When a top official of the US government disparages opponents in an aggressive talk about an important subject, he ought to have his facts straight. In a Feb. 16 diatribe on climate change in Jakarta, Sec. of State John Kerry didn’t bother.
“This is about facts,” he declared. “This is about science. The science is unequivocal. And those who refuse to believe it are simply burying their heads in the sand.”
These statements are forceful, self-assured. And on that “unequivocal” science, Kerry offered a remarkably crooked lesson.
“It’s called the greenhouse effect because it works exactly like a greenhouse in which you grow a lot of the fruit that you eat here,” he said.
Wrong. The reradiative effect of greenhouse gases differs fundamentally from the workings of a real greenhouse. Kerry doesn’t understand the science he’s so powerfully sure about.
In the secretary’s view, science is unequivocal because “97% of climate scientists have confirmed that climate change is happening and that human activity is responsible.”
His percentage comes from a study published last year based on a review of abstracts of 12,000 scientific articles about climate change. Of that number, one third offered opinions on the question whether climate change results largely from human activity. In that group, 97% seemed to respond affirmatively, although observers—including, in some cases, authors of the reviewed abstracts—questioned the interpretation.
The other two thirds in the sample had no opinion on the basic question. This represents thundering uncertainty, not the end-of-discussion settlement of science in which Kerry thinks everyone should believe.
“We should not allow a tiny minority of shoddy scientists and science and extreme ideologues to compete with scientific fact,” Kerry said. “Nor should we allow any room for those who think that the costs associated with doing the right thing outweigh the benefits.”
The climate-change issue deserves more than threadbare charlatanism that’s reckless with facts, intolerant of dissent, and heedless of cost. So do Americans.
(This article appeared first at www.ogj.com on Feb. 21, 2014; author’s e-mail: bobt@ogjonlinecom)