Book Depository Blog

RSS

 

  • Climate Debate Daily

    Fri, 12 Dec 2008 06:24

    Is this helpful?
    Climate Debate Daily is intended to deepen our understanding of disputes over climate change and the human contribution to it. The site links to scientific articles, news stories, economic studies, polemics, historical articles, PR releases, editorials, feature commentaries, and blog entries. The main column on the left includes arguments and evidence generally in support of the IPCC position on the reality of signficant anthropogenic global warming. The right-hand column includes material skeptical of the IPCC position and the notion that anthropogenic global warming represents a genuine threat to humanity. Many sites on the Internet, including some of those listed at the far left of [our homepage], take firm views for or against the threat of anthropogenic global warming. As a matter of editorial policy, Climate Debate Daily maintains a studied neutrality, allowing each side to present its most powerful and persuasive case. Our object is to allow readers to form their own judgments based on the best available information.
    Arguably it is useful. All the debate in one place -- nice. But it was my understanding that the vast majority of climate scientists believe that global warming is most certainly occurring right now and is definitely (well, 90% probability)

    Posted by Mark Mark

    Categories: debate, Climate Debate Daily

    Comments

    1. johnt's avatar johnt

      90 % probable? Perhaps next year it will be 80% possible, and the year after that?<br /> <br /> There do appear some cracks in the wall of consensus and in a world, science, where skepticism is supposed to be healthy, doubt welcome, and testability necessary, that's rather a good sign.<br /> <br /> Best to keep that modern virtue of today's culture, the open mind, ready and willing.

      Posted Fri, 12 Dec 2008 06:24
    2. Robert's avatar Robert

      One of the tricks they are doing is to stage it as 'pro-IPCC' v. skeptics when in reality, there are many other scientific and political organizations that agree on AGW. A right wing argument about AGW is that IPCC isn't scientific, only political, and has an agenda. Sounds more like paranoia to me.<br /> <br /> A couple of sites they don't mention in the 'pro-IPCC' side are ExxonSecrets.org and sourcewatch.org which detail the funding and history of the close-knit denier community. <br /> <br /> Notice also that both are of the skeptic delayer point of view: "science remains uncertain", so real balance isn't going to be found there.

      Posted Fri, 12 Dec 2008 06:24
    3. Maxine's avatar Maxine

      Yes, Mark, you are right and it is disingenuous to do what they are doing. There are some good websites/blogs out there, in particular<br /> Real Climate http://www.realclimate.org/, a longstanding site in which climate scientists analyse the media coverage of the topic, and Climate Feedback, the blog of Nature Reports Climate Change, at http://blogs.nature.com/climatefeedback/ - this is an independent website run by Nature journal editors (of whom I am one, though I am not involved in this particular site/blog).<br /> The blogroll of Climate Feedback also provides other reliable sources of climate science information.<br /> <br /> I would not trust a website that implies or states that there is a 50/50 argument about man's effects on the climate. I hope the two sites I've mentioned here will be useful, they are certainly reliable and trustworthy.

      Posted Fri, 12 Dec 2008 06:24

    Write a Comment

    Create an account

    Fields marked * are required

    Please enter a password with at least six characters.


Book Depository Team
Publisher Blogs