Source: BBC Radio Scotland: Newsdrive
URL: N/A
Date: 31/03/2014
Event: Judith Curry: "Too much of the science is being filtered through a political agenda"
Credit: BBC Radio Scotland
People:
Bill Whiteford: Today the UN is warning that the impact of global warming is likely to get worse, with a growing risk of floods, food shortages and threats to human health, unless carbon emissions are reduced. Dr. Chris Fields [sic] is Co-chairman of the Working Group of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the IPCC, who wrote the report. He says no-one on the planet will be left untouched.
Chris Field: Risks of serious consequences from climate change are really pervasive, and especially if we continue on a high-emissions trajectory, the prospects for severe outcomes are really inescapable. But, with ambitious investments in mitigation, those risks are substantially decreased.
Bill Whiteford: Well, Judith Curry is Chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology. She joins us on the line now - hello.
Judith Curry: Hello, Bill.
Bill Whiteford: So, what's your view on climate change and also on the IPCC report?
Judith Curry: Okay, on climate change, I think this is a very complex problem that I'm concerned that the IPCC has oversimplified, both the problem and its solution. Um, there's been too much focus on the human causes of climate change and its dangers, and not enough attention to natural climate variability. So I'm concerned about that aspect. And, you know, there's the issue, even if we were to successfully, you know, implement mitigation policies and reduce carbon dioxide emissions substantially, it's not clear exactly what that would do to the climate. Um, since, you know, with rapidly increasing carbon dioxide emissions, we haven't seen any increase in global average surface temperature for the last 16 years. So, you know, there are a lot of things going on in the climate, and you can't blame everything that happens with the climate on humans - a lot of it is just natural.
Bill Whiteford: I see you've been called a "lukewarmist" - do people not also describe you as a "denier"? And why are you against the consensus on this?
Judith Curry: Um, the issue is this. I think for myself. I look at the evidence, I look at the observations and I acknowledge uncertainties, I acknowledge that this is a very difficult problem to reason about. And that's where I'm coming from. I think this new report is interesting in that it acknowledges the uncertainties, it's more humble in saying that, you know, we can't really predict what's going to happen in the future, when and where, but it talks about, you know, risks and possibilities - and that's what we're talking about, is possibilities of risk. And we don't know how to quantify the risk - it's too uncertain. And the focus on adaptation, I think, makes sense. And, globally, there's an adaptation deficit - we're not even adapted to our, you know, the risks in our current climate, especially with regard to extreme weather events. So, um, we're not ready for the surprises that, you know, climate change might have for us.
Bill Whiteford: But wouldn't it be true to say that the vast majority of scientific opinion is weighted against you, and a lot of the professional bodies that represent scientists? And there's a great deal of anger amongst them that there are some people - a very small minority, like yourselves - who take issue with the basic science.
Judith Curry: I don't take issue with the basic science. There are very few facts, in all this, such as - yes, global temperature's been increasing for the past 100 years, last 200 years, 300 years. And the IPCC has an explanation only for the warming since 1976 - they don't have an explanation for the warming from 1910 to 1940, for example. So there is a lot of uncertainties, there's a lot of unfortunate attempts to enforce a consensus and there's a lot of people - there's a silent group of scientists who are afraid to speak out, they don't have tenure. So there's a lot more diversity in thought on this subject than is generally portrayed in the media.
Bill Whiteford: But it's a basic scientific fact that carbon dioxide causes a greenhouse effect, and we're putting more CO2 into the atmosphere and that will raise the temperature.
Judith Curry: No-one questions that. The issue is: how large is the effect, relative to natural climate variability. That's the whole big issue. Solar variations, the ocean oscillations and circulations, volcanoes - the whole mix of other processes, how clouds interact with climate variability and change - there are a whole host of uncertainties that haven't been adequately sorted out to say that we know how much of the recent climate change we can really attribute to humans.
Bill Whiteford: But the IPCC will say "Look, this is an urgent problem - we have to do something now". And even by just raising some of these issues, some of these doubts, you are in effect giving succour to those who want to do nothing about our changing climate.
Judith Curry: I'm a scientist. I look at the evidence and I'm often asked to talk about what I think - what are the arguments for, what are the arguments against, what are the areas of uncertainty and ignorance. And I do the best job that I can, to sift through the scientific evidence. What that - the implications of that, or somebody's policy agenda, I'm not going to speak for, but as a scientist, that's my job. And that's what I've been doing. Too much of the science is being filtered through a political agenda, and that's a concern of mine
Bill Whiteford: Professor Judith Curry from Georgia Institute of Technology, thank you very much for joining us.