Greenhouse Simplicities

Newsweek – August 20 issue

You probably saw the very ominous issue of Newsweek that stirred up quite a bit of controversy regarding global warming deniers and claimed there was a denial machine. Some have said that I am part of the denial machine because I call for more studies and more scientific research to prove what is happening. I don’t think that I am part of that machine, but I understand why others put me in that camp.

In the latest issue, there is an op-ed piece by Robert Samuelson that accuses Newsweek of going too far.  Frankly, I agree with him. While there is certainly a lot of evidence that the earth may be slightly increasing in warmth – the evidence is hardly conclusive and the evidence of massive problems in the future is very tenuous.


Climate reporting “too balanced” say scientists

Cosmos – April 19, 2007

I am amazed. How can a scientist say that talking about an issue from all sides is “too balanced” for the news coverage? Isn’t it the job of scientists (and reporters) to completely discuss and challenge a theory so that it is as solid as can be? I am an engineer by education (although no longer practicing) and I distinctly remember being taught that we should form a hypothesis and then challenge that hypothesis with multiple tests and different points of view. My fear is that when we don’t listen to the entire community, someone will have made a mistake.


Cold, hard science

Pittsburgh Tribune-Review – February 11, 2007

This is a great opinion column! It is a must read for anyone that still questions that humans are the cause of global warming. It is written as a 2 way conversation and I have had this exact conversation a dozen times. If you read the my dedication page you will find that I say almost this exact argument. As always, here are some excerpts but please click on the link below.

…the exact cause of the warming has not yet been proven. That is the unfortunate truth.Scientists are supposed to follow the scientific method. They come up with a hypothesis, then apply a rigorous, objective, measurable process to either prove or disprove it.