> That's why there is so much frustration among us when lay people claim
> there
> is no such thing as human-influenced climate change.  Because by now, the
> evidence is so overwhelming....thousands of corroborating studies....that
> our science societies are making definitive statements, and that is a big
> deal.
>

Comments like this do give scientists problems since nothing is clearly
defined and strawmen are obvious.

There is a debate in science about Global warming, specifically if it falls
within natural variation or not.

Climate change is a terrible scientific term since it means nothing as
climate is always changing.

There is no debate about humans influencing climate by added CO2 but there
is debate about the part it plays against natural variation in climate.

There is no debate that temperatures are at a high point since "records
have been kept" but the records are only a recent  part of history (from
about 1850 on) and the most accurate are only from 1978 on. So it is not a
very long record, especially since we are in a low point for CO2 and
temperature since the end of the last glaciation. We are still cooler than
either of the several "warm periods" like the Medieval and Roman warm
periods.

The worst part is that most of the science is based on models and most all
have been wrong. That normally would be enough to kill any theory.

When I first started my graduate studies in Chemistry I found that most all
I learned as an undergraduate as certainties, became "not quite" for a
variety of reasons. Entire disciplines in Chemistry are dedicated to the
"not quite" - process chemistry comes to mind. That infused me with
scepticism when I hear certainties pronounced and "the science is settled".
There is no such thing in scientific disciplines so full of uncontrolled
and unknown variables like climate for anything to be settled.

Just look at the current changes in nutrition, another field full of
variables  where all the certainties over fat and salt ar no longer so
certain and may be have been harmful because of their reduction in our diet.

Truth is, the problem does not rest in science since, in time it will
settle out as long as free debate is encouraged.. The problem rests in
politicising science, which was pointed out by Eisenhower long ago.

Bill Truesdell
Bath, Maine

             ***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html