'We did not start this fight’: In Trump era’s dawn, scientists rally in Boston

BOSTON — Hundreds of scientists and their supporters rallied in historic Copley Square on Sunday, demanding that the Trump administration accept empirical reality on issues such as climate change and highlighting the centrality of objective information to making policy.

The Rally to Stand Up for Science
in Boston’s Copley Square. 

“We did not politicize science,” said Naomi Oreskes, a Harvard science historian who spoke at the rally, which unfolded on a surprisingly warm February day that left the square filled with mud puddles from the melt of a recent blizzard. “We did not start this fight.”

“Our colleagues who have been attacked have not been attacked because they did something wrong,” Oreskes continued. “They have been attacked because they did something right” — namely, producing information that proved politically inconvenient.

Read The Washington Post story - “‘We did not start this fight’: In Trump era’s dawn, scientists rally in Boston.”

'We've blown it, but pessimism is not acceptable' - Naomi Oreskes

In 2000, Naomi Oreskes, a geologist by training, was working at the Scripps Institute for Oceanography in San Diego, an organization with a long history of climate change research.

“All the scientists around me spoke about climate change as if it were a settled matter. Proven scientifically. Manmade,” recalls Oreskes, a renowned Harvard professor specializing in the history of science. “Yet I noticed that in the media, the issue was reported as if there were a big debate over whether it was even real. That contrast led me to the work I published in 2004.”

Oreskes, whom The New York Times has called “one of the biggest names in climate science,” did what any interested party could have done then, but didn’t. She counted the scientific papers on climate change — 928 at the time — and determined that not one disagreed: all found that climate change was real, underway and manmade. She exploded the myth that any debate existed. The media took notice; and she, of course, came under attack from climate science deniers.

Read Justin Catanoso’s piece on Pulitzer Crisis Reporting - “Naomi Oreskes on Climate Change: We’ve Blown It… But Pessimism Is Not Acceptable.”

Naomi Oreskes - a 'lightning rod' in a changing climate

T

he job interviewer scrutinized the young American geology student sitting across from him. She was about to graduate from the Royal School of Mines in London, and was trying to break into a field long unwelcoming to women.

What, he wanted to know, might she have to contribute to the geology of mining? Naomi Oreskes had a simple answer: “I want to find an ore deposit!”

Naomi Oreskes - a "lightning
rod" in a changing climate.

She wound up in the Australian outback in the early 1980s — not to search for deposits, exactly, but to help work out the complex geology of one that had just been found. It would eventually become one of the world’s largest uranium mines.

Yet, in time, prospecting for ores could not hold her interest. Today, from a professorship at Harvard University, Dr. Oreskes is still in the mining business. But rather than digging for minerals, she tunnels into historical archives, and she is still finding radioactive nuggets.

Read more about what the New York Times said about the woman who is fast becoming one of the biggest names in climate science - “Naomi Oreskes, a Lightning Rod in a Changing Climate”.

Doubts dispelled immediately by scientific and practical evidence

Doubt about climate change has at times assaulted my thinking until that momentary skepticism is completely dispelled by further evidence, both scientific and practical.

That scientific evidence has almost total support around the world and yet in being true to the skeptism their training the demands, most scientists appear reluctant to lay the responsibility for climate change at the feet of humanity.

In what is a strange contradiction, climate scientists happily explain the science behind climate change, but often appear reluctant to be more emphatic about the risk it poses to humanity.

Writing in the New York Times, a professor of the history of science at Harvard and the author, Naomi Oreskes, has lamented this problem.

Her story - “Playing Dumb on Climate Change” – says:

“We are now seeing dangerous effects worldwide, even as we approach a rise of only 1 degree Celsius.

“The evidence is mounting that scientists have underpredicted the threat. Perhaps this is another reason — along with our polarized politics and the effect of fossil-fuel lobbying — we have underreacted to the reality, now unfolding before our eyes, of dangerous climate change.”

Listen as Oreskes talks about the collapse of Western civilization

"A then a miracle occurs" - Oreskes
believes most put their faith in this.

Naomi Oreskes has dedicated her life to helping the world understand the realities of climate change.

The Professor of the History of Science and Affiliated Professor of Earth and Planetary Sciences at Harvard University recently appeared with Robyn Williams on “The Science Show” on Radio National to discuss her latest book.

That book, “The Collapse of Western Civilization: A View from the Future” co-authored by Erik M. Conway, is in fact a novel, based on hard scientific evidence from the International Panel of Climate Change (IPCC).

The conversation – “The Collapse of Western Civilization?” was broadcast by Radio National on August 16 this year.

From the Merchants of Doubt to a tale of trouble

The new book from
 Naomi Oreskes
and Erik Conway.

Naomi Oreskes and Erik M. Conway became more widely known when they wrote about the Merchants of Doubt in 2011.

That fast selling book told how just a few scientists confused and obscured the truth about tobacco and global warming.

Again they have combined their talents, insights and skills to pen just 104 pages about the collapse of western civilization.

They look back from an imagine future in an attempt to alert us to what will unfold if we continue to ignore what the science is telling us.

Published just this month, “The Collapse of Western Civilization: A View from the Future” is honest to the point of brutality with the overwhelming message being that although we knew exactly what was happening, did nought.

The rather slim book tells a message worthy of a much weightier tome and in doing so tells us of the perverse contradictions in operation – neoliberals who object virulently to government interference, but in pursuing their ideals are actually bringing down upon themselves what they dislike most.

Naomi Oreskes - looking
toward tomorrow.

They wrote: “A key attribute of the period was that power did not reside in the hand of those who understood the climate system, but rather political, economic, and social institutions that had a strong interest in maintain the use of fossil fuels.

“Historians have labelled the system the carbon-combustion complex: a network of powerful industries comprising fossil fuel producers, industries that served energy companies (such as drilling and oil field service companies and large construction firms), manufacturers whose products relied in inexpensive energy (especially automobiles and aviation, but also aluminium and other forms of smelting and mineral processing), financial institutions that service their capital demands, advertising public relations, and marketing firms who promoted the products”.

Although much of what Oreskes and Conway write is fictional, it emanates from fact and relying on what science is telling us today, paints a picture of what tomorrow will look like if we continue to ignore the science.

Links from Terry Court

Tatura's Terry Court provided the following links (thanks Terry)

•••••••  All you need to know about temperatures increases in Australia in 1 graph

http://www.bom.gov.au/announcements/media_releases/climate/change/20110105SSTgraph10.gif

•••••••  300 years of fossil fuels in 300 seconds (video)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJ-J91SwP8w

•••••••  The ultimate climate change FAQ

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/series/the-ultimate-climate-change-faq

Building the definitive guide to climate change, covering science, politics and economics                  

•••••••  Naomi Oreskes - Merchants of Doubt

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/scienceshow/stories/2011/3101369.htm

ABC Science Show, 8 January 2011

•••••••  New study suggests climate change would continue even without greenhouse gases

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/prairies/new-study-suggests-climate-change-would-continue-even-without-greenhouse-gases/article1863311/

Bill Graveland, The Canadian Press, 12 January 2011

A study predicts there will be havoc akin to a big-budget Hollywood disaster movie in the next 1,000 years even if people stop emitting all carbon dioxide into the atmosphere now.

 

Fire and rain: the lessons of natural disasters

http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/editorial/fire-and-rain-the-lessons-of-natural-disasters-20110111-19mkr.html
The Age editorial, January 12, 2011

Queenslanders knew this summer's storms would be severe and bad flooding was likely.

Have Insurers Begun to Detect Climate Change in Storm Damage?

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=have-insurers-begun-to-detect-climate

Evan Lehmann and Climatewire, SCientific American, January 11, 2011

It's likely that the number of strong storms involving rain, snow and hail is also rising because of warming temperatures, not just urban sprawl and expanding development

Global weather disasters a sign the heat is on
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/global-weather-disasters-a-sign-the-heat-is-on/story-e6frg6zo-1225983256858

Mike Steketee, The Australian, 8 January 2011

Meteorological figures confirm the empirical evidence that temperatures are rising.