Posts Tagged ‘Michael Mann’

Donald Trump and Climate Change

January 25, 2017

It is not surprising that the “New Scientist” is alarmed by the presidency of Donald Trump as a threat to science and critical thinking.   The 21 January 2017 issue of the New Scientist offers 4 articles on the potential threats of a Trump Presidency.   It could have offered many more articles, and perhaps it will.  Two of the four published articles will be shared in healthy memory blog posts.  The preceding post was the first.  This post is the second

This article is titled, “Resisting Trump:  How scientists can fight a climate witch-hunt.”  Donald Trump has argued that global warming is a hoax created by China to damage US manufacturing.  As president-elect, he has chosen a climate change denier to head the Environmental Protection Agency, and his pick for the helm of the energy department (DOE) is Rick Perry, who once suggested dismantling it.  If carbon dioxide emissions rise faster as a result, the consequences for the global climate will be. dire.  “We can’t take a four-year break,” says Marcia DeLonge at the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) in Washington, D.C.

Moreover, a Trump presidency won’t just be a problem for climate change.  It could also spell trouble for the scientists trying to stave it off.  The Trump transition team asked for a list of DOE employees and contractors who worked on climate change or had attended climate change meetings.  Correctly, the agency refused, but the incident sent a chill through the scientific community, particularly in light of the Republicans revival of the Holman rule.  The Holman rule allows for specific federal employees have their pay slashed to $1.

These fears of being targeted are legitimate.  Already there has been an uptick in Freedom of Information Act requests for the scientists’ private emails, said Peter Fountainee, the lawyer who defended climate scientist Michael Mann in a case against the State of Virginia.  If such tactics also come from within their own agencies, federal scientists might leave en masse.

The director of science and policy at the Union of Concerned Scientists in Cambridge, Massachusetts, Peter Frumhoff, says this would permanently erode federal agencies’ ability to use science to inform public decisions.   He begs scientists not leave because if they leave they’ll lose their ability to know whats’s going on.

Even if they do stay, they may be forced to stop pursuing certain lines of research.  The Trump transition team suggested as much when it said NASA should shift its focus away from “politically correct environmental monitoring.”  Apparently, we are entering a new era of political management, “Management by Thuggery!”

Fears that data will be insured or altered have prompted crowd-sourcing to back up federal climate and environmental data.  Climate Mirror is a distributed volunteer effort supported by the Internet Archive and the Universities of Pennsylvania and Toronto.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Hey US Teachers, leave those climate myths alone

February 22, 2016

The title of this post is the title of an article by Michael Mann in the Feb 20-26, 2016 edition of the New Scientist.  He summarized an article in the 12 Feb 2016 issue of science, whose authors are Eric Pulitzer, Mark McCaffrey, A. Lee Hannah, Joshua Rosenau, Minda Berbeco, & Ann H. Reid (doi.org/bcgt).  Even though 97% of active climate scientists attribute recent global warming to human causes, and most of the general public accept that climate change is occurring, only about half of U.S. adults believe that human activity is the predominant cause.   The U.S. ranked the lowest in this belief among 20 nations polled in 2014.

The article examines how the societal debate in the U.S.  affects science classrooms.  They found that whereas  most U.S. science teachers include climate change in their courses, it appears that their insufficient grasp  of science is hindering effective teaching. Generally teachers devote a paltry 1 to 2 hours to this important topic.  Despite the fact that 97% of experts agree climate change is mainly human caused, many teachers still “teach the controversy,” suggesting a sizable “consensus gap” exists.  They survey showed that 7 in 10 teachers mistakenly believe that at least a fifth of  experts dispute human-caused climate change.  Although they are supposed to be teaching science, they have insufficient knowledge in the discipline they are teaching.

Michael Mann in his book “The Hockey Stick and Climate Wars describes how those with interests in fossil fuels have spent tens of millions of dollars to create the impression of a consensus gap by orchestrating a public relations campaign aimed at attacking the science and the scientists, thus confusing the public about the reality and threat of climate change.  They also have created a partisan political divide on the issue.  The United States is the only advanced country with a major political party denying the reality of climate change.

These climate myths provide an unfortunate example of the effectiveness  of Big Lies.  These Big Lies are working their damage in the United States and not only on the issue of climate change.

These myths on climate change are exacerbating a problem and endowing it to our
children.  These children need to know truth so that they can educate their parents.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2016. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.