Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
19 The scientific method (and other heresies)
Stewart W. Franks
Perhaps the most frustrating aspect of the science of climate change is the lack of any real
substance in attempts to justify the hypothesis. Often the occurrence of a drought or flood
is sufficient to generate a whole range of expert speculation from those that should know
better. Often the claims are couched with the disclaimer, 'Of course, no single event is
attributable to carbon dioxide and climate change however this is exactly the sort of event
wewouldexpecttosee.'Suchstatementsaremeaningless,asthesearealsothesortofevent
that we expect to see irrespective of anthropogenic climate change. What is most dismaying
is that the worst examples of speculative claims often come from the scientists themselves.
Commentators from the Bureau of Meteorology and the Commonwealth Scientific and
IndustrialResearchOrganisation(CSIRO)areamongsttheworstformakingstatementsthat
are simply incorrect.
One stated, 'Of course, the drought has not been helped by rising temperatures, which
have increased losses through evaporation,' and, 'It is very difficult to make a case that this
is just simply a run of bad luck driven by a natural cycle and that a return to more normal
rainfall is inevitable, as some would hope.' 1 In an interview with the Sydney Morning
Herald , another commentator mused that 'Perhaps we should call it our new climate.' 2 A
similar line was adopted by another climatologist, 'In the minds of a lot of people, the
rainfallwehadinthe1950s,1960sand1970swasabenchmark…Butwearejustnotgoing
to have that sort of good rain again as long as the system is warming up.' 3
Such claims are not limited to off-the-cuff speculation in the media—many incorrect
claims surface in the scientific literature. One example was the flurry of activity attempting
to link the recent MurrayDarling Basin drought and anthropogenic climate change.
The Murray-Darling Basin drought was initiated by the 2002-3 El Niño. Immediately
following this, a report under the auspices of the WWF-Australia noted that whilst rainfall
had been low, the air temperatures had been particularly elevated. 4 This led the authors to
claim that:
The higher temperatures caused a marked increase in evaporation rates, which sped up the loss of soil moisture and the
drying of vegetation and watercourses. This is the first drought in Australia where the impact of human-induced global
warming can be clearly observed. 5
While this may sound intuitively correct, it is wrong. It completely ignores the known
science of evapotranspiration and boundary layer meteorology. That is, when soil contains
Search WWH ::




Custom Search