Climate Science Red Team

by John McClaughry

Some years ago a national administration – possibly Reagan’s — created an independent Red Team to attack the orthodox national security policy prescriptions of its own officials. This excellent idea gave top policymakers the chance to listen to a heated debate among experts.

Last week a distinguished physicist, and former Obama undersecretary of energy for science, Dr. Steven Koonin, recommended just such a Red Team to sharpen the debate over climate change.

Writes Koonin: “The public is largely unaware of the intense debates within climate science. At a recent national laboratory meeting, I observed more than 100 active government and university researchers challenge one another as they strove to separate human impacts from the climate’s natural variability. At issue were not nuances but fundamental aspects of our understanding, such as the apparent—and unexpected—slowing of global sea-level rise over the past two decades.”

“We scientists must better portray not only our certainties but also our uncertainties, and even things we may never know. Not doing so is an advisory malpractice that usurps society’s right to make choices fully informed by risk, economics and values. Moving from oracular consensus statements to an open adversarial process would shine much-needed light on the scientific debates.”

“Congress or the executive branch should convene a climate science Red/Blue exercise as a step toward resolving, or at least illuminating, differing perceptions of climate science.”

It’s too bad the climate warriors will absolutely reject Dr. Koonin’s valuable recommendation. They don’t dare risk anything that would undercut their propaganda campaign to impose on us their green theology, and its foolish and expensive policy prescriptions.

John McClaughry is vice president of the Ethan Allen Institute.

{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }

j paul Giuliani April 28, 2017 at 11:48 pm

But, Bill McKibbon will be out of a job if a rational dialogue is initiated.

Reply

David Usher April 29, 2017 at 6:06 pm

A great idea!

I propose these basic questions for starters: what is the optimum average world temperature we intend/desire to reach; what will it cost to do so; how many years will be required?

If the “science is settled,” the answers to these questions should be available. Otherwise, we are being persuaded to act with no goal or defined outcome.

Reply

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post:

About Us

The Ethan Allen Institute is Vermont’s free-market public policy research and education organization. Founded in 1993, we are one of fifty-plus similar but independent state-level, public policy organizations around the country which exchange ideas and information through the State Policy Network.
Read more...

Latest News

Pandemic Push Back: Vermonters Should Speak Up Now Before It’s Too Late

May 29, 2020 By Aimee Stephenson, Ph.D. As Vermont begins to re-open, I am hopeful to see more of my friends beginning to relax. Fear is a funny...

VT Democrats Are Conspiring with VPIRG to pull off a massive “Ballot Harvesting” operation

May 28, 2020 by Rob Roper The three biggest advocates of an all-mail-in ballot election are Democrat Secretary of State Jim Condos, Democratic legislators, and Vermont Public Interest...

GWSA Enforcement

May 26, 2020 by John McClaughry Over the past year I’ve spent a lot of time denouncing what I call the worst democracy-shredding bill in Vermont history. It’s...

Get Ready for the “Global Warming Shut-Down Act”

May 22, 2020 by Rob Roper As Vermonters struggle to figure out how to re-open our economy in the wake of the COVID-19 shutdown, the Senate Committee on...

Roll Call! Senate Votes to Expand Scope of Energy Tax and Subsidize Program (28-2), 2020

S.337- AN ACT RELATING TO ENERGY EFFICIENCY ENTITIES AND PROGRAMS TO REDUCE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS IN THE THERMAL ENERGY AND TRANSPORTATION SECTORS PASSED in the State Senateon May...

Video