Experts respond to the lastest IPCC report, with some very sensible words from Mike Hulme (Kings College London):
“…it is good and proper to ask critical questions about the state of climate knowledge. Science never produces finished products, only provisional ones. But being sceptical about climate science does not automatically entitle one to be negative about climate policies—the question is what sorts of climate policies are most appropriate—effective and plausible—given what we know today. The problems of energy supply, weather risks and poor air quality all need to be tackled in some way even if the climate sensitivity was only 1.5C. This latest assessment of climate science from the IPCC threatens to distract from resolving the core issue of climate change – the political challenge of finding policy interventions that are effective and plausible. The difficulties in implementing policies that reduce the dangers of a changing climate don’t result from a deficiency of scientific knowledge. Raising the confidence that humans are a major influence on climate from ‘very likely’ to ‘extremely likely’ doesn’t change the politics of climate change. The difficulties arise because of different interests, values and attitudes to risk. These can only be worked through using political strategies that are less constrained by the need to reach global agreements.
We need a more pragmatic politics of climate change, not more weighty science about climate change.”
Some useful links for academics:
Though I disagree with number 6, ‘be wary of co-supervisors’ – as some one who has had more than their fair share of supervisors (due to staff leaving for other institutions), one of the things I have learnt is that the more people you can usefully discuss your work with in a constructive way the better. Everyone is different, and so it’s good to have good working relations with more than one person to discuss your work with – whether they are a formal supervisor or not.
‘We are rarely in the position of simply ‘writing down what we think’. Instead, we are putting words together in a way that then shapes meaning’.