Dr. Jim White is Director of the Institute for Arctic and Alpine Research, University of Colorado.
Dr White chaired the production of a 2013 National Academy of Science report on Abrupt climate change.
His entire talk is here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=shBUcF…
Dr. White figured prominently in my video on Abrupt Climate Change, below.
Reblogged this on Global Climate Change .
This post ties in with the other one on scientists being too “conservative”.
It is really starting to annoy me that scientists are so wrapped up in “data” and “proof” that they fail to use that one characteristic of the human brain that is hard to get data or proof about but DOES exist.
I speak of intuition and the mechanisms whereby humans make subconscious connections and have “gut feelings” about things. I have spoken often about the “crap detectors” that policemen, judges, lawyers, and educators develop. They are real in the sense that when they “vibrate”, they are making those logical connections that lead to revealed truths. I would have been eaten alive on the job if I didn’t have good ones
We go on this post from the “already” of Arctic sea ice decline to the “possible” collapse of WAIS to the “possible but THOUGHT to be UNLIKELY this century” of AMOC shutdown and massive methane release. We say this because we have DATA and MODELS and we are CONSERVATIVE scientists who don’t want to “overstate” AGW. (Time out—those sounds you hear are gnashing of teeth and beating of head against wall).
What ever happened to plain old common sense? When all the climate change news is bad, why do we dither around so, especially when we are not very good at seeing the future and haven’t learned all that much from the past? “Unlikely this century”? JFC!!! How about in 2101? How about EVER? We have stared a grand experiment and have NO idea how it’s going to turn out (except for those of us who still have some common sense and know it won’t end well). And ABRUPT? As in “happening very fast”? I am reminded of the tipping point analogy of sliding a book incrementally over the edge of a table—-once the center of gravity of the book passes the edge of the table, the book flips and hits the floor with a bang.
We are sliding the climate book ever more over the edge, and we had better recognize that looking at things so cautiously with our limited ability to see the future is a bad bet. (Abrupt is also a term that can describe the ending of a life when a bullet arrives between the eyes).
I’m inclined to trust what he says about methane, as well as the scientists over at Real Climate. After all, they’re the ones who live and breathe this stuff. And it’s not necessary to be on the extreme alarm side of the spectrum on every issue surrounding climate change, to be very alarmed about it in general. It’s not like, if you take a nuanced approach to it, you’re suddenly a denier.
This is what scientists do. They speak about what they know, they talk about probabilities. That’s good practice. They get pummeled by the other side for speaking in probabilities too. Give them a break and just let them be scientists.
I’m sorry that you have so badly missed my point. Perhaps reading my comment a few more times will make it clearer to you.