Borderless thoughts on Politics, Public Affairs, the media and anything else that matters from Conall McDevitt, SDLP MLA for South Belfast
RSS icon Email icon Home icon
  • What to do about Global Warming – by You Tube

    Posted on July 6th, 2009 Conall McDevitt 4 comments

    There is a US High School Science teacher who is taking on the the Global Warming debate on You Tube. He is well worth a watch. Greg Craven, has also written “The Worst Thing That Could Happen” to present coherently the arguments in favour of and against taking action about climate change.

     

    His book is reviewed in this weeks edition of the New Scientist;

    Craven’s ingenious argument was that when it comes to global warming, the facts we fight over don’t actually matter. Far more important is that the experiment is already running. We will see soon enough who is right, but in the meantime, Craven believes we should analyse the situation using the tools of risk management. Here, the answer is indisputable. If we take strong action and global warming turns out to be no big deal, we have needlessly incurred a serious economic cost. If we fail to take strong action and global warming turns out to be catastrophic, we have sacrificed the entire planet and everybody’s future. Clearly, inaction carries the greater risk.

    Such is the core argument that took Craven’s video viral on the web in 2007. Now, 52 videos later, he has used it as the basis for a book, which is essentially a toolkit for thinking about global warming – or rather, for avoiding thinking wrongly about global warming – enlivened by the same everyman charm and humour that made Craven such a popular guide. (Who else would open a section about confirmation bias with an anecdote that begins: “A couple of years ago, as part of a spectacular air-guitar leap off a desk during a triumphant routine for my high school’s lip-synch contest…”)

    Freed from the 10-minute limitation of a YouTube video, Craven now goes far beyond risk management. He also explains how to evaluate the credibility of sources, how to avoid the all-too-human trap of confirmation bias in determining which arguments to trust, and how to think about the nature of science – always tentative, never certain.

    Craven’s schtick is “don’t just trust me, think for yourself”. Or as he puts it: “I’m really just a Joe Schmo science teacher.” His book provides pages where the reader is supposed to jot down his or her own thinking, and has two separate “conclusion” chapters, one for the author’s conclusions, one for the reader’s. The truth, though, is that Craven really is an expert, just of a new breed that didn’t exist before the internet. In the climate debate, I would rather trust Craven than industrial lobbyists or environmental groups, and I doubt I am alone.

    Wondering if Amazon would do a special deal on a bulk order of 108 for our MLAs?

     

    4 responses to “What to do about Global Warming – by You Tube”

    1. The flaw in this logic occurs at the beginning. Craven makes the assumption that GCC or global climate change is caused by humans. AGW Believers blame human activity and the Skeptics blame something else unknown (many blame the Sun). If you alter the cause of global warming from humans to the Sun, this changes the results of the matrix considerably.

      For example, if we take action to mitigate climate change and it turns out to be false, we will spend considerable money and cause global depression and end up with a sad face. If we decide to take no action and it turns out to be false, we end up with no costs and a happy face. Just like in the video. No change here.

      However, if we take action to mitigate climate change and it turns out to be true (but it is caused by the Sun), then we have spent considerable money, caused a global depression, and we still end up frying anyway in the worst case scenario with wars and droughts etc (because we have zero effect on the Sun). If we decide to take no action to mitigate climate change and it turns out to be true (but it is caused by the Sun), then we still fry anyway in the worst case scenario and end up with another sad face.

      So with the view that climate change is not caused by humans (Sun perhaps), we end up with 3 sad faces and only one happy face. The only happy face resides in the “Take no Action” column and in the “False” row.

      There are other flaws as well. I’m mystified by why this video is garnering so much attention; it is full of flawed assumptions.

    2. Ken>>You’re not paying attention to the video. “True” meant humans are causing global climate change, and “False” meant humans cannot cause global climate change, so your argument concerning the only example you give of flawed logic is actually completely baseless.

      And if you still prefer a 3×2 grid (for the sake of clouding the issue, I assume), you still have to consider the likelihood of each row happening. You know, since practically every qualified professional agrees that humans are causing global climate change.

      But really, why do you only want a 3×2 grid? Why not add a row for every possible cause for climate change? Perhaps aerosols, CO2, methane gas, the sun, cosmic rays, aliens, Chuck Norris, etc. should all be given their own row? Then we’ll really see how silly this guy looks, with his 2×2 grid!

    3. the effect of Global Warming these days is even worst. i think every government should pass stricter laws on Carbon Emissions. we should also concentrate more on renewable energy sources and avoid fossil fuels.

    4. - We should be more concerned about Global Warming and Climate Change because Typhoons are getting much stronger and there are greater incidence of Flooding. take for example the recent Typhoon Ketsana which devastated some countries in South East Asia.

    Leave a reply