understand how to create incentives to limit pollution production with maximum effect and minimum collateral damage, but crafting the appropriate response is a complex valuation process that requires quantifying those same uncertainties,” Litterman said. “To do so requires scientists and economists to work together, ask tough questions, and break the boundaries of their professional silos. That’s what’s this initiative aims to do.”
Litterman will join AAAS CEO Dr. Alan Leshner and panel co-chair Dr. James McCarthy on a phone conference tomorrow to discuss the report, the new initiative and why framing climate change as a risk management issue is critical. (that phone in is long past at 9AMEST today, sorry, Anthony)
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Several of these sort of “initiatives” are happening at once, at a time when the current and accumulated knowledge is trending strongly against the conclusion they are pushing. It would seem there is a coordinated effort occurring, to focus a last gasp attempt on 2014. Evidently, they have given up on the notion that it is going to get any warmer, and have decided to make the best of whatever they can gin up from current conditions. Get the fix in before it gets any cooler…
Well posted David:
David L. Hagen says:
March 18, 2014 at 9:25 am
Contrast The Right Climate Stuff who were able to bound predicted global warming to a maximum of 1.2 deg C – by realistic evaluation of transient climate sensitivity based on observations, and the limits of economically usable fossil fuels.
Keep in mind that the 1.2 deg C is an UPPER bound in the TRCS paper that will be reduced by (observed) increased albedo, both cloud and snow/ice, which reflects sunlight at wavelengths that pierce CO2 and DO NOT get re-radiated downwards!!!
Isn’t a discussion a debate? The science isn’t settled anymore? Bring on the debaters. 🙂
This is clearly an article written by committee.
http://www.despair.com/teamwork.html
(Note the reference to Phil and the gang at East Anglia)
Is St Patrick’s Day the NEW April Fool Day? Or have we been drinking too much green beer – what I’m reading is green around the edges
kenw says:
March 18, 2014 at 9:54 am
Mumbles McGuirk says:
March 18, 2014 at 9:47 am
That’s funny. I’m a member of the AAAS (section W -Atmospheric and Hydrospheric Sciences)
….
Group W? (channeling Arlo here…)
—————————————————————
Sorry, had to Google it. I was never much of an Arlo Guthrie fan (liked his Dad’s singing much better.) Maybe I could ask the AAAS to change our designation to Section 8. 😉
AAAS Project 2061 was first created during the 90s version of Radical Ed Reform, but it remains around to be of service in the implementation of the Common Core and the model-oriented Next Generation Science Standards. This initiative should be seen through this Science for All Americans goal http://www.aaas.org/report/science-all-americans .
IPCC and AAAS’s work have to be seen through the constantly announced belief in the social sciences that “there is nothing as valuable as a good theory.” It is not that a good theory reflects reality. It simply provides a means for transforming reality once taken up by education and the media and institutions with regulatory power.
@Mumbles: regardless of your preferences, do yourself a huge favor and devote the required ~15 minutes to hear his “Alice’s Restaurant”. (it’s really his only claim to self-fame) The appropriateness is boggling!
JJ says: March 18, 2014 at 10:00 am
Little doubt we’re witnessing an orchestrated CAGW “Alamo” probably exacerbated by abject terror at the very plausible prospect of loss of both the Excecutive and Senate branches of government.
Even assuming that eventuality, the EPA CAGW still looms mightily, unelected and out of control.
“Bob Litterman, former Goldman & Sachs Co. executive and senior partner at Kepos Capital, has participated in discussions”
This is all we need to know about the validity of the group. Follow the money.
Anthony,
I’d love to purchase a few t-shirts featuring your chart, “Warming Predictions v. the Real World”.
It’s a slam dunk, and it needs exposure.
Robin says: March 18, 2014 at 10:10 am
In that regard, the natives are, apparently, restless…
Wyoming rejects science education standards over climate change
“This new effort is intended to state very clearly the exceptionally strong evidence that Earth’s climate is changing, and that future climate change can seriously impact natural and societal systems,”
————————————————
Of course it can. We are in an interglacial period. If we slide back into an ice age it will have a serious impact on natural and societal systems. As to that strong evidence the Earth’s climate is always changing and has changed considerably for its 4.5 by history.
Page one of the text includes the 97% error.
Why read further?
I’m curious how the figure at the top of the article was constructed. Looking at the referenced AMS “State of the Climate 2012” report I see Lower Troposphere temperatures plotted in figure 2.3 with trends , some qualitative discussion of the bulk troposphere with trends presented in table 2.2, and Stratosphere temperatures are plotted in figure 2.5. I don’t see anything that seems to correlate with your figure.
Dr. McCarthy writes:
“This new effort is intended to state very clearly the exceptionally strong evidence that Earth’s climate is changing…”
Aside from not understanding the definition of scientific evidence, McCarthy’s statement is the position of any scientific skeptic.
Skeptics have stated consistently that the planet’s climate is always changing. Only alarmists claim that the climate never changed until the industrial revolution [the long flat shaft of Michael Mann’s Hockey Stick].
======================
kenw says:
Models are NOT DATA.
Models are NOT DATA.
Models are NOT DATA.
Models are NOT DATA.
Models are NOT DATA.
To further educate Dr. McCarthy:
Models are NOT EVIDENCE.
++++++++++++++++++++++++
“Scientists have developed a solid understanding of how the climate is responding to the build-up of greenhouse gases…”
*snicker*. Explain that.
Gentlemen:
We need a way to keep the gravy train going. I propose that we argue that the magnitude of our rather obvious error in predicting global temperature change henceforth be called “uncertainty” and that we are ceratin that this “uncertainty” actually increases the risk of harm and the greater the risk of harm the more funding we need to save the
suckersworld. All those in favor?What we do know is that the earth’s climate does change, sometimes very suddenly (geologically speaking). What we should know is that short of an all out nuclear war, man really does not have any control over any climate other than that within his buildings. And what I do know, if the AGW crowd wins in the political arena, we will not even be able to control the climate within our homes.
Speaking as a career research scientist, the AAAS is not my voice.
The re-branding of multi-decadal ocean temperature cycles is not science and not good public policy, period.
Camille Parmesan is on the AAAS panel. The AAAS “What We Know” report cites three of her papers that purport impending ecological doom. Readers here will recall Jim Steele’s thorough exposure of the tendentious negligence of her work; here, for example, and here and here and here.
“The largest general scientific society in the world” is supposed to be the most objective yet what we find in this report is that they are least objective.
It is time to end all climate change funding because the people controlling the money have shown that they cannot act responsibly with it. That is all the rationale one needs when dealing with public money.
Follow the money or How to make money with Climate Change.
Al Gore lead off the group, Bob Litterman (Kepos Capital) page 6. His thoughts on climate change investments.
http://www.rijpm.com/key_insight_files/Ten_Strategies_for_Pension_Funds_to_Better_Serve_Their_Beneficiaries_June_20_2013.pdf
“…and bring policymakers to the table to discuss how to deal with the issue.”
So these guys think they now run the country or what?!
Perhaps they need to subpoena the president so they can tell him what to do about it.
Incredible.
Science, my AAAS.
How seriously should we take this press release when it does not use the correct name for Bob Litterman’s former company — Goldman Sachs not Goldman & Sachs Co.