Comments on: Communicating Climate Change: The “Isolated Weather Event” Problem

By: baidu

baidu — Fri, 13 Aug 2010 13:13:39 +0000

Very well written,thank you share. baidu

By: M003 8

M003 8 — Fri, 11 Jun 2010 02:36:47 +0000

There is every reason in the world to study climate change to actually understand it, how it affects the biosphere, and how it affects humanity. With our knowledge, we can adjust our ways of living, to better adapt to the stress that our biosphere has taken during our time here on this planet.Q5800That, is the sort of research that should be done with climate change. I have faith in the Obama administration that we may actually progress somewhere in four years, after eight years of stagnation.N900

By: likwidshoe

likwidshoe — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 06:13:07 +0000

New news: “Climate scientists withdraw journal claims of rising sea levels”. The REAL “deniers”, those who have politicized and bastardized science so that it is no longer science, are silent about this. Why is that, Dave? Why are you so silent about all of the scams and lies perpetuated by those of your ilk?

You not championing science. You’re championing politics.

By: Not Cold Everywhere : CleanTechnica

Not Cold Everywhere : CleanTechnica — Fri, 08 Jan 2010 20:02:08 +0000

[...] good recent article on ecopolitology, “Communicating Climate Change: The ‘Isolated Weather Event’ Problem“, discusses [...]

By: Peter

Peter — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 17:43:12 +0000

‘We blame every home run on steroids, but no hurricanes on climate change.”

I can emptahise with much you say, and especially regarding the parlous state of communicating the various aspects of ‘climate’ and the factors involved in its changes, but is this statement above strictly correct in complement? I guess… it depends on who is meant by ‘we’.

Just, I have in mind one notable advocate, Al Gore, who seems to have created quite a storm (sorry) in this regard, at least in my neck ‘o the woods, not so long ago.

Frankly, I would wish he, and many others, were a tad more circumspect with the claims and deadlines as, like it or not, the onus with the public is to persuade into areas they have little incentive to go to.

That takes trust. And when the cake gets over-egged, it’s all the more tricky to make it palatable the next time.

And no point pointing to the words and deeds of others; this requires a higher standard, not double ones.

More faith in the public is required. And respect. They are open to the facts, well told, honestly. But conversely will punish ‘over-enthusiasm’ if it is found wanting, even with the best of intentions.

Or, and this is key, even if a notion may well be valid, but impatience taints it before it can be properly borne out.