Climate scientists need to take more responsibility about how their work is presented to the public, suggests the Met Office's Richard Betts. In this week's Green Room, he says it is vital to prevent climate science being misunderstood or misused.
Individual weather events, from heatwaves to big freezes, cannot be used either to prove or disprove climate change
Recently, I gave a talk on climate change in my local village hall in Devon, and not surprisingly I was given a hard time.
In fact, it started two days before that. Cut off from work by the snow (which, incidentally, had been forecast with almost pinpoint accuracy), I was out with the kids and being teased by the other dads.
"Where's all this global warming you're always on about, ha ha!"
The usual stuff, leading to the usual somewhat nerdy discussion on the difference between weather and climate, which was then cut short when one of the children crashed their sledge and asked if we had got that on video to send to a TV show such as You've Been Framed.
Of course, we are seeing the same comments in some parts of the press and on Twitter, from those who jump on any bit of cold weather to say it proves that global warming is not happening and we're all a bunch of idiots (or worse).
No matter how many times we say that "global warming" means a rise of average temperature across the world, decade by decade, and not every year being consistently warmer than the last in every place on Earth, there are still those that get this mixed up.
Warming world
Yes, we have had the coldest December in the UK for 14 years and now we are having a big freeze in early January; but the UK covers less than half of one thousandth of the Earth's surface.
Climate data shows that human activities are warming the world
Journey through climate history
Last year was actually the fifth warmest year on record as far as global temperatures were concerned.
The four warmest years were, in ascending order, 2002, 2003, 2005 and 1998. The last decade was the warmest on record, followed by the 1990s and then the 1980s, so the world is definitely warming up.
To be fair, people often make the same mistake but in the other direction, and link every heatwave, major flood, drought and famine to global warming.
Of course, we know that these things happen anyway, even without climate change - they may happen more often under a warmer climate, but it is wrong to blame climate change for every single event.
Climate scientists know this, but still there are people outside of climate science who will claim or imply such things if it helps make the news or generate support for their political or business agenda.
Mixed messages
Climate "sceptics" accuse climate scientists of exaggerating the evidence for human-caused climate change in order to secure their own funding; but actually I think that any vested interests in talking up the problem lie elsewhere.
Individual natural disasters are not evidence of climate change
The focus on climate change is now so huge that everybody seems to need to have some link to climate change if they are to attract attention and funding.
Hence the increasing tendency to link everything to climate change - whether scientifically proven or not.
The question is: do climate scientists do enough to counter this? Or are we guilty of turning a blind eye to these things because we think they are on "our side" against the climate sceptics?
It's easy to blame the media and I don't intend to make generalisations here, but I have quite literally had journalists phone me up during an unusually warm spell of weather and ask "is this a result of global warming?"
When I say "no, not really, it is just weather", they've thanked me very much and then phoned somebody else, and kept trying until they got someone to say yes it was.
Talking up of the problem then gives easy ammunition to those who wish to discredit the science.
They do not care whether the wrong information came from the scientists or from a second-hand source, they just say (quite rightly) that it's wrong and therefore why should they trust other parts of the science?
Climate scientists need to take more responsibility for the communication of their work to avoid this kind of thing.
Even if scientists themselves are not blaming everything on climate change, it still reflects badly on us if others do this.
We cannot simply say it is everyone else's fault; we need to be very clear about what can be used as evidence for or against climate change.
Long-term, large-scale trends and the overall statistics of extreme weather events can and should be part of this evidence base. Individual weather events, from heatwaves to big freezes, cannot be used either to prove or disprove climate change.
If we do not help the media, NGOs and the public to understand this, we have done nothing to stop them getting it wrong.
If our science is misunderstood and misused, and then turned against us, it really will be a case of We've Been Framed.
Dr Richard Betts is head of climate impacts at the Met Office Hadley Centre
The Green Room is a series of opinion articles on environmental topics running weekly on the BBC News website
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you agree with Dr Betts? Is climate science being used as a political football? Do scientists need to take more responsibility to ensure their work is correctly understood? Or is the difference of opinions about climate change the sign of a healthy democratic debate?
Depressing reading (the comments as much as the article).
Lets put it this way-
Global Warming happening & we no nothing = Major Problems
Global Warming happening & we make changes = We have a chance
No Global Warming & we do nothing = No Change
No Global Warming & we make changes = some upheaval, cheaper/renewable energy for all, job creation, cleaner air etc etc
Sorry but its really a no brainer
Kat, Lincs
I really am unsure about climate change and find the nit-picking (on both sides) rather hypocritical. Yes, we mustn't read too much into recent and local weather, but the pro-warming group continues to quote data for the last 20 or 30 years ad nauseam. What about the last 8000 years or so? Do you really think there are no other valid scenarios? Could we be totally wrong?
Skeptic, Bognor Regis
I hate to break it to you, but the cold is not just in the UK. It's in China, Russia, USA, North Korea, and on and on. There is record cold over much of the world right now. It's even cold in Miami, Florida!
Clint, Medina, TN
That's a good article. For the sake of an objective post, I'm not going to state my own view. The main issue with climate science is that it's not simple - it's hideously complicated, and many people on both sides of the debate are using the issue as a political or professional tool. The only way to combat ignorant assumptions is with clear science and transparant research; and acknowledgement of the fact that pretty much any science is incomplete.
Luke Kavanagh, Cheltenham, England
It's funny how a cold winter is proof of nothing but a couple of hot summers and it's the end of the world?
David, London
It is tempting to blame climate change when there are warmer than normal weathers. But still, it is pretty abnormal to have winter starting without snow and snow melting early. Even though we have lots of snow and freezing this year, the year was otherwise warmer than normal.
There are not only weather and climate, but also different kinds of cycles. We can blame cycles too. But if it is cold cycle and it is still warmer than normal, then something should be wrong.
Also winters were colder and had more snow when my grandfather was younger. Having lots of snow starts to feel more like an exception than the norm. Hard to say what is correct, though, I am not an expert.
Suomalainen, Tampere, Finland
I don't understand, even if you ignore the recent months, there still hasn't been any statistically significant globally averaged warming for 15 years!
We are all just pagan weather-worshippers making sacrifices to our weather gods! Will we ever learn?!
Harry, London
On the one hand I agree with Dr Betts - scientists do need to make their work far more public. On the other hand I have to say I am now a confirmed climate skeptic - confirmed not by so much by the claims of Phil Jones et al, but by the extraordinary extent to which the 'hockey team' went about keeping the information to themselves; the flawed peer-review sytem; and their attempts to discredit (and threaten) those who would question their methods and conclusions. The e-mails are, quite simply, mind-boggling... In a sense the whole concept of the IPCC is wrong - 'Intergovernmental Panel on Climate CHANGE'- surely that implies an assumed outcome..? Wouldn't ..Climate RESEARCH' be better..? The whole process has been far too politicised for a balanced view to emerge - and has just given every government on the planet the excuse to increase tax. I would also question the assertion that the past few years are the warmest 'on record' - what happened to the 1920's/30's..? What about the famours 'Medieval Warm period'..? Surely Dr Betts is not falling into the trap of only considering temperature records since 1960..?
David Simmons, Cambridge
I completely agree with Dr. Betts, being from the US not only do I get the wonderful opportunity to see some of the worst journalism available in the developed world but also a democratic system that has a dualism fetish that undoubtedly covers the climate issue. The lack of knowledge between both the journalists and the public only creates democratic debates involving points of views that often is misinformed, partly true, or fallacy. It would be nice if the issue, needless to say quite an important one, be understood by a greater portion of our population, our journalists and news teams, and politicians alike rather than ignorant arguments, spoon fed simplifications, and democrats and republicans taking sides on an issue that deserves to be considered on the same level of importance as national security, not abortion, gay marriage, etc. It is, however, a complicated issue to fully grasp. Although there are simple truths that get thrown around and perhaps the basic concept is understood, but they hardly explain the full scope of what has/is happening, and what needs to happen in order for us to stabilize or reduce CO2 emissions. Unfortunately it may take more extreme climatic events for us to believe that human caused climate change is causing a host of environmental problems, but until that happens, enjoy the showcase of ignorant ideas from some of the less than savvy cretans that somehow found their way onto an American media platform.
Andrew Trumbull, Evanston, Illinois. USA
Most people know that the world is getting slowly warmer and do not dispute the scientific fact of Global Warming. It just becomes much harder to sell this fact to the general public when you're skating into work every morning.
John, Craigavon
For the last eleven years the global temp. has been decreasing. The polar bear population has been increasing for the last 20 years and now NASA says they miscalculated the ice cover in the arctic. There is a much ice there as there was in 1979. 1998 was not the warmest year on record. 1934 was. Global warming in a religion not a science. It's based on faith not fact.
Dr. J. S. Zannucci, Knoxville, USA
I don't think scientists need to take more responsibility to ensure their work is correctly understood. I think they need to take more responsibility to ensure that their work is correct.
michael e forster, lewes, de usa
I do not agree with Dr. Betts. It is true that there is a climate change we all know that but we just don't want to admit it. For example Poland is a country which winters are very bitter. Last year there was no snow. This year its the opposite. I just can't understand Dr. Betts. Look at the poles. They are melting should they melt? According to the history they were always cold, and now they are melting for some reason. Its getting warmer, colder, the climate is CHANGING. FACE IT.
Mardin M, Manchester
I have watched numerous television programmes about the effects of climate change. Most have predicted warmer wetter summers and shorter colder winters due to the gulf stream changing course. It's not that the information isn't out there, its that people are selective about what they take in. As a result the general media are selective about what and how they report things. It's created a sort of self sustaining reaction. It's also worth pointing out that a few months ago there was reporting that the Sun's solar activity had been decreasing for the last ten years, that this was a regular thing and had resulted in very cold winters in the past. To the point the Thames froze. Lots of astronomers were interviewed and it was very interesting. As far as I can see the media has completely forgot about this. I not saying that the current cold snap is a result of it, but it would be nice to have some debate about it.
Justin Ellis, Bangor, Co. Down
Dr Betts makes a lot of good points, and yet still manages to push the assertion that climate change is human-centric. However, that's far from being proven. I'm not saying that human activity has no effect by any means, but climate change is a natural process that has occurred many times before (e.g. ice ages, farming in greenland). Does this mean that we shouldn't do anything? No, of course not - clean air is a good end to itself, as is ending our reliance on fossil fuels and reducing our consumption of both energy and resources. But trying to use climate change as a means to scare people into it is a bad idea. Ultimately, we can't even predict the weather with a degree of accuracy in the medium term, so long-term climate forecasts are little more than guesswork. To make it worse, the mechanisms are poorly understood (e.g. some scientists claim that CO2 is a big problem, whereas others suggest that CO2 lags behind climate changes, and others suggest that water vapour has a larger greenhouse effect, etc). Either way, it's not worth worrying about, as there's very little that the insignificant human race can do about it when mother nature decides to flex her muscles. |
浙公网安备 33010202000686号 ( 浙ICP备09035230号-1 )
发表于 2010-1-12 02:55:09