Exhibit 9. 1 in the textbook discusses the main sources for the scientific controversies of climate change. What do you make of those scientists who are highly skeptical about the consensus positions on scientific evidence for the causes and consequences of global warming? Do you see some merit in their skepticism? Explain.

Data from Exhibit 9.1

Transcribed Image Text:

Exhibit 9.1 The origins of scientific controversies of climate change 25000 There are many global warming critics. They range from those who would like to argue that the hype on global warming is nothing but political propaganda orchestrated for the purpose of influencing energy policies, to those who are simply skeptical about the "consensus" positions on scientific evidence for the causes and consequences of global warming. This exhibit presents the essence of these skeptics' views by focusing on those expressed by three highly distinguished scientists: Professors Fred Singer (a physicist), Richard Lindzen (a climatologist), and Freeman Dyson (a physicist). None of these three scientists can be accused of being climate-change deniers. They all agree with the conventional wisdom that the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide has been rising steadily. Furthermore, these three scientists do not dispute the slight increase in the average temperature of the earth that has occurred over the past two centuries or so. Prof Lindzen, one of the world's renowned climatologists, has done several collaborative works with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Where these three scientists appear to diverge from the conventional wisdom on climate change can be identified in the following three ways: (1) the extent to which human activities have contributed to the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide; (2) the extent to which changes in average global temperature have been associated withi the rising atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide; and (3) the way in which the assessment and projection of ecological and environmental damage have been done, based on large climate-change modeling that relies on positive feedback mechanisms.