[PREV - CRANIAL_COOLING] [TOP]
THE_HERETIC
August 7, 2010
Added stuff from: July 14, 2009
Rev: December 21, 2010
One of Freeman Dyson's latest causes
is to play global warming "heretic".
DYSON
He argues that we're worrying too much
about global warming right now.
His analysis is that:
o the computer models are really not
that adequate, the damage inflicted
by our release of CO2 is not that
easy to estimate.
o by the time we succeed in fixing it
the hard way, there will be an
easier way.
His method of arguing the second case is twofold:
o He emphasises the scale of the biosphere,
pointing out that it's an easily accessible
short-term carbon sink.
o He sketches out speculative scenarios of
different technologies that might be developed.
JUGGLING
There are two things about this
that are of interest:
(1) if he's correct, the climate
science community has been backed into
a premature certainty, and what we're
looking at is a duel of religious Ultimately, these
fanaticisms, not a tale of science issues are our biggest
vs. ignorance. problem -- how is is
possible for a
(2) It's extremely difficult to concerned citizen to
deal with speculative scenarios deal intelligently
in a reasonable way... Dyson's with these issues?
proposed hypotheticals seem to How do we increase our
have almost universally rubbed collective intelligence?
people the wrong way.
Freeman Dyson made a
minor splash when he
"came out of the
closet" on this and I gather he approached this move with
stood revealed as a some trepidation: around the same
Global Warming time he published a lot of more
Skeptic (albeit of an general work about the need for
unusual sort). Scientific Heretics.
Afterwards there was an The *idea* of being a
immediate attack by a non-conformist rebel
round of liberal always sounds good to
commentators who had no us in the abstract.
idea who he was, and When you hear the
could barely grasp what details, then we begin
he was saying. To them to wonder.
he was yet another
odd-ball, all too willing
to dive into a subject
where he's unqualified to MERCHANTS_OF_DOUBT
speak. Another tool of
the conservative denial This may be the saddest aspect of
machine... the entire affair: at present,
many of us are getting used to the
Was this guy bought, idea that the conservative rulers
or is he insane? of the mainstream are the masters
(He certainly *sounds* of deceptions and lies.
insane, doesn't he?)
But knee-jerk reactions are no better
if they jerk left than if they jerk
right. Myself I think Dyson deserved
a fairer hearing.
The first thing to undestand:
as far as credentials go,
Dyson's are pretty good. He
isn't a climate specialist,
but he *was* one of the first
physicists to look into the
subject, and he does appear to
have been keeping up with it.
He knows more about this than
I do, and certainly knows more
than his most vociferous critics.
Dyson's critique of Global Warming
doctrine is a little subtle:
He has reservations about the
reliance on computer modeling of The complaint about computer models
the climate, but his main point is I'm afraid sounds immediately like
not that it Global Warming isn't part of the usual conservative
happening or even that it isn't litany.
human induced...
Nevertheless, some very extreme
His point is mainly that the claims were made with computer
ship of the global climate models that turned out to be
steers so slowly that the completely wrong ("Club of Rome",
things we can do now are barely "Limits to Growth").
worth doing compared to the
costs, and that we may very Let us hope that the modelers
well be better off waiting for are doing a better job now.
new technical developments to
open up new lines of attack on
the problem. I suspect that the weakest point
of Dyson's argument is that he
Further, he goes on to has to buy into someone else's
speculate about the estimates of the costs-- and
kinds of things we here he arguably *is* beyond his
might be able to do in direct expertise.
the future, using as an
example genetically Many of the things we might
modified crops to do to combat global warming
increase the thickness are worth doing anyway, for
of top soil. other reasons.
I think Dyson was in a bind: MITIGATE
if he left the field of
possiblities a blank, there's
nothing there to catch the
imagination, and the natural
response to a vague gesture
towards some future techfix
would be "like what? what
kind of stuff are you talking
about?"
But by filling it in
some blanks, and
presenting some actual
scenarios, it all seems
fantastic, fanciful,
and he comes off as
some sort of crazy.
(You're going to bet
the planet on *that*?)
The idea that a Known Evil
like genetically modified
crops might save us from
another Known Evil did
not go over well.
WHATS_GOOD_FOR_GM
So, here we have a fellow concerned
about improving our top soil management I think there are
who was thus labeled as a conservative multiple levels of
devil. irony there...
"The Question of Global Warming"
[ref]
[ref]
[ref]
[ref]
"Our Biotech Future"
[ref]
[ref]
[ref]
A New York Times Magazine profile of Dyson:
[ref]
--------
[NEXT - MITIGATE]