The audio-only message attached to the OP in this thread takes less than 5 minutes to listen to. Sadly, no one here seems to feel as if they need to listen to anyone else's opinion, they've got their own and they're going to stick to it no matter what.
The crux of Dessler's message was:
If 97% of the experts in a given field all believe the same thing, it is PROBABLY correct. It is not proven correct. We cannot say it is KNOWN to be correct. But it PROBABLY is correct.
The harm that will be done should those 97% be correct and yet ignored is immense. For one thing, the harm will be IRREVERSIBLE within any timeframe meaningful to anyone alive now. The lifetime of CO2 and methane in an overheated world is many hundreds of years at the very least. If we do not stop it now, we will not be able to stop it in the future.
The harm that will be done should those 97% be incorrect and yet measures are taken is small. It is small for several reasons:
1) There are numerous co-benefits to moving away from fossil fuels
a) Reduce air pollution
b) Get an early start on the new energy and transport infrastructure that WILL be required at some point
c) It is REVERSIBLE. If we eventually discover that we can safely burn coal and oil, they will still be here. We can quite easily return to a fossil fuel economy and burn the shit out of that stuff.
Any thoughts on any of THAT?
First, he makes an assumption that 97% of the scientists agree that:
- the earth is warming
- Humans are very likely the cause
- Future warming may be severe
Which is a bald faced lie. Brip already outlined why the 97% is bullshit. More importantly, if you take the statistical analysis at it face value, you notice that the 2 questions that are asked NEVER allude to the third point. Again, this is ANOTHER core element to the argument that the video makes.
IOW, the entire premise of the video that you are upset that no one is watching is based upon a complete fabrication. This alone is sufficient to disregard the asinine argument that he makes but we can go even FURTHER. The next step is to analyze the proposed ‘solutions’ that are being suggested and ask how much of an impact that they are going to make. In the video, he makes ANOTHER assumption that is incorrect, that the impacts of climate regulation are going to be small. That is absolutely false. All of the ‘small’ changes that are brought up have one thing in common – small impacts. Impacts that, when really looked at, amount to less than 1 percent of actual change. Is that going to do anything? Not according to ANYONE that believes AGW is going to be disastrous. Considering that, in order for the results to be disastrous in the first place, a feedback loop is required it is unthinkable that any of these changes amount to squat. In order to make real changes, we are going to have to completely remodel our economy and that is going to result in DRASTIC results. Lastly, he makes another MONUMENTAL asinine claim – that any changes occurring from AGW are completely irreversible. That is buffoonery. There was a time when people thought that the moon was impossible to reach or that the patent office was no longer needed because we had already invented everything. The fact is that no one knows what we are going to be able to do in ten or twenty years as technology moves faster every day.
There is one thing that I do know however. If AGW is going to cause drastic and deadly changes in our atmosphere we are going to NEED a strong economy and advanced technology to deal with it. There is no other way around that simple truth as the doomsayers have already stated that we cannot handle those changes with what we currently have.
The sad part is that the AGW believers seem to want to dismantle any method of dealing with that outcome out of sheer fear. Bad idea.
