CFE agenda 091117 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Gii- applhlic II Its II4:n�i Y:nauu° IIn- mg1iu"na�ilic:ni in Saun"nvin -n n•rs Am GeU„tliu"ng III�IIIc:n�U~tein,� Su.uir nir nee- ter nlCperacau.ures have ;nIh ifted toward r nu -e exar�eir ne heat over- all e past seveI ul decades, 01, 61 > M The scientists told us that the Arctic would warm especially fast. They told us to expect heavier „a;aa, aa;sl,aa;a a;aas, They told us . e.. al:a<ar�aves.,, would soar. They told us that the oceans would rise. All of those things have come to pass. Considering this most basic test of a scientific theory, the test of prediction, climate science has established its validity. That does not mean it is perfect, nor that every single prediction is correct. While climate scientists have forecast the long -term rise of global temperatures pretty accurately, they have not been as good — yet — about predicting the short -term jitters. ADVER71 ISFMFNI In other fields, we do not demand absolute certainty from our scientists, because that is an impossible standard. When you let doctors inject vaccines into your children, you are responding to a prediction — based on evidence, of course — about how their bodies will react. Yet the vaccines do pose some risks, and a small proportion of children suffer .s ide. effects. .......................................... Gii- applhlic II 9S.- IlDegii- Days: III�IIIc:n w IE.i:us�h— n"n'n III�111eat C:naulld Sp ii -ead Acii °c:ncsus the VWc.nn °Ild IExareir ndy Ihot days are exlCpec:,a<.d to Ile rynuuc:lh r nor-e pre qu.ueint 'ii n all e c: ebryding decades, Il:roteinUa Hya cUsr�u.up:r�bi ng our everyday I'iVes, w; When your aging mother is found to have cancer, the recommended treatment will be rooted in a statistical model of how tumors respond to the available medicines. Your family is likely to follow that advice, even though you know the drugs are imperfect and may not save her. We trust scientific expertise on many issues; it is, after all, the best advice we can get. Yet on .cIi maata ° „_chaarioe, we have largely ignored the scientists' work. While it is true that we have started to spend money to clean up our emissions, the global response is in no way commensurate with the risks outlined by the experts. Why? Sheer inertia is one of many reasons. The changes we need to make are hard, and they demand large - scale, collective action: to rebuild our energy system, to save our forests, to change our cars, to create radically better buildings.