Climate Change Interview with Dr. Pieter Tans
Pieter Tans’ interview – Part 1
Pieter Tans’ interview – Part 2
I was honored to interview Dr. Pieter Tans, Chief Scientist at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Dr. Tans is considered to be one of the leading and most influential climate scientists in the world.
I asked Dr. Tans his opinion of Steve Chu’s (Secretary of Energy) statement to the media that California is in danger of losing its agriculture due to climate change. Dr. Tans explained that this is a real concern due to the lack of snowfall to provide water for the plants. We discussed that building new damns may be a partial solution to capture the water that runs off from rainfall.
We also discussed the story that Dr. Tans was under political pressure to change his scientific findings. We discussed how that government funding of science tends to compromise the integrity of science. The bureaucrats of these governmental departments are always fearful that they will lose funding. Hence, the managers put pressure on the scientists to produce specific results. Dr. Tans referred to this as a “climate of fear”.
Dr. Tans also stated that he feels we are in big trouble unless we discover a technical solution to lower the CO2 level. Dr. Tans admitted that we are actually in a low period of CO2 and that the CO2 level was much higher in the past. The problem is that the CO2 level has recently dramatically increased. The question is if we will be able to adapt to the climate change.
Pieter Tans’ interview – Part 2
I was honored to interview Dr. Pieter Tans, Chief Scientist at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Dr. Tans is considered to be one of the leading and most influential climate scientists in the world.
I asked Dr. Tans his opinion of Steve Chu’s (Secretary of Energy) statement to the media that California is in danger of losing its agriculture due to climate change. Dr. Tans explained that this is a real concern due to the lack of snowfall to provide water for the plants. We discussed that building new damns may be a partial solution to capture the water that runs off from rainfall.
We also discussed the story that Dr. Tans was under political pressure to change his scientific findings. We discussed how that government funding of science tends to compromise the integrity of science. The bureaucrats of these governmental departments are always fearful that they will lose funding. Hence, the managers put pressure on the scientists to produce specific results. Dr. Tans referred to this as a “climate of fear”.
Dr. Tans also stated that he feels we are in big trouble unless we discover a technical solution to lower the CO2 level. Dr. Tans admitted that we are actually in a low period of CO2 and that the CO2 level was much higher in the past. The problem is that the CO2 level has recently dramatically increased. The question is if we will be able to adapt to the climate change.
In California, there's a little fish called the smelt, and the water that was being sent from the San Joaquin was cut in half to help 'save' the fish. Never mind filters or some such fix. The judge ordered that the water would be cut off - and is a big part of the problem here with water supplies.
ReplyDeleteA congressman from CA has a bill that would seek to loosen such rules during drought. I have the link for you. The point being that the left is deeply involved, and I believe is making the problem worse, faster, in order to keep the idea of 'climate change' or 'global warming' alive. It makes me furious.
http://www.cbs47.tv/news/local/story/Radanovich-s-Bill-Aims-to-Get-Water-Flowing/fT0PPZuah0WWtqP1DxjRfw.cspx
It is interesting that Dr. Tans suggested that it might be necessary to build more dams. I am sure the Left is opposed to that.
ReplyDeleteI am not sure if I agree with man made climate change. But I think Dr. Tans is genuine.
Me too, in that Dr. Tans was honest, genuine, and that he seemed impartial too! He gives credibility to the global warming argument because he certainly didn't seem to be interested in politically motivated science...
ReplyDeletestay tuned I guess...