Tuesday, April 07, 2015

Judith Curry pulls no punches: Draft climate "statement is an embarrassment to the APS"

Draft APS Statement on Climate Change | Climate Etc.

JC reflections

Well, their paragraph on Climate Science is a rather astonishing take on the APS Workshop.  Their paragraph on Climate Change seems to come from the Guardian.  Their statement on Climate Action reiterates their rather crazy statement in 2007

Apart from the issue that no one on the POPA seems to understand any of these issues beyond a superficial level (after Koonins and Rossner departed from the POPA), and that their statements are naive and unprofessional, here is my real problem with this.  This is an egregious misuse of the expertise of the APS.  Their alleged understanding of issues like spectroscopy and fluid dynamics are not of any direct relevance to the issues they write about in this statement.  The statement is an embarrassment to the APS.

...JC message to APS POPA:  no one cares about your political preferences in the climate change debate.  You have demonstrated that you bring nothing intellectually to the table (once Koonins and Rossner left).   You simply have no business issuing a policy statement on climate change. You have embarrassed the APS membership.


Carlos David Aguilar said...

Just using common sense, when China built 39 gigawatts of coal-fired capacity in 2014, 3 gigawatts more than the previous year. From 2005-2011 they added 2 600-megawatt coal plants per week, the equivalent to 1 and a half of the entire U.S. fleet of coal-fired power plants.

We heard nothing from President Obama, yet this is the threat of our lifetime.

I have yet to hear anything about China and Japan financing coal-fired power plants in Bangladesh and Indonesia.

All these new-coal-fired plants from what I read last 40 years. It would seem whatever we do would mean nothing.

opit said...

" It would seem whatever we do would mean nothing." The Chinese have had their fill of problems from wind power. Solar can be little better as it too is an intermittent supply. You can bet coal and nuclear are all that is left for constant draw technology ; though thorium can be used instead of uranium and gets one out of the weapon supply cycle. I don't even subscribe to the carbon dioxide regulating climate idea. My take is that any effect is too small to be measured accurately, as even the sign of change is not nailed down.