March Madness
Hooray for Doomsday!
A third of the way through his State of the Union speech, Donald Trump declared, "We have ended the war on American energy, and we have ended the war on beautiful, clean coal." We knew that he believes that manmade global warming is a hoax. We knew that he trusts Vladimir Putin but not our National Academy of Sciences. We knew that denial of climate science has become a litmus test of true Republicanism and a prerequisite for serving in his cabinet. Still, to see the standing ovation that followed from the Republican side and the joy on the faces of his cabinet was shocking. But in a way it did us a favor, making it painfully clear that neither scientific facts nor protest marches will change the minds of these hardened deniers. Ideologues do not change their minds: that is their defining quality. Instead they have to be voted out of office.
This November we will join in a big-tent coalition, generate the largest turnout of any mid-term election, and start to take our country back from a man already regarded as the worst president in U.S. history and certainly the most dangerous. It will be time for every American to examine their conscience and answer the question of an old Harlan County song, "Which Side Are You On?" Our grandchildren will want to know how we answered.
This November we will join in a big-tent coalition, generate the largest turnout of any mid-term election, and start to take our country back from a man already regarded as the worst president in U.S. history and certainly the most dangerous. It will be time for every American to examine their conscience and answer the question of an old Harlan County song, "Which Side Are You On?" Our grandchildren will want to know how we answered.
Donald Trump: President for Life? See here.
Rebekah Mercer Puts a Museum’s Credibility at Risk, by James Powell and Michael Mann, New York Times Op Ed, Feb. 5, 2018
"Climate change skeptic"? No such thing. See here.
Blog Posts: Munich in America, Madoff for President, Strike for Science, Disappearing Data, How we know man-made global warming is true, Trusting LIGO, and more here.
In 31 seconds, review the core evidence for man-made global warming.
The Consensus on Anthropogenic Global Warming: 99.94%.
Studies of the consensus among scientists on anthropogenic global warming that are based on literature surveys give higher and more consistent results than opinion polls. Using rejection as the criterion of consensus, five literature surveys (11-15 in the chart above) agree closely (literature survey 10 did not use rejection alone). The five comprise 54,195 articles from 1991-2015 and reveal an average consensus of 99.94%. I estimate that at least 150,000 individual authors wrote those articles and that number does not include all those who wrote about AGW during the period, only those found using specific search terms. (See Powell 2016, Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 36(3), 157-163. doi:10.1177/0270467617707079. Download HERE.)
For the sake of our grandchildren's future, is it not past time that scientists and those who support science speak loudly and with one voice to proclaim that on anthropogenic global warming, publishing scientists are virtually unanimous?
For the sake of our grandchildren's future, is it not past time that scientists and those who support science speak loudly and with one voice to proclaim that on anthropogenic global warming, publishing scientists are virtually unanimous?