Windmills along the lake

Onshore · 10-27-2009, 08:26 PM

I'm not "on the clock" right now so let me preface this by saying I'm speaking solely for myself at this moment and not my employer.

First, thanks to Redwing for suggesting the concept of having a "healthy discussion". Can we try that?

Second, there is no consensus on global warming. There is consensus that, globally, climates are changing. How the climate is changing depends on your geographic location. Some places are in fact cooler and wetter. While I cannot think of any well known scientist or scientific organization that would dispute that human impacts are complicating the global climate equation. There is certainly debate with regards to just how much of a factor human impact really is given the complexity of the system. As someone who works in the environmental science field I question how anyone can speak in absolutes on this issue. There are too many variables involved. We can't conclusively model the track and intensity of an active hurricane more than a few hours in advance and yet people will speak in absolutes about where the global climate will be in 50 years? To attribute climate change solely to the impacts of human activity is just as irresponsible as it is to say we have no impact. Science has not eliminated all other possible causes for change. We lack the capability to test and prove the theory at this point. When we become so sure of ourselves that we become close-minded (a condition similar to having one's head stuck in the sand...) and forget that we might be wrong (not like it would be the first time...) we stop being scientists and we need to be challenged. Good science does not fear being questioned. Good science is grounded in questions and the ability to tested by them and withstand them. Any scientist that responds to questioning of their work with derisions and insults deserves suspicion.

Causes aside, we know that the climate has changed in the past and it will continue to change in the future. We cannot stop change from happening. If we allow ourselves to believe we are solely responsible for climate change we can then delude ourselves into thinking change is avoidable or reversible, and then we risk failing to be prepared to address changes as they occur. This does not seem like an issue on which we can afford to drop the ball.

Third, why does everything have to be about climate change? There are plenty of other good reasons to explore alternative power. Oil is not a renewable resource; it will run out. It's getting more expensive and money is tight. It funds certain governments that don't like us all that much. It contributes to acid rain. Pick a reason...

Ok…. Done ranting …Can we go back to talking about windmills now?

10-27-2009, 08:26 PM	#11
Onshore Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 502 Thanks: 12 Thanked 423 Times in 145 Posts	I'm not "on the clock" right now so let me preface this by saying I'm speaking solely for myself at this moment and not my employer. First, thanks to Redwing for suggesting the concept of having a "healthy discussion". Can we try that? Second, there is no consensus on global warming. There is consensus that, globally, climates are changing. How the climate is changing depends on your geographic location. Some places are in fact cooler and wetter. While I cannot think of any well known scientist or scientific organization that would dispute that human impacts are complicating the global climate equation. There is certainly debate with regards to just how much of a factor human impact really is given the complexity of the system. As someone who works in the environmental science field I question how anyone can speak in absolutes on this issue. There are too many variables involved. We can't conclusively model the track and intensity of an active hurricane more than a few hours in advance and yet people will speak in absolutes about where the global climate will be in 50 years? To attribute climate change solely to the impacts of human activity is just as irresponsible as it is to say we have no impact. Science has not eliminated all other possible causes for change. We lack the capability to test and prove the theory at this point. When we become so sure of ourselves that we become close-minded (a condition similar to having one's head stuck in the sand...) and forget that we might be wrong (not like it would be the first time...) we stop being scientists and we need to be challenged. Good science does not fear being questioned. Good science is grounded in questions and the ability to tested by them and withstand them. Any scientist that responds to questioning of their work with derisions and insults deserves suspicion. Causes aside, we know that the climate has changed in the past and it will continue to change in the future. We cannot stop change from happening. If we allow ourselves to believe we are solely responsible for climate change we can then delude ourselves into thinking change is avoidable or reversible, and then we risk failing to be prepared to address changes as they occur. This does not seem like an issue on which we can afford to drop the ball. Third, why does everything have to be about climate change? There are plenty of other good reasons to explore alternative power. Oil is not a renewable resource; it will run out. It's getting more expensive and money is tight. It funds certain governments that don't like us all that much. It contributes to acid rain. Pick a reason... Ok…. Done ranting …Can we go back to talking about windmills now?

The Following User Says Thank You to Onshore For This Useful Post:
hazelnut (03-07-2011)