Climate Change: Why I Believe

Last night, I involved myself in a Facebook conversation about climate change with an old friend, someone I haven’t seen in over 20 years. Neither one of us is a scientist, but he is a climate change denier and I am not. Let’s call him Don. I can’t say I’m particularly surprised by Don’s opinion, yet it reminded me of all the reasons that I believe climate change is real and is a threat to our world.

As a non-scientist, I have to believe that most scientists know what they’re doing, and that the results of their research is credible. I don’t have the scientific knowhow or wherewithal to challenge them. Most people don’t. We need to rely on the work of experts and trust that their findings are correct.

The most extensive investigation so far was conducted in 2013,  and concluded that 97% of published climate science papers believe that man-made climate change, or Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW), is real.

Among abstracts expressing a position on AGW, 97.1% endorsed the consensus position that humans are causing global warming.

 - 2013 Report

Prior to this, the most often quoted study of the science of climate change was a 2010 analysis published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. The result was the same. Both of these analyses were themselves conducted using scientific methodology.

Here, we use an extensive dataset of 1,372 climate researchers and their publication and citation data to show that (i) 97–98% of the climate researchers most actively publishing in the field surveyed here support the tenets of ACC outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and (ii) the relative climate expertise and scientific prominence of the researchers unconvinced of ACC are substantially below that of the convinced researchers. - PNAS Report

A key argument from climate change deniers is that science is fact, not consensus, and therefore, the 97% consensus is meaningless. This argument makes me dizzy. The 97% consensus is a consensus of fact. Take any one of the 4000-odd papers reviewed in the 2013 study and they will give you basically the same set of facts - scientific findings - about the existence of climate change: that AGW is real, caused by human action on the environment, and that it is a continuing threat. These are the facts derived from science.

Why does this consensus convince me that the science is real? Applying the theory of Occam’s Razor to climate science suggests that the worldwide hoax/conspiracy theorists are wrong. The number of assumptions, leaps of faith and the masses of people who’d need to participate in such a hoax make it all but impossible.

Ever tried to keep a secret?

The 2013 study started with approximately 12,000 papers spanning 20 years of research, and using the criteria of eliminating those which did not take a position for or against climate change, there were around 4,000 papers analysed, with well in excess of 1,000 authors.

Ever tried to get a thousand people to keep a secret? Ever tried to get a thousand people, from diverse backgrounds, languages and agendas to agree on something contentious, and then keep it secret?

Why would they? What’s in it for them? What would be their motivation?

Motivation, according to author Daniel Pink, is governed not be the old ‘carrot and stick’ aphorism, but by three intrinsic human factors: autonomy, mastery and purpose. Autonomy is the ability to make rational, informed decisions without compulsion or coercion. Mastery is skill, the ability to carry out tasks competently and with confidence. Purpose is the reason, understanding and accepting why you are doing what you’re doing.

Even if the carrot and stick approach was accepted as the only driver, what carrot could be accepted by this particular group of scientists? It’s not financial reward, as the majority of climate scientists publishing in scientific journals work in government or academic research rather than for big business. Research scientists and academics are not well paid in comparison to their corporate counterparts. The downside is that in return for the big salaries. corporate scientists are often expected to produce results which support the business that pays them. So money is not a motivator, and may in some cases be a demotivator.

Therefore, it’s probably fair to say that research and academic scientists have chosen autonomy. Their science is for its own sake – to learn, to discover, to contribute. Mastery is also a given, as these scientists who are having their work assessed and accepted for publication in scientific journals are not mugs. They are highly qualified experts in their fields.

That leaves us with purpose as the pivot point for the consensus versus conspiracy debate. For what reason would a thousand or so learned scientists, their peers and publishers claim that the planet is in danger from climate change if, in fact, it isn’t?

Hoax Time

This is where the theme music from The Twilight Zone cuts in, and we stray from reality.

Climate change deniers often believe that the massive global warming “conspiracy” is tied to Agenda 21, a United Nations initiative from 1992 which promotes sustainable development on a global scale. They believe Agenda 21 is tied to the drive for a New World Order, where a single fascist-socialist government rules the world for the good of all creatures great and small, but to the terminal detriment of capitalism and free will. 

The structure of Agenda 21 is such that initiatives are developed at local government level, rather than being a federal government mandate. In fact, Agenda 21 is non-binding. There has even been some pushback against against Agenda 21, particularly in the US, where Republicans and Tea Partiers actively campaign against it.

Agenda 21 was adopted by the United Nations in 1992, when 178 governments voted in favour of the programme. It has been amended and sanctioned twice since then. So now, instead of having a thousand or so scientists and their communities in on the story, we have most of the governments of world signing on too…and when we say ‘governments’, we should include the leaders, plus the individuals from each of 180 or so nations who would understand the "real" purpose of Agenda 21 and be tasked with implementing it. In the 22 years since Agenda 21 became a reality, most countries have changed governments multiple times. Conservatively speaking – and this is just a guess - we now have 200,000+ people in on the conspiracy.

Every tried to get 200,000+ people to keep a secret?

What possibly benefit would there be for hundreds of thousands of people from all over the world, male and female, Christian, Muslim, Hindi, Jewish, atheist and others, and from everywhere along the political spectrum, to engage with the whole Climate Change/Agenda 21/New World Order palaver, and agree to promote a scientific untruth to support a socialist one world government?

I can’t wrap my mind around a conspiracy of that scale. Even if it’s only the scientific community involved in the Big Lie, and those scientists have convinced the leaders of impending global catastrophe, I find it virtually impossible to believe. If it's the other way around, I can't accept that the Agenda 21 signatories have convinced the majority of climate scientists to fall into line and lie. 

There is simply no credible motivation for the vast majority of the world’s climate scientists to undermine their life’s work by manipulating data, falsifying results and fabricating conclusions, and lying about it.

People aren’t that gullible…are they?