Reactions to Report on Al Gore at AGU

 HYPERLINK "http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheus/archives/climate_change/index.html#001025" http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheus/archives/climate_change/index.html#001025

December 15, 2006

This  HYPERLINK "http://www.insidebayarea.com/ci_4840810" news report of Al Gore’s speech at the American Geophysical Union yesterday is interesting for at least three reasons.

Here is the relevant excerpt from the  HYPERLINK "http://www.insidebayarea.com/ci_4840810" news story:

"We have somehow persuaded ourselves that we really don't have to care that much about what we're doing to future generations," he said. 

"We have to find a way to communicate the direness of the situation."

James Hansen, director of NASA'S Goddard Institute for Space Studies, had a front row seat to Gore's hour-long talk. His name often comes up when talk turns to the need in science for a standard-bearer; more than any scientist, he has generated headlines for his spars with the White House on climate change.

He agreed fully with Gore's call. "Scientists have not done a good job communicating with the public," he said in an interview.

The "huge gap" between where the science is and what the public knows, Hansen added, "is partly our fault and part of the problem."

Dan Kammen, co-director of the University of California's Institute of the Environment and a professor in the Energy and Resources Group, said being a scientist activist has its price. He's lost out on grants because of his political positions on energy and climate issues, he said.

"Some of us have been doing this for some time and at some risk," Kammen said.

Are more scientists likely to heed Gore's call? In a few weeks, a pack of climate scientists and politicians are planning a demonstration in front of the White House.

First interesting item: James Hansen asserts that scientists have not done a good job communicating with the public. Of course there is a huge gap between what climate experts know and what the public knows. There are similar gaps between what experts know about the history of Iraq and what the public knows, how a modern automobile works under the hood and what the public knows, functioning of cancer cells and what the public knows, and every single other issue for which experts have specialized knowledge. I will speculate that Dr. Hansen is making a political point, as Mr. Gore did, suggesting that if the public only knew what they knew, then they’d act exactly like Mr. Gore or Dr. Hansen. This of course is the public understanding of science (PUS) fallacy that we have discussed many times here. There are two responses to the PUS fallacy on climate change. First, for many years, and especially 2006 there has been overwhelming awareness of the public about climate change and support for action. What is it that Mr. Gore and Dr. Hansen think will happen if the public becomes more educated? The only place for opinion polls on this issue to go is down. Consider that the EU public overwhelming supports action on climate change and yet EU performance closely resembles that of the United States. There is more to this issue than public opinion. Of course, public opinion matters a great deal if one, hypothetically, is using the global warming issue for some larger goal, like running for president. (Disclaimer: I’ve bet Lisa D. lunch that Mr. Gore will run. We shall see.)

Second interesting item: Berkeley’s Dan Kammen suggest that he has lost out on grants because of his political views? Prof. Kammen is a darling of the climate community, and based on what I’ve seen and read, it is well deserved. I find it hard to believe that he has been punished for his popular and widely accepted views. As I had earlier stated about Bill Gray’s claims about funding, I’d need some evidence to buy such claims.

Third interesting item: "In a few weeks, a pack of climate scientists and politicians are planning a demonstration in front of the White House."

Posted on December 15, 2006 01:50 AM