[Pvgreens-discussion] Global Warming Forum

Fri Feb 22 12:57:54 MST 2008

"... it is far from settled in the public mind."

In fact, a recent national poll (in Time mag. feb.) showed only 14% of
Republicans thought climate change a serious problem.

---------------------------------------------

However, that's neither here nor there. In Fort Collins, our most recent
(2007) survey shows 82% believe we are getting warmer, and 73.5% believe
it's caused by humans. I've pasted relevant survey info below.

I humbly suggest I know a little about the subject, having spent nearly a
year as a founding member of the Fort Colilns Sustainability Group
getting a climate resolution through City Council.

I've now spent another year on Ft. Colllins' climate task force, which it
was my idea in the first place to start. (We're about to come out with a
widescale climate program, and could use all the help we can get.) It was
also myself who was in and got our original climate program past city
council in 1999, and again it was me who was able to remove City manager
discretion from the reporting requirements.

Just as I've pasted a real measured Ft. Collins survey response on the
subject here, I've also engaged in real internet debates on the subject.
I'm not ashamed to say I went into it thinking it a slam dunk, only to be
sent scurrying numerous times for hours of research to debunk all the
cleverly misleading graph and chart links which debaters referenced. I
don't know if Grey is that slick, but I DO know there is no shortage of
clever liars on the subject who ARE slick, and who have a wealth of
clever misleading info to point to.

I personally think we could use a debate about what we, in Fort Collins
can and should do about continuing climate damage. That could play very
nicely into support of our new Climate Program. (1st council worksession
on it this Tues)

........ eric levine

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question 10 is a new set of question for this year’s survey. The scale,
or set of questions, attempts to investigate the beliefs, knowledge and
attitudes around the issue of global warming.
Most of the respondents “Agree” that The earth is getting warmer (global
warming) (82.5%).
Most also “Agree” that Human caused emissions are causing global warming
(73.5%); Individual choices can make a positive difference in impacting
global warming (reduce it) (78.2%); Governments should do more about
global warming by offering community programs that enable citizens and
businesses to make choices that can reduce global warming (79.4%) and,
Governments should do more about global warming by enacting legislation
and regulations intended to reduce global warming (68.6%). In support of
these findings, most respondents
“Disagree” that Technology will solve global warming without any changes
needed in individual behavior (79%) and they also “Disagree” that Nothing
can be done to reduce global warming  (72.6%).
The City of Fort Collins Air Quality Survey-Spring 2007 was conducted in
March and April of 2007. Of the 1,500 surveys sent to a random sample of
residents of Fort Collins by mail, an adequate response rate occurred for
a total of 577 returned and completed, or 38%.
Environmental Behavior Consulting
Cheryl L. Asmus, Ph.D., Environmental Psychologist
4056 La Veta Drive
Loveland, CO 80538
970-461-8453
stillwater119 at comcast.net
June 2007

On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 07:40:23 +0000 ericfried at comcast.net writes:
Here's why we should go full speed ahead with this forum. While the real
debate among scientists is indeed settled, it is far from settled in the
public mind. Large segments of the population still doubt or deny the
measurable, observable reality of global warming, helped by a
disinformation campaign by Exxon-Mobil and the rest of the fossil fuel
complex. Simply saying "Debate's Over - We Won!" does not convince anyone
- it strengthens the other side's conviction that we are either bullies
or cowards, unable or unwilling to debate the facts. Since the case for
global warming is a slam dunk, why is anyone afraid to confront Dr. Gray
in public and make it clear to the world that he is out of his depth when
he goes to the broader issue of large-scale climate changes from his
niche of predicting hurricanes? Because he is a nice guy?? And they are
afraid he might be perceived as winning such a debate? That is so weak...

As far as I know, Dr. Gray has NEVER engaged in such a public debate, as
scientists instead prefer the back and forth volleys of published
articles. Some of the world's leading experts on climate change are right
here in Fort Collins or in Boulder, as is Gray. We would not be giving
him a platform - he already has a sizeable one in the public view. We
would be making him step off his platform. I am not debating whether or
not global warming is happening - I am a passionate advocate for taking
action to halt or at least slow the climate change underway. I just think
debunking one of the iconic contrarians in the field, on his home turf,
might be the single greatest contribution our little band of greens can
do to advance our cause. I want to treat Dr. Gray with the civility and
respect he deserves (we all deserve), but tear his false arguments to
shreds with real science. I mean come on: the White House/executive
branch/science establishment is only funding pro-global warming research
and shutting down the opposing view? This is the BUSH White House we are
discussing. Absurd. 

So, tomorrow I will be making more calls to find the best person to
debate against him. We decided several meetings ago to do this, and that
train has already left the station. It is time to make this happen, not
second-guess ourselves.

I would like to add that I think Sandy has conducted himself honorably
and transparently on this matter, and I applaud that, even though we
disagree on the best way forward. Per his instructions, I declined to
send the large pdf files to this discussion list, but they are available
on request from him.

-------------- Original message -------------- 
From: sandylemberg at juno.com 

> I agreed to work on finding a speaker for the proposed Global Warming 
> Forum to present the consensus position which is opposed by Bill Gray. 
> The first person I called, who wishes to remain anonymous, persuaded me

> that this forum is not a good idea. I am pasting below information I 
> received from that person which supports that position. 
> 
> Additionally, I am forwarding separately two large pdf files. Those 
> emails are likely to be blocked by the PV Greens email list because of 
> their size. I am asking that the moderator of the PV Greens list allow 
> them through, since they are essential to our discussion. 
> 
> I am suggesting that the PV Greens reconsider the idea and consider 
> cancelling the forum. I hope this discussion can be conducted entirely
by 
> email and that we can agree to cancel the forum well before our next PV

> Greens meeting. 
> 
> Because I now oppose the idea of this forum, I am abdicating. effective

> immediately, from any efforts to put it together. 
> 
> Thanks for your attention, Sandy Lemberg 
> 
> “A debate would be giving Bill Gray's views equal time with the 
> mainstream scientific views that are closer to my own. His views do not

> deserve equal time, because they are representative of only a very tiny

> fraction of scientists -- 1% at most. A debate would give the
impression 
> that there is actually a scientific controversy, when the truth is that

> there isn't. A debate plays into the hands of the skeptics. 
> 
> The web site 
> 
> http://www.davidsuzuki.org/Climate_Change/Science/Skeptics.asp 
> 
> contains the following quote, which I agree with: 
> 
> “To gain an understanding of the level of scientific consensus on
climate 
> change, a recent study examined every article on climate change
published 
> in peer-reviewed scientific journals over a 10-year period. Of the 928 
> articles on climate change the authors found, not one of them disagreed

> with the consensus position that climate change is happening or is 
> human-induced. 
> 
> These findings contrast dramatically with the popular media's reporting

> on climate change. One recent study analyzed coverage of climate change

> in four influential American newspapers (New York Times, Washington
Post, 
> LA Times, and Wall Street Journal) over a 14-year period. It found that

> more than half of the articles discussing climate change gave equal 
> weight to the scientifically discredited views of the skeptics. 
> 
> This discrepancy is largely due to the medi a’s drive for balance in 
> reporting. Journalists are trained to identify one position on any
issue, 
> and then seek out a conflicting position, providing both sides with 
> roughly equal attention. Unfortunately, the “balance” of the different 
> views within the media does not always correspond with the actual 
> prevalence of each view within society, and can result in unintended 
> bias. This has been the case with reporting on climate change, and as a

> result, many people believe that climate change is still being debated
by 
> scientists when in fact it is not.” “ 
> _______________________________________________ 
> Pvgreens-discussion mailing list 
> Pvgreens-discussion at pvgreens.org 
> http://pvgreens.org/mailman/listinfo/pvgreens-discussion 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lackof.org/pipermail/pvgreens-discussion/attachments/20080222/827de5e7/attachment.html