Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
its wasteful comforts are bringing us closer
to a Biblical day of judgement.”
There is a certain irony to Dutton's lik-
ening of what he perceives as global warm-
ing hysteria to the notion that modernity is
leading us to a “Biblical day of judgement,”
given that a large share of climate change
naysayers are fundamental Christians of a
conservative bent. It is true that the news
media will often inflate a problem out of
proportion to gain an audience. However,
Dutton's view ignores the fact that much
of the concern about climate change is fu-
eled by hard-nosed science—based not
just on climate change models, which by
nature are to some degree speculative, but
also on vast amounts of field observations.
We have moved from predictive science to
observational science.
Ideologues abound on both sides of the
climate change debate, but one cannot
deny or fail to be concerned by tide-gauge
records of rising seas, temperature data
showing warming oceans, observations
of glacier retreat the world over, and maps
showing the shrinking areal extent of per-
mafrost in northern latitudes. Also, the
“real problems” of poverty, terrorism, and
broken financial systems that Dutton men-
tions will all be exacerbated by the realities
of climate change.
We are already seeing climate change
refugees (e.g., Pacific Islanders having to
abandon their homeland because of sea
level rise, and Alaska natives facing reloca-
tion because of erosion). In the next cen-
tury rising seas will force many, including
tens of millions of Bangladesh citizens, to
seek higher ground. Even the economies
of wealthy countries like the United States
will be challenged, as billions of dollars
will have to be spent to protect coastal cit-
ies. Weather patterns will be altered, caus-
ing drought in some places. Major rivers in
Asia and elsewhere may disappear during
the dry season, as global warming causes
the high mountain glaciers to continue to
melt.
The Petition Project
In a bulk mailing in 1998, the global warm-
ing denier Arthur Robinson, founder of the
Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine,
circulated what has come to be known as
the “Oregon Petition.” Attached to the peti-
tion was what appeared to be a publication
of the National Academy of Sciences (nas),
using the same typeface and format as the
nas official proceedings and with a cover
note signed by a former nas president,
Frederick Seitz, who is a physicist. This was
not a peer-reviewed publication but a piece
filled with misinformation, disguised as a
legitimate publication in order to encour-
age scientists to sign the petition. The peti-
tion read as follows:
“We urge the United States govern-
ment to reject the global warming agree-
ment that was written in Kyoto, Japan,
in December, 1997, and any other similar
proposals. The proposed limits on green-
house gases would harm the environment,
