Re: [asa] Creation Care

* To my surprise, for example, the global warming issue is quite clear with
no controversy in the community of scientific expertise in the field. I
found that global warming is significant and is primarily due to
anthropogenic sources.*

Based on what I've read and also not being an expert by any stretch, I'm
inclined to agree that warming is a real problem with anthropegenic
sources. I don't know how you can say, however, that the issue is "quite
clear with no controversy in the community of scientific expertise in the
field." What I've seen suggests the question is clear as mud, particularly
when it comes to the *extent* of human causation and the projected rate,
trends and effects of warming, and further that *every* position in the
scientific community is significantly affected by politics. Why are you
saying it's so easy to brush off every criticism?

On 1/18/07, Randy Isaac <randyisaac@adelphia.net> wrote:
>
> It's good to be back after a few weeks away and to find a continuing
> active dialog.
>
> I'd like to share my own personal journey into environmental issues over
> the past year or so. This isn't my field of expertise so I hadn't studied it
> or formed any opinion on the issues such as global warming. The dialog on
> this list and other places was interesting but I had no vested interest or
> strong opinion either way.
>
> But stewardship of God's creation is the fourth element of ASA's statement
> of faith and finally I had the opportunity and motivation about six months
> ago to learn more about this field. I read a number of articles in the
> scientific literature and had the privilege of meeting personally and
> talking with several experts. I also read as much of the criticism as I
> could.
>
> The experts I was able to meet and talk with in person included:
> climatologist Jim Hanson; biologists Jim McCarthy (AAAS president-elect) and
> EO Wilson; botanist Peter Raven; forester Gus Speth; oceanographers Carl
> Safina and Nancy Knowlton; microbiologist Rita Colwell; physicians Eric
> Chivian and Paul Epstein; CDC epidemiologist Howie Frumkin; etc. Their
> publications were most helpful.
>
> The critics that I read included Michael Crichton ("State of Fear" and
> various lectures and articles); Bjorn Lomborg (and the Copenhagen
> Consensus); Cal Beisner; links provided by Janice in this forum, etc.
>
> Obviously, I'm far from being well-versed in the field, let alone an
> expert, but I feel that I understand the basic issues and at least know who
> the experts are and what the critics are saying. Rather than finding lots of
> uncertainty and fuzziness in this field, I found some issues to be clear and
> unambiguous. To my surprise, for example, the global warming issue is quite
> clear with no controversy in the community of scientific expertise in the
> field. I found that global warming is significant and is primarily due to
> anthropogenic sources. Impact of this warming is occurring already--no need
> to wait many decades. It's not too late to take action to reduce those
> causal factors and it does not seem prohibitively expensive or disruptive.
> Furthermore, there are numerous positive feedback loops that could soon be
> triggered that would further accelerate the warming trend. Negative feedback
> loops are more difficult to detect and may exist but don't seem to be in
> play as yet.
>
> There seems to be no question but that our responsibility as stewards of
> God's Creation must include climate change as a major factor of a holistic
> approach.
>
> Randy
>

-- 
David W. Opderbeck
Web:  http://www.davidopderbeck.com
Blog:  http://www.davidopderbeck.com/throughaglass.html
MySpace (Music):  http://www.myspace.com/davidbecke
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.