CO2 where science meets science fiction
24/02/09 16:55 Filed in: Personal
Could somebody tell me why CO2 continues to be the blame-all “pollutant” and driving force to climate change in “popular” science? Actually, that’s not really a question. It’s more a rhetorical statement, because I’ve a scientific background and the level hockey science being banded as “fact” in climate change is extraordinary.
I should point out that I do have a scientific background. So I’m not just having an ill informed rant.
But what does make me rant is the statements of absolute truths being banded by the media (BBC, ITV etc) that is both ill informed, misleading or at worst, a bloody lie.
Case in point, BBC reported that Polar Bears are “close to extinction”, quoting Al Gore’s eco film as fact. However, if they had taken the time to look at reports created by scientists studying Polar Bears, they’d have found another picture.
Most amusing this week is the sad story of the loss of the CO2 ODO detector in what appears to be a faulty bit of rocketeering by NASA. You might have missed the key element, but at the bottom of the story is the little admission that “scientists” (as though they are a single block of people) are at a loss to understand where 20% of the CO2 goes. Really? Because you’d imagine any scientific projection that includes atmospheric CO2 and its interaction with the climate as a whole, might be a little inaccurate given a 20% discrepancy.
I should point out that I do have a scientific background. So I’m not just having an ill informed rant.
But what does make me rant is the statements of absolute truths being banded by the media (BBC, ITV etc) that is both ill informed, misleading or at worst, a bloody lie.
Case in point, BBC reported that Polar Bears are “close to extinction”, quoting Al Gore’s eco film as fact. However, if they had taken the time to look at reports created by scientists studying Polar Bears, they’d have found another picture.
Most amusing this week is the sad story of the loss of the CO2 ODO detector in what appears to be a faulty bit of rocketeering by NASA. You might have missed the key element, but at the bottom of the story is the little admission that “scientists” (as though they are a single block of people) are at a loss to understand where 20% of the CO2 goes. Really? Because you’d imagine any scientific projection that includes atmospheric CO2 and its interaction with the climate as a whole, might be a little inaccurate given a 20% discrepancy.