Armchair scientists and global warming

There is a fascinating commentary in the Denver Post online by David Harsanyi called "Chill Out Over Global Warming". Harsanyi unlike most politically oriented people admits up front that he is no scientific expert:

Admittedly, I possess virtually no expertise in science. That puts me in exactly the same position as most dogmatic environmentalists who want to craft public policy around global warming fears.

He then sites two experts to point out the shortcomings of public discussions on the issue. Bill Gray of Colorado State University is the world's leading expert on hurricanes. Here are his comments about Bill Gray's views:

The only inconvenient truth about global warming, contends Colorado State University's Bill Gray, is that a genuine debate has never actually taken place. Hundreds of scientists, many of them prominent in the field, agree.

Gray is perhaps the world's foremost hurricane expert. His Tropical Storm Forecast sets the standard. Yet, his criticism of the global warming "hoax" makes him an outcast.

"They've been brainwashing us for 20 years," Gray says. "Starting with the nuclear winter and now with the global warming. This scare will also run its course. In 15-20 years, we'll look back and see what a hoax this was."

He also sites another respected climatologist: Roger Pielke, Sr. Here are Harsanyi's comments on Pielke:

Pielke contends there isn't enough intellectual diversity in the debate. He claims a few vocal individuals are quoted "over and over" again, when in fact there are a variety of opinions.

I ask him: How do we fix the public perception that the debate is over?

"Quite frankly," says Pielke, who runs the Climate Science Weblog (climatesci.atmos.colostate.edu), "I think the media is in the ideal position to do that. If the media honestly presented the views out there, which they rarely do, things would change. There aren't just two sides here. There are a range of opinions on this issue. A lot of scientists out there that are very capable of presenting other views are not being heard."

So here are two leading experts in the field that point out that this subject has been under-debated. Without proper debate why are we plunging headlong to set public policy that will cost more money than the world's economies can support. Don't get me wrong, I am all for a good environment. We have had a poor track record around the world. However, we cannot completely fix it overnight. Also, I am for a sound environment so we can be assured of clean air and clean water; not to save the planet from something which likely does not exist.

Yes, the planet has experienced some warming. However, there is not indisputable evidence that this problem is man-made. Nor is there conclusive evidence that the earth will get drastically warmer in the future.

In the rest of the article Harsanyi talks about things like Al Gore's movie. So the underlying message is that we shy away from allowing our scientists free debate without fear of losing their jobs, their funding and their reputation. Instead, we get propaganda as a poor substitute.