Public vs. Science: Evolution and Climate

So, Gmail informs me that there have been 42 posts and comments since the last time I read anything over here ... even though I'm still not caught up, I felt compelled to pass on this fascinating study which not only compares what the public thinks about evolution and global warming with what scientists think, but it also shows the difference between what the public thinks that scientists think and what they actually do think.

Planet, Public Information in Peril

I am in the early stages of trying to restart the green initiative in my office. That the public, even the intelligent and well-educated, is poorly informed on global warming is not surprising to me. Friday night, however, I found myself at a trivia event organized by one of my coworkers and attended by many. When fewer than one-in-five was able to identify "The three Rs of recycling" (reduce, reuse, recycle) I realized the problem was much more grave than I thought.

I'm going to put together a presentation, and I know I'll be facing an audience that is, generally, skeptical. If you have information that might be helpful, I'd love to have it. I'm thinking of things like Wikipedia saying that there is no longer any scientific body that disputes global warming (although I find their citation of this statement insufficient) or like a report I saw that said something along the lines of "The 2007 IPCC report's claims were so extreme they were considered ignorable; however, all data thus far on the effects of global warming has exceeded the report's projections." Basically - evidence that might not be the most persuasive, but at the very least is nearly indisputable.

I put this post together in many pieces so it might be incoherent but should still be understandable. I know this is a chore but any help you can give is appreciated, and keep in mind that I'll have an audience of about 50, at most 10 of whom go about their lives any differently than they would were global warming not an issue, so in terms of impact, your efforts might be getting more bang for their buck than almost anything else you do.

Oh, and I forgot to mention - the impetus for this post coming right now was this article, which claims that even under best case scenarios, we're down to a coin flip at saving the planet.

Quick Heads Up

Maybe you saw it maybe you didn't. I don't know how much of an effect this will have, but the new EU president is Czech, and when it comes to global warming, he and Sarah Palin have a lot in common.

Darcy Burner for Congress, indeed

Darcy Burner (D) is trying to unseat two-term Congressman Dave Reichert in what is possibly the closest House race of the year. So there I am on TerraPass's website looking into getting my office to buy carbon offsets, and right there on their list of partners is "Darcy Burner for Congress," which has apparently offset 19 metric tons of carbon. Good job, Darcy!

Interesting side-effect of adaptation

New Scientist published a blurb that discusses the impact on climate of placing reflective greenhouses in arid parts of Spain. Obviously not the be-all, end-all of global warming, but a nice surprise.