Andrew Revkin, NY Times: A Closer Look at Moderating Views of Climate Sensitivity

For the record, I am interested and have various queries out on how “consensus” is determined in the climate panel’s writing process (something that’s been explored here before).

And, once again, don’t get me wrong. Even with almost no chance of the high end of climate sensitivity estimates being right, the odds of substantial, prolonged and disruptive climate change (and changes in ocean chemistry) are still plenty high enough to justify a sustained push toward an energy menu that works for the long haul.

And given the inherent wide range of people’s feelings of risk, I also don’t expect the evolving science to eliminate debate over how fast to push and how much to spend.

Finally, it’s especially important to keep pushing toward new energy norms given how little humanity has done so far to shift from unfettered fuel burning.

Anyone who’s ever gotten an extension on a tough homework assignment or paper knows how that can work out — simply with a later all-nighter. (See a 2005 discussion of climate policy in the context of homework here.)

The stakes here are far higher than in potentially flunking out of a course.

For these reasons, I can understand why some climate campaigners, writers and scientists don’t want to focus on any science hinting that there might be a bit more time to make this profound energy transition. (There’s also reluctance, I’m sure, because the recent work is trending toward the published low sensitivity findings from a decade ago from climate scientists best known for their relationships with libertarian groups.)

Nonetheless, the science is what the science is.

to make assertions about what it says.....is intellectually dishonest.

i don't understand why you spend most of your time here arguing that climate change is less and agreeing with people who work to deny it here.

often you preface your minimizing posts by saying that you do believe in climate change and doing something about it.

only in support of the idea that it isn't as big of a problem as most believe.

but you rarely post in favor of doing anything about it. the one idea you've agreed with lately, as mitigation for climate change, was putting reflective sheets of plastic into the atmosphere to reflect some sunlight.