I am getting so tired of hearing people say “I believe in science” when what they mean is that they think global warming is real because the vast majority of scientists tell them it is real. The worst is when Presidential candidates like Elizabeth Warren use it. I want a Presidential candidate who says, “I understand the science.” And means it.
I have read Senator Warren’s academic work. It is well thought out and well presented and frankly I found it really interesting. It is clear she deeply wants to understand how laws (policy) are experienced by real people. I am highly confident she understands the basics of climate change science and this is why, more than anything she is on my short list of candidates. The woman is wicked smart.
Yet she goes and says “I believe in science” instead of saying, “I have spent a lot of time thinking about climate change and how dealing with it will be a key part of my Presidency if I am lucky enough to get elected. I understand that there are many important questions remaining to be answered in climate change science. However, the key findings of climate change scientists and experts in related fields are accepted by the vast majority of the world’s scientists. I trust that this consensus will grow in future years to include the answers to the questions I mentioned above. I want to close by saying, the findings of climate change scientists, to the extent I understand it, and I am working on getting the basics right, scares the crap out of me.”
That wouldn’t commit her to anything but would reassure me, and all climate catastrophe alarmists that she is on the right side of the issue. I should stop here and say I am a climate change contrarian. I think climate change science is wrong. I think the effects of climate change will be larger, possibly far larger than predicted by most models of climate change. More importantly I think those effects are going to show up sooner and be much more profound and dangerous than predicted. So for me it is issue one for any Presidential candidate.
I firmly believe any candidate to be the next President needs to understand the basics of climate change science. But how on Earth would we determine that.
I propose asking every candidate five simple questions. Well they should be simple for the candidates to answer. I am confident that any of you could answer them. I assume Jay Inslee could.
Each of these questions tests the candidates basic knowledge of a particular aspect of climate change except the first. That is a test to see if they understand what is and isn’t consensus science in the field.
I don’t actually expect anyone who isn’t a science nerd to read all four links or even take the quiz. I find these links utterly fascinating but I am a true science nerd. Not only is it what I studied at university and how I make my living it is my hobby and my passion. I particularly love the link to the Dailykos diary about submarine permafrost. The comments are wonderful if you like science, just a ton of fun. There is lots of talk about Russian ships catching fire in the Arctic Ocean and giant craters in Siberia.
What I am hoping it will start a conversation on how important a working knowledge of our climate and how it is changing is or isn’t for a President. I know from the first 60 or so comments below that many of you find the entire idea absurd believing that the President should just surround themselves with the best experts and thinkers and let them set policy. But that misses that the next President needs to be able to convince a large minority of Americans to make changes they won’t want to make, well maybe a majority of Americans to make changes they won’t want to make and to help countries like China and India and Brazil and yes Russia to by into their vision. I just think this incredibly important task will be easier for someone who gets the science at a deep intuitive level. No science degree or academic training is really required. My candidate of choice just needs to be curious about the world and aware that global heating is possibly going to end humans tenancy on this planet.
My quiz doesn’t presuppose any previous knowledge of climate change science. The first four questions the answers are found for the most part in the link provided. They need to be able to read, take in new inofrmation, process new information, and form an opinion about that information. The fifth question is my attempt to see if they can extrapolate from the first four to answer the fifth.
I designed the quiz using things I have heard Jay Inslee talk about. I believe he could with some effort fly through this quiz. That is why he is my second choice for President. But I would still like him to take it just to reassure me he isn’t just using talking points.
At the end of the quiz for Presidential candidates I have one for all of you.
- 1. What are ten of the most robust findings in climate change science? What are ten areas of climate science where there are still key questions? Why does our not knowing the answers to these questions matter to policy makers trying to deal with climate change? I am actually going to give you the answers to the first two questions in the first link below. The third question is a test of the candidates’ ability to turn information, into knowledge, and possibly even wisdom.
- 2. What is The Coupled Climate-Economy-Biosphere Model (CoCEB)? Describe it in one sentence. Explain what is wrong with it. Propose a better model. Easy-peasy (sarcasm alert — I hope you find this exercise really difficult and have to think deeply in order to asnwer it because in your time as President you are going to be presented with a large number of models and most will be possible to understand if you spend some time but none of them will be easy). Read the second link if you are unfamiliar with the idea of models that combine climate change with mitigation factors. The unique thing about the CoCEB model is it looks at other ways of mitigating climate change than stopping using fossil fuels. For bonus points why are the impacts of climate change likely to impact the poorest people more than the wealthiest? By the way, unless you are a math nerd I would skip over the math and focus on the commentary in this paper.
- 3. What is submarine permafrost? Why can it lead to explosions? Why does it matter in models of global heating? For bonuses points what is a pingo? And of course how does submarine permafrost factor into geo-politics and why does it mess with Putin’s plans for the Arctic? The third link, and you have to read the comments, is a brilliant Dailykos diary that brought out some real nerds and was not just informative but tremendous fun.
- 4. Now we are going to go for a hard one. What is the adiabatic process and why does it matter to developing strategies to deal with the climate crisis? The tephigraph seen above is a clue. This is of course a bit of a trick question. I think Canada and the Brits are about the only people who use tephigraphs as their therodynamic chart of choice. The fourth link from which the chart above is taken doesn’t exactly answer the question but it should lead you there. I chose the Canadian approach to thermodynamic charts because I find it more intuitive and because Canadian models tend to be better at predicting the weather in the mid and to some extent the long term than American models but sometimes useless for day to day forecasting and prediction and we don’t actually know why this is so but it may be suggesting that better models are needed. Which would be really important.
- 5. This time you don’t get a link to help you answer. The question is very basic. What is water vapor and how does it factor into modeling climate change?
Have fun!
www.csiro.au/...
tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/…
www.dailykos.com/...
www.briangwilliams.us/...
Note: My answer to 1.3 would be that we can’t at this moment in time predict how global heating and the resulting climate change is going to impact your community, your state, your weather, your livelihood, or your health with any degree of certainty. The confidence intervals are enormous. Nor can we say whether or not a particular weather event or a group of weather events are a direct consequence of climate change or not. In fact, climate change is actually making it more difficult in some locations to make accurate weather forecasts.
This uncertainty makes convincing people to make huge life altering changes such as becoming a wind turbine technician instead of a coal miner, or becoming a vegan instead of a meatatarian a bit difficult. Especially when there is so much counter-messaging. This is why stories about real people living with the many problems caused by climate change are so important and why it is vital for journalists to cover these stories more than statisitcal or scientific facts.
A lot of people figure well it will never happen to me. When they see people on TV just like them, who live not far from them stuggling with the impacts of climate change then they become motivated to change. Over time they will begin to hedge their bets on climate change.
The right President could speed that process along. They could invest heavily in advancing our understanding of climate change science. This would hopefully reduce the areas of uncertainty. If you can turn on your local Fox news affiliate and hear your local forecaster saying with certainty that the tornadoes that are threatening your house are caused by global heating and so is the blizzard that hits in April in Georgia, and the flooding all over the center of the country, and the earlier and earlier onset of forest fire and hurricaine seasons in your part of the country pretty soon you will forget you were ever a climate change denier and start demanding somebody do something. NOW!
Wouldn’t it be nice to have a Presidential candidate who understood the basics of climate change science and was great at communicating the basics to others. Not to mention having real plans that would reduce the likelihood of climate catastrophe and for dealing with the problems that will unquestionably be caused by global heating? Saying “I believe in science” does not qualify you to be President.
You have to be able to understand the basics of climate change science.
Thanks to Angmar for suggesting these edits.