Talking Points

The Huffington Post has obtained an internal memo from the EPA (under the leadership of Scott Pruitt) revealing what it thinks are the right “talking points” about climate change that can be “used across all Program and Regional Offices.”

The main point of these new “talking points” is to downplay global warming, chiefly by resorting to what I call the “know-nothing meme” — keep telling them we don’t really know anything. Yes something is happening, but we don’t really know anything about what the impact will be or what to do about it — if anything! Yes we’ve done extensive reserach, but we don’t really know anything because their are gaps in our understanding. We need to strive for a better understanding! Encourage more study and open debate, because we don’t really know anything.

What Scott Pruitt really doesn’t want his people to admit about global warming is that it’s real, it’s us, and it’s dangerous. Very dangerous. Of course there are gaps in our knowledge, plenty of them, but the fact that there’s a world of hurt headed our way and our actions will determine how bad it gets, isn’t one of them. If he admitted that, people might actually want to do something about it.

Here’s the text of the memo itself:

Dear Colleagues:

During the recent meeting of our Cross-EPA Work Group on Climate Adaptation, several individuals suggested it would be helpful to develop consistent messages about EPA’s climate adaptation efforts that could be used across all Program and Regional Offices. I’m pleased to report that the Office of Public Affairs (OPA) has developed a set of talking points about climate change that include several related to climate adaptation. These talking points were distributed today by Nancy Grantham (OPA) to the Communications Directors and the Regional Public Affairs Directors.

The following are the talking points distributed by OPA. I have highlighted those relating specifically to our adaptation work.

EPA recognizes the challenges that communities face in adapting to a changing climate.

EPA works with state, local, and tribal governments to improve infrastructure to protect against the consequences of climate change and natural disasters.

EPA also promotes science that helps inform states, municipalities, and tribes on how to plan for and respond to extreme events and environmental emergencies.

Moving forward, EPA will continue to advance its climate adaptation efforts, and has reconvened the cross-EPA Adaptation Working Group in support of those efforts.

Human activity impacts our changing climate in some manner. The ability to measure with precision the degree and extent of that impact, and what to do about it, are subject to continuing debate and dialogue.

While there has been extensive research and a host of published reports on climate change, clear gaps remain including our understanding of the role of human activity and what we can do about it.

As a key regulatory voice, it is important for the Agency to strive for a better understanding of these gaps given their potential significant influence on our country’s domestic economic viability

Administrator Pruitt encourages an open, transparent debate on climate science.

Best regards,

Joel
Joel D. Scheraga, Ph.D
Senior Advisor for Climate Adaptation
Office of Policy

---

This blog is made possible by readers like you; join others by donating at My Wee Dragon.

---

The Ballot is stronger than the Bullet — Abraham Lincoln

Tin soldiers N.R.A. comin’
right here in America
This winter I hear the drummin’
seventeen dead in Florida

Gotta get down to it
guns are cutting us down
shoulda been done long ago.
What if you knew her, and
found her dead on the ground?
How can you run when you know?

Tin soldiers N.R.A. comin’
right here in America
This winter I hear the drummin’
seventeen dead in Florida
twenty-six dead in Sandy Hook
nine dead in church in Charleston
twenty-six dead at church in Texas
thirteen dead in Columbine
fifty-eight dead in Las Vegas … how many more?

US Warmhole

Not all places on earth are experiencing global warming at the same rate. Let’s consider the U.S., the “lower 48 states.” Taking data from NOAA for the 344 climate divisions in this region, and computing the linear trend rate for each, we can see differences between different parts of the USA, with red dots for warming and blue for cooling, larger dots faster and smaller dots more slowly:

Consequences

It seems that Sheldon Walker’s main disagreement with the danger of global warming isn’t about whether or not it’s happening, or whether or not it’s man-made. He isn’t convinced that the consequences will be as harmful as is often claimed.

This isn’t so much a post, as a comment thread. It’s about the science, and what we can expect the consequences of global warming to be. Feel free to play rough — with ideas, with assertions, but not with people. Call an idea or claim “totally fucking stupid” if you want, but don’t call a person that. And, even when it comes to ideas, I suggest that calling them “stupid” isn’t likely to be persuasive.

This thread is also about discussing other scientific claims from Sheldon Walker — or from others who dispute the danger of global warming. But his opinion of the severity of the consequences seems to be our main point of disagreement.

There’s a lot to say on the subject. Please no “gish gallop.” When one sub-topic gets too hot, deal with it before resorting to another sub-topic. Yes, the other aspect deserves discussion too — but not as a refuge to avoid issues.

When somebody, anybody, asks a question, whether it be Sheldon asking others, or others asking Sheldon, let’s do the opposite of what most politicians do. To quote from “Braveheart,” quit changing the subject and answer the fucking question.

One last thing: if Sheldon participates in this discussion, he’s going to be outnumbered. That takes guts. Show some respect.

P.S. Other skeptics are welcome to participate too. I hope you will — I want ideas to be tested severely. But if you mention “eco-terrorists” or “leftist” your comment goes into the trash bin — and whatever valid points you have made with them.

New Blog

I’ve launched a new blog. I’m not abandoning this one, just starting another.

ClimateYES

The “YES” stands for “Youth Education in Science” because it’s about educating youth (including youthful 100-year-olds if they wish) about the science.

I can use help, in many ways. One is to visit the blog and drive up traffic. That’s an odd request because at the moment there’s only one post and it’s just a “welcome” — no science yet.

Another is to participate in comment threads. Answer questions. There’s quite a bit of knowledge among regular readers here, share it with others. Do be advised that the standard for civil discussion will be unbelievably high.

I will also, eventually, welcome guest posts. There’s certainly no hurry … I haven’t even made a scientific post myself yet.

And, anything you can do to spread the word will help.

As usual, donations to this blog will also help. I’ve decided not to solicit donations on the ClimateYES blog, I just want to keep it informative.

As I say, no need to hurry. But … think about it.

---

This blog is made possible by readers like you; join others by donating at My Wee Dragon.

---

The Lowest Road

I call climate deniers “denier.” This angers some of them; they claim that I’m trying to liken them to Holocaust deniers in order to smear them by association with Nazis. That’s bullshit. I call them “denier” because they deny reality; saying that it’s about holocaust denial is just their attempt to get sympathy for themselves and smear us.

I quite agree that calling them “Holocaust deniers,” or associating them with Nazis, is out of line. They’re deniers, not holocaust deniers, and climate denial has nothing to do with Nazism.

So … where would you find something so despicable as an attempt to associate their opposition with the Nazis — an explicit connection, one that mentions Nazis by name? A post at the WUWT blog, that’s where.

Sea Level Acceleration

Sea level isn’t just rising, it is accelerating. It did so during the 20th century, and has done so even more quite recently. ABC news reported the story, based on just-published research (Nerem et al. 2018), that the latest satellite data now show it plainly. The authors of the new study conclude:

When taken with a rate of sea-level rise of 2.9 ± 0.4 mm/y (epoch 2005.0), the extrapolation of the quadratic gives 654 ± 119 mm of sea-level rise by 2100 relative to 2005, which is similar to the processed-based model projections of sea level for representative concentration pathways 8.5 in the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report. Stated alternatively, the observed acceleration will more than double the amount of sea-level rise by 2100 compared with the current rate of sea-level rise continuing unchanged.

Song for Donald

John Wayne or Gandhi?

When I grew up, I wanted to be like John Wayne. I won’t be insulted, I won’t be cheated, I won’t be laid a hand on. I don’t do these things to other people, and I require the same in return. If you do, there’s going to be a fight.

It’s taken me a very long time to understand that John Wayne was wrong. Gandhi was right.

Response to Sheldon Walker

Sheldon Walker commented on my most recent post about his most recent post. It began thus:

---

Sheldon Walker | February 7, 2018 at 12:10 am | Reply

Sheldon Walker: Oh, oh, I see, running away then. You yellow bastards! Come back here and take what’s coming to you. I’ll bite your legs off!

---

I’ve got to give you credit; you do have a sense of humor.