The New York Times linked to my article Climate "Science" Is Ruining Everything. My article was about how the government gets the science it pays for.
I discussed drug war "science" and how it relates to climate "science". The NYTs thinks that the problem with climate science is not dodgy science but a failure to communicate on the part of climate scientists. I'd have to agree.
And so I responded to the NYTs piece thusly:
There is no doubt (in the science community - sceptics and warmists alike) that a doubling of CO2 (absent any other effects) will produce a 1 deg C rise in the Earth's temperature. Not very exciting.We are getting partial truth gussied up as certainty. I'm sure that is not the communication failure they were hinting at.
Where it gets tricky is the water vapor amplification factor. Warmists claim it will increase the warming from CO2 by 1.5X to 3 or 4X. i.e. from 1 C from CO2 to 1.5 to 4 C for CO2 plus water vapor. The sceptics say the amplification is around .5 i.e. the 1 C from CO2 is reduced to .5C.
Now the warmist community (as well as the sceptics) admit that the effects of water vapor are the least understood part of climate science. So we are fed alarms based on what is currently incomplete science. And you know what? None of the scientists in the warmist camp explain this to the public.
There is your communication failure.
Cross Posted at Classical Values