The Moderate Voice encourages weblogs to do original interviews so this great infosource can live up to its potential. And — once again — there is a GREAT one via The Talking Dog. This time TTD has shifted his focus from terrorism related issues to global warming. And, just as in his other ones, he peppers his interview subject with highly specific questions that show he has done his homework.
There’s a wealth of new info and concepts in this interview. So as we’ve done in the past, we’ll give you his introduction and tiny taste of it:
Adam Stein is the co-founder and vice president of marketing of TerraPass, described on its own web site as a means for concerned people to combat global warming. On February 9, 2007, I interviewed Mr. Stein by telephone. What follows are my interview notes, as corrected by Mr. Stein.
Here’s one part of a fascinating exchange in an interview that touches on a variety of subjects, such as the impact of Al Gore’s hit global-warming documentary and the use of ethanol:
The Talking Dog: You recently wrote of “the changing debate” (in particular, also the subject of a recent New York Times article) of a growing “middle ground view” on climate change– that it is a serious problem and must quickly be remedied, but that “extremism” and “alarmism” are somehow counterproductive; this, indeed, is somewhat of a positive shift, because, Senator James Inhofe aside, the side paid by oil and coal companies to deny the existence of global warming or climate change is now forced to be less outright dismissive of it… A couple of questions emerge from this… For one, how do we (all people, of course, but we’ll start with, for example, so-called “progressive” bloggers) address so-called “climate skeptics”?
Adam Stein: Well, you address a climate change skeptic politely and respectfully with solid arguments based in science and fact. We have to realize that most Americans just don’t know about climate change. Many people are still learning about this for the first time. This can be frustrating, but itâ€™s a long-term problem, and a certain amount of patience is necessary.
When encountering a diehard skeptic, one need not convince them — you can’t necessarily. But in any debate, there are always people on the sidelines listening in, and these are the people that your arguments should be aimed at. We need to convince less partisan onlookers with the reasonableness and soundness of our position. Itâ€™s a hard task, though. The science is complex, and even those of us who understand the scope of the problem canâ€™t always be up to date on the latest climate research.
But a key point is that there is no scientific debate — there is not a single peer reviewed scientific journal article that disputes the reality of man-made climate change at this point. Indeed, the scientific climate change does something unique– they get together every 5 years and issue a report that summarizes the latest scientific evidence on climate change. This is the IPCC report that has just come out, demonstrating that there is a greater than 90% chance that climate change is not only real, but caused by man-made emissions. The scientists have made up their minds; the vast body of data is now indisputable. We now have the science– CO2 records go back 600,000 years, and there is now no alternative explanation– in short, the “debate” is over. The only question is just how long it takes for most people to understand, and act on this.
Make SURE you read the entire post.