[Pvgreens-discussion] Global Warming Forum

Sun Feb 24 00:32:56 MST 2008

Actually we have discussed this forum extensively at several PV Greens meetings. I know you cannot attend the meetings when they are scheduled, Eric, but the fact that you were not there does not mean we did not have informed discussion before "flying this out the door." I understand your viewpoint, I just disagree with it. 

-------------- Original message -------------- 
From: eric levine <eric.levine at juno.com> 

There is (only) one person in our group who is a major climate change research scientist. He unfortunately does not live in Colorado anymore, but I'm not sure if even he has debate skills to tackle it. ...
PVG could have asked for a few more informed opinions and a few less assumptions before flying this out the door.

........ eric levine

On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 15:43:57 -0800 (PST) joe kissell <jrfk54 at yahoo.com> writes:
I am having a hard time understanding why people who feel that climate change is a serious human induced problem are unwilling to suggest someone who can debunk Dr. Gray's points of view in a public forum. I'm surprised there would be no one in our area who feels comfortable, knowledgable enough and moreover enthusiastic about doing so. 

I really thought people would be all over the chance to knock down Gray's theories. 

I certainly appreciate your work and committment to this Eric. Are the people you are involved with really afraid that you can't counter Gray's arguments or do you just think that it is giving equal time to the contrarian and that any press at the event would do the same?

Joe Kissell

eric levine <eric.levine at juno.com> wrote:
"... 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 resear
ch 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 

_______________________________________________
Pvgreens-discussion mailing list
Pvgreens-discussion at pvgreens.org
http://pvgreens.org/mailman/listinfo/pvgreens-discussion

Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lackof.org/pipermail/pvgreens-discussion/attachments/20080224/3ff25474/attachment-0001.htm