Clear & Present Danger to Public Welfare

~
If you haven't yet heard, the Texas State Climatologist, Dr. John Nielson-Gammon, is making his case over at The Wonk Room:

Texas State Climatologist Disputes State’s Denier Petition: Greenhouse Gases ‘Clearly Present A Danger To The Public Welfare’.

and at Joe Romm's Climate Progress:

Texas state climatologist disputes state’s anti-science petition: Greenhouse gases “clearly present a danger to the public welfare.”

Now those are some headlines we can all live by.

NIELSEN-GAMMON: Do I think that the EPA based its assessment on sound science? I think, by basing its assessments on the IPCC, USGCRP, and NAS reports, it was basing its assessments on the best available science. I have the expertise to independently evaluate the quality of these reports, and on the whole they constitute in my opinion the most comprehensive, balanced assessments of climate change science presently available.

WONK ROOM: Do you know of any particular reason to doubt that the planet is warming, that greenhouse gases are involved, and that sea levels are rising?

NIELSEN-GAMMON: No.

WONK ROOM: I’m also interested if there are any specific risks relevant to Texas.

NIELSEN-GAMMON: Potential Texas vulnerabilities include sea level rises, droughts, floods, estuarine ecosystems, and agricultural productivity. The possible adverse economic impact of future greenhouse gas emission control strategies on Texas industries also represents a risk associated with global warming.

Full text of email interview with Dr. Nielsen-Gammon

And please take note that the Texas State Climatologist is not the only South Texan to support the conclusions of the IPCC & the findings of the EPA.

Dr. Andrew Dessler, a climatologist at Texas A&M University and author of The Science and Politics of Global Climate Change, tells the Wonk Room in an email interview that the entire Department of Atmospheric Sciences agrees with the IPCC:

"I, along with all of the other faculty in the department, agree with the main conclusions of the IPCC."

Dr. Kenneth P. Bowman, the head of the Texas A&M University Department of Atmospheric Sciences, writes:

"I believe that EPA finding is based on good science, as do all of my colleagues in the Atmospheric Science Department here at Texas A&M."

UPDATES: Texas State Climatologist Disputes State’s Denier Petition: Greenhouse Gases ‘Clearly Present A Danger To The Public Welfare’

Dr. Nielson-Gammon also plays over at his Atmo.Sphere blog & sometimes, when a pleasant mood overwhelms him, the Houston Chron's SciGuy.

All you science savvy, biodiversity loving, intelligent citizens of planet Earth, bring friends, lots of 'em.
~

Judg[e]ment Day: Climate Denial on Trial

~
Where's an honest Bush appointee when you really need one? Somebody get Judge John E. Jones III on the phone, right now.

Then, with a little science & good judgment, by this time next year we might see headlines across frontpages across the nation, if not the Daily Mail, along the lines of:

"JUDGEMENT DAY: CLIMATE DENIAL ON TRIAL"

That report an historic Memorandum Opinion like Dover's:

The proper application of both the endorsement and [smell] tests to the facts of this case makes it abundantly clear that the [Texas Climate Change Denial] Policy violates the [Climate Science]. In making this determination, we have addressed the seminal question of whether [Climate Change Denial] is science. We have concluded that it is not, and moreover that [Climate Change Denial] cannot uncouple itself from its [Exxon Mobil money], and thus [Big Oil profits].

Both Defendants and many of the leading proponents of [Climate Change Denial] make a bedrock assumption which is utterly false. Their presupposition is that the [Anthropogenic Global Warming] theory is antithetical to [Climate Science] and to [science] in general. Repeatedly in this trial, Plaintiffs’ scientific experts testified that the theory of [Anthropogenic Global Warming] represents good science, is overwhelmingly accepted by the scientific community, and that it in no way conflicts with, nor does it deny, the existence of [Climate Change].

To be sure, the [Anthropogenic Global Warming] theory of [Climate Change] is imperfect. However, the fact that a scientific theory cannot yet render an explanation on every point should not be used as a pretext to thrust an untestable alternative hypothesis grounded in [Anti-science denial & Exxon Mobil money] into the [peer-reviewed] science or to misrepresent well-established scientific propositions.

The citizens of [Texas] were poorly served by the members of the [Governor's administration] who [promoted] the [Climate Science Denial] Policy. It is ironic that several of these individuals, who so staunchly and proudly touted their [Anti-science] convictions in public, would time and again lie to cover their tracks and disguise the real purpose behind the [Climate Science Denial].

Now, that really would be American History!

re: "I trust climate scientiests more than I trust Texas politicians."
~

China laughing?

~
What with all the global weirding hereabouts, a good guide to the latest climate science is undeniably the order of the day.

Let’s start with the basics, shall we?

• Heat-trapping greenhouse gases are at unprecedented levels, and the paleoclimate record suggests that even slightly higher levels are untenable.
• Since we have record levels of heat-trapping gases, it’s not surprising that we also learned that this was the hottest decade in the temperature record and that the Arctic is the hottest in at least two millenia.
• We learned that the planet is warming from those GHGs just where climate science said it would — the oceans, which is where more than 90% of the warming was projected to end up.
• Unexpectedly, even Antarctica appears to be warming.
• This global warming is driving melting at extraordinary rates every where we look, including places nobody expected.
• And given that unexpectedly fast ice melt, it’s no surprise the science now projects much higher and much faster sea level rise than just a few years ago.
• We continued to learn about the dangerous positive carbon-cycle feedbacks that threaten to amplify the impacts of human-caused GHGs.
• Indeed, the best evidence is that the climate is now being driven by amplifying feedbacks.
• High emissions levels + positive feedbacks = climate catastrophe.
• And the plausible worst-case scenario is even worse than this grim “business as usual” emissions case.
• And this is not good news for human health and welfare.
• So the time to act is most certainly now.
• The anti-science crowd [& that's putting it politely] use smoke and mirrors to distract as many people as possible, but the rest of us need to listen to the science and keep our eyes on the prize — reversing greenhouse gas emissions trends as quickly and rapidly as possible.

And, for videophiles, The Science of Climate Change.

Indeed, I suspect China is quietly laughing at us right now. And Iran, Russia, Venezuela and the whole OPEC gang are high-fiving each other. Nothing better serves their interests than to see Americans becoming confused about climate change, and, therefore, less inclined to move toward clean-tech and, therefore, more certain to remain addicted to oil. Yes, sir, it is morning in Saudi Arabia.

Amen to that, brother Thomas. Or rather, Allahu Akbar!
~

KUDOS & BRAVO ZULU TO AGU

AGU calls for scientists to educate the public & communicate with policy-makers to shape our future climate.

Members of the AGU, as part of the scientific community, collectively have special responsibilities: to pursue research needed to understand it; to educate the public on the causes, risks, and hazards; and to communicate clearly and objectively with those who can implement policies to shape future climate. Human Impacts on Climate

Dr. Nisbett maintains that many scientists are giving fresh thought to their roles as communicators and contributors to policy. Indeed, the AGU's statement advocates a more active role for its members in communicating their work to the public and to people "who can implement policies to shape the future of climate."

This is a significant shift for the 50,000-member organization. "The AGU has not done this in the past," says AGU president Timothy Killeen. The American Geophysical Union's warning Thursday reflects an increasingly vocal scientific community.