Guest essay by Eric Worrall
Climate Scientist Mechanical Engineer John Abraham, writing for The Guardian, seems to think it is un-American to disagree with his views on climate change.
An Inconvenient Sequel – the science, history, and politics of climate change
Al Gore’s new film is worth watching
Wednesday 15 November 2017 22.00 AEDT
Al Gore’s new movie ‘An Inconvenient Sequel’ is, in some ways, similar to his groundbreakingInconvenient Truth project, but different in other ways. Those key differences are why I recommend you watch it.
This movie successfully accomplishes a number of interweaving tasks. First, it gives some of the science of climate change. Gore gets his science right. I remember his first movie, which I thought was more steeped in science and data than this one, so based on my recollection this new picture is somewhat abbreviated. That’s a good thing because the science is settled on climate change. That is, the science is settled that humans are causing current climatic changes and the science is settled that we are observing these changes throughout the natural world.
Readers of this column who venture into the comments below will likely find people claiming, “science is never settled.” But the people making those comments are not scientists. They don’t work in this field every day, they don’t see the data, and they don’t know what they’re talking about.
…
The election in the US was a climate disaster and it is turning out to be worse than we could have feared. The US President and Congress are doing everything they can to ensure more rapid and devastating climate change. They are doing everything they can to ensure more California wildfires, more Marias, more Harveys, and more Irmas. They are doing everything they can to bring us more California droughts and wildfires and Texas floods. They are doing everything they can to cut funding from climate science so we won’t know how bad it is. They are doing everything they can to make the USA a pariah nation. In fact, on the day I write this, the US has become the only country to reject the Paris Climate Accord. That is a stunning fact. What kind of country does this?
What they are doing is so un-American; so un-conservative.
But what these forces cannot do is turn back the tide of the economics. People are investing in clean energy because it makes economic sense. And this is the inflection point that makes the clean energy revolution unstoppable. That’s why I am optimistic. That’s why Al Gore is optimistic. That’s the threaded message in his movie. And it’s why you should be optimistic too.
What I don’t get is, if the clean energy revolution is unstoppable, why the vitriol? Surely if economics is driving the shift to renewables, the greens have already won? Do educated people like Abrahams really believe that renewables offer sufficient economic advantage to sweep the field without further help, or are they just peddling empty propaganda to their followers?
Back in the real world, claims that renewables are competitive are as wobbly as a climate projection. German Government Broadcaster ZDF reports old wind farms are closing in Germany, because the owners can’t afford to refurbish in the face of falling government subsidies.
While I don’t have a background in ‘climatology’ (whatever that is), I do have an Mechanical engineering background that includes applied physics, modeling, testing, observation, fluid dynamics, thermodynamics, mathematics, & properly applying the scientific method; & after 55yrs in industry, I know how many beans make five.
I find it incomprehensible that Abraham (who claims to have worked on – thermodynamics, heat transfer, fluid flow, numerical simulation, and energy), could come up with this tripe… he obviously doesn’t understand the laws of thermodynamics & heat transfer.
It’s a bit like a paleontologist believing the world was created 6,000yrs ago on October 23, 4004 BCE. At 9:00 in the morning, EST.
It was a Sunday !!!
Mechanical Engineer John Abraham, is a typical vassal of the Grauniad. He thinks that Al Gore’s new film is actually worth watching. Al Gore’s ‘An Inconvenient Sequel’ is non-scientific, actually anti-scientific and a waste of electronic space. Gore gets the science wrong or ignores it. Anyone who thinks the Science is settled has not been paying attention. The Grauniad functions only as a Fish & Chip wrapper these days.
What puzzles me is the fact that Gore’s first alarmist movie, The Inconvenient Truth, was menacing people about the impeding, immediate end of the world. How come, a few years later, there is a “sequel”, without any shame, since, according to the previous alarmist move, the wold should have ended by that point in time?
“I remember his first movie, which I thought was more steeped in science and data than this one,” implying that this one has even LESS science and data. 😀
When I am curious about what it means to be both American and Conservative, I can assure you the Grauniad is not where I will look to find the answer.
The movie might be worthwhile if it had a laugh track.
… but it’s UNAmerican to watch it.
I am not American, so I can be as unAmerican as I please.
I am a mechanical engineer focused on heat transfer and energy. I am also interested climate issues.
Being a lot older, I grew up at a time when we had real problems and a few chicken little issue too. I am a draft dodger. I enlisted in the navy to avoid getting drafted.
As problems go AGW is not on my list. The NSF with their definitive word on the issue says that man is contributing. Or if you read page two, maybe it is natural variation. Something to do with confidence interval and measurement error.
That is science speak for not having a clue.
Did I mention I am an engineer? I have a list of effective solutions. Wind and solar are not on my list since they are mickey mouse. Of course nuclear power works.
The primary reason I am skeptical of AGW, is the focus is on solution that will not work. It is like there is a political agenda that is interested in using the problem for their gain and not solving it.
John Abraham. Al Gore a scientific reference?
The science is settled, it’s just that the programmers who write the failed climate models suck at their job. Who was the scientific genius that predicted a rise in hurricane activity? Oh yeah, that was scientific genius Al Gore. Who predicted the lull in temperature rise over the past decade or so? Nobody. I think the science has settled on climate change and it settled on the dung heap of bad sciend.
The really sad thing is, that when CO2 emissions are reduced, the people who are expecting a world without storms, floods, tornadoes, hurricanes and sea level rise as a result, are going to be very disappointed.
New torture coming…must watch the movie every night after work. Nothing else may be watched.