By
Scott Wagland
Hey, wanna make a bet? This new computer model will predict this year’s football finalists and the champions – you put in their stats, past performances of the players and coaches etc. How much would you bet? $50? $10k? Maybe you’d want a demonstration, say, next week’s games. Well, actually, it can’t predict seven days ahead reliably. But it will predict the finals. So, you think, if I put in that information from previous seasons it will give me the finalists of those years? Well, no, it’s only about 50% accurate in predicting the past. So anyway, wanna bet your house? Your national economy? Welcome to the world of computer climate change modelling.
We’re being asked to bet our economies on models that can’t even reliably predict what has already happened or what will happen in a fortnight, yet being told the science is settled and no doubt remains. “We’re strong enough to admit that the global cooling scare of the ‘70s was wrong, and in recognition we’ll use ‘climate change’ instead of ‘global warming’ so we can attribute every weather fluctuation to it. We’re past the model that produced a hockey stick graph regardless of what data was entered. Of course all our new models agree. It’s not like the first studies came out saying 2°C in 80 years, and when not enough people panicked the next report came out saying 3°C in 40 years. What’s that?! Politicians still aren’t taking us seriously? Well, let’s publish a report that says 6°C in 30 years, with huge swathes of land flooded! With it we’ll put out pretty little CGI simulations of land being washed away, and doctored photos of tumbleweed and bleached cattle skulls on busy suburban streets for the front page.” Perhaps some wolves wouldn’t be out of place either, considering how often it’s being cried.
Of course conservative governments should shoulder the most blame. Ignore the irony of course that wanting to stop climate change is one of the most extremely conservative stances you can take (along with those who believe in evolution yet wail and gnash their teeth for every species that becomes extinct). Here’s a little secret – climate change happens. Climate change has happened. Climate change will happen again. You can argue over whether climate change is being affected by human activity, but to argue it is purely man-made is simply preposterous. The last vestiges of guilt over abandonment of the scientific method meant the IPCC couldn’t even bring itself to say more than “it is likely that anthropogenic warming has had a discernible influence” on physical systems. Likely, incidentally, means here a 66%-90% probability – and this is that it is discernable at all, let alone the driving force. To completely stop climate change would involve unbelievably gross interference with nature. (Canute springs to mind, but to be fair he was disproving his power intentionally).
So what of government policy? Pollution should be cut wherever possible, for the sake of cutting pollution. Energy efficiency is a worthy goal in its own right, like recycling. Alternative energy sources should be sought, since our current main sources are not infinite (and will run out within 30 years…as true today as when it was first said 50 years ago). But targets? The Kyoto Protocol was embraced by many; a great feel-good exercise with no serious enforcement, and only former Communist countries that ran grossly inefficient industry until exposed to capitalism have come close to meeting their targets. Carbon trading? Go ahead, pollute as much as you want, run a mansion with 20 times the average household electricity bill, fly to meetings with other environmentalists instead of teleconferencing, run inefficient industry; if you’re rich you can just buy your indulgences.
How about a 60% reduction in CO2 emissions by 2050? Will you commit your government to stern targets? Nice and far enough away that you won’t ever be held responsible (unlike, say, 30% by 2020; a bit too…accountable). Personally, I’m going to go one further. I hereby pledge to reduce my carbon emissions, and that of any government I form, by 95%…by 2150*.
Ah, it feels good to help the planet.
(*Disclaimer: this is a non-core promise, and should there be any technological changes (i.e. an anti-aging pill) the target will be re-evaluated).
Copyright © Scott Wagland 2007. Do not reproduce without permission. All rights reserved.