Friday’s dust

By Gareth Renowden 20/08/2010

The weekend’s coming, and so I’m clearing out some of the stuff that’s cluttering up my web browser. NIWA recently posted an excellent explanation of the carbon/greenhouse gas relationship in pastoral agriculture, taken from the July issue of their magazine, Water & Atmosphere: Why isn’t grass in, methane out, carbon neutral? Click on the image above to see the carbon flows in a typical paddock. The article’s a good overview of why agricultural methane’s important, worth a read.

Lord Nick Stern is giving this year’s Sir Douglas Robb Lectures at the University of Auckland (Sept 8 – 10, with live link to Wellington), on Managing the risks of climate change, overcoming world poverty and creating a new era of growth and prosperity: The challenges for global collaboration and rationality. Over three nights he’ll be considering how we can reconcile dealing with climate change while promoting development where its needed, the sorts of policies required, and the global context for action — developing themes from his book A Blueprint for a Safer Planet. I hope Key and co are paying attention…

The Australian Academy of Sciences has released The Science of Climate Change: Questions and Answers (web, pdf) this week, an attempt to:

… address confusion created by contradictory information in the public domain. It sets out to explain the current situation in climate science, including where there is consensus in the scientific community and where uncertainties exist.

It’s an excellent introduction for anyone new to the subject, and includes useful boxes dealing with standard sceptic questions (it’s the sun, cooling since 1998, etc & etc).

Finally, a snip from a screenshot from the climate deniers answer to John Cook’s excellent Skeptical Science iPhone app. The great and the good of scepticism (Monckton, Watts, Carter and the usual suspects) clubbed together to create a digital catechism of climate denial. Under “key climate theories” it provides a screenful of mutual contradictory arguments (as John Cook pointed out in the Guardian recently), but what made me laugh was this, snipped from their disclaimer page:


If only all sceptic nonsense came with such a helpful disclaimer… and our policy makers read the small print. ;-)