Climate Change Poll - not chess related

[Paul Beckwith]

Please choose the option that best reflects your current view on climate change...

[Felix Dumont]

Re : Climate Change Poll - not chess related

I don't think we really need to start a new poll on this... There is no doubt that humans have a large impact on climate change. Yes nature has a big impact too, but without humans Earth will be O.K.

[Paul Beckwith]

Re: Re : Climate Change Poll - not chess related

I think that Vlad D. would disagree that humans have a large impact on climate change. I am interested to see if many others have this view also, thus the poll...

[Paul Bonham]

Re: Climate Change Poll - not chess related

Please choose the option that best reflects your current view on climate change...

Where's the option for
"Climate is cooling and humans are having a large impact" ?

[Carl Bilodeau]

Re: Climate Change Poll - not chess related

Please choose the option that best reflects your current view on climate change...

I think you should not open a discussion on this since it is not chess related at all. If someone does not agree with the majority he could reject the Chess Community.

Other interesting subject of poll: Do you think god really exist?

By the way, since the majority here already proved over the years they don't even know how to make a success with Chess in Canada, how can we ask them to talk about climate? The real good answer to the poll will probably be the opposite of the result you will get.

Carl

[Patrick Kirby]

Re: Climate Change Poll - not chess related

I think it is a bit presumptuous for people who are not experts on the subject to make conclusions. We should defer to the people who have spent their lives studying the climate.

To make an analogy with chess, wouldn't this poll be the equivalent of polling a bunch of amateur players on whether the King's Gambit is sound? I wouldn't really care about the results of this poll - it is enough for me to know that Fischer thought it was unsound.

[Paul Bonham]

Re: Climate Change Poll - not chess related

I think you should not open a discussion on this since it is not chess related at all. If someone does not agree with the majority he could reject the Chess Community.

If all it takes for someone to not join the "Chess Community" is disagreement on a single topic, maybe the "Chess Community" is better off without that someone.

By the way, are you thinking of leaving the chess community because you don't agree with the thinking of the majority on climate change? PLEASE, DO IT!

By the way, since the majority here already proved over the years they don't even know how to make a success with Chess in Canada, how can we ask them to talk about climate? The real good answer to the poll will probably be the opposite of the result you will get.

Hmmm, another insult from you, this time to all the members of this forum.

[Bob Gillanders]

Re: Climate Change Poll - not chess related

I think it is a bit presumptuous for people who are not experts on the subject to make conclusions. We should defer to the people who have spent their lives studying the climate.

To make an analogy with chess, wouldn't this poll be the equivalent of polling a bunch of amateur players on whether the King's Gambit is sound? I wouldn't really care about the results of this poll - it is enough for me to know that Fischer thought it was unsound.

OMG, no no no, never totally defer your judgement to the experts! Many self proclaimed "experts" are NOT experts! Think for yourself, always be skeptical, but YES, some deference once they prove themselves. For me, the ultimate authority on this topic is David Suzuki.;):)

[Paul Beckwith]

Re: Climate Change Poll - not chess related

Patrick, I have not seen the King's Gambit mentioned on TV or radio or in the newspaper recently, like climate change has, so I do not think that your analogy is that applicable...

The most important point is that people who have spent their lives studying the climate are not communicating with the public sufficiently. For example:

1) University professors are not looking at the big picture, they study some very specialized part (i.e. pollens on Ellesmere Island) and publish their results in peer reviewed scientific journals that are only read by others in that niche.

2) Environment Canada/Natural Resources/National Research Council scientists are not allowed to publicly release their material unless it is acceptable to their bosses, department heads, and PMO office.

3) NGO scientists can talk to the public but are quite often discounted as "environmental lefties" or "religious zealots" with another agenda, and they don't get the funding to do their own research.

4) Meanwhile, the people that take the view of minimal or no climate change occurring have positions that favour the status quo so get ample funding from large corporations and the oil industry to have disproportionately large voices so the public gets a very incorrect impression of what is happening.

5) Journalists are always trying to get a balanced story with both sides, but for science issues that can distort the scientifically accepted viewpoint. For example, if every story on evolution (for example the recent story of Ardipithecus) had a "balance" and included the viewpoint of a creationist that would mislead the public.

6) Politicians setting policies base their views on the short-term direction the public polls/winds are blowing when setting policy so the policies do not address the true issues.

So any suggestions as to how more information could be communicated to the public so proper policy can be examined?

[Patrick Kirby]

Re: Climate Change Poll - not chess related

Paul, I don't really disagree with any of your points, and I think maybe I misunderstood the purpose of your poll.

Personally, I think the only rational viewpoint is to accept the opinion of the vast majority of scientists that man-made climate change is really happening. And I don't accept the necessity of providing a "balanced" point of view of issues if the other side of the argument clearly lacks any support among knowledgeable people. So for example, if a journalist wrote an article on the King's Gambit, there would be no real need to provide a counterpoint to the opinion of Kasparov or Fischer let's say.

The Ottawa Citizen has a columnist named David Warren who often publishes columns claiming that climate change is not happening. I think it is irresponsible of the Citizen to publish these columns because Mr. Warren is not a scientist and is not qualified to make judgments on this particular issue - he may have his opinion, but his opinion means nothing and has no place in the public debate on this subject.

As for the setting of public policy, that is a separate issue. The only politician I know who took a real long-term view on environmental issues was Stephane Dion, and we all remember how that story ended.

[Paul Beckwith]

Re: Climate Change Poll - not chess related

I agree with you that David Warren has no balance at all in his columns, only ideological nonsense. I have complained to the Citizen on more than one occasion about his articles. A much more interesting columnist in the Ottawa paper is Dan Gardner, who wrote the informative book "Risk: The science and politics of fear".

I think that Stephane Dion got hammered because he was not a good leader, and did not defend himself or his views from personal attacks by the Conservatives. I do not think that it was his environmental views, persay, that brought him down.

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: Climate Change Poll - not chess related

Hi Paul

I voted for global climate being stable, based more on a hunch than certainty - and who feels honestly certain about it that is not deluding themselves? My guess (like Gary Ruben, and my own father) is that we are right between Ice Ages, at a point where global temperatures are at their highest, which would be normal for between Ice Ages. I would consider this as part of stability (as opposed to global climate permanently reaching a warmer level). Ocean temperatures being at such a high for a century coincides with this.

I haven't heard that sea levels in any particular place have risen yet, however, which is supposed to be part and parcel of global warming. If you listen much to Lowell Green of Ottawa AM radio, whom you refered to in another thread (and who mentions that sea levels seem to be static), he notes yes, ice in the Arctic has been at its most alarming levels in recent years BUT it has actually begun to improve recently as well, as though the worst might be over.

[Felix Dumont]

Re : Re: Climate Change Poll - not chess related

Hi Paul
My guess (like Gary Ruben, and my own father) is that we are right between Ice Ages, at a point where global temperatures are at their highest, which would be normal for between Ice Ages.

Even between Ice Ages, the global temperature never has been as high as it is now and it continues to increase...

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: Climate Change Poll - not chess related

It would be interesting to see a temperature graph going back to previous Ice Ages. I was not aware of such records being kept.

[Felix Dumont]

Re : Climate Change Poll - not chess related

http://www.megavideo.com/?v=EMBQTR8O

Here's the results of a study (at 19:45 min.) in the video. Feel free to watch the whole movie if you never watched it, it is very interesting.