4 ms·
Unless the World Bank has climatologists on staff doing original research, this boils down to "we found a paper that we're basing our planning on". It's as rel
by tjic 14y ago
Unless the World Bank has climatologists on staff doing original research, this boils down to "we found a paper that we're basing our planning on". It's as relevant and interesting as "Boston Symphony envisions a world with quantum cryptography". Absent researchers on staff who can add something new or display some expertise in choosing to rebroadcast the news or not, I really don't care what the Boston Symphony's opinion is.
- gregsq 14y agoWell sustainable economic development is part of the World Banks remit. The report is a summary of other sources. The qualification required for summary differs from that of the originating science. As it forms the basis of donor contributions and allocation, it would seem to have some interest from that point of view.
- scarmig 14y agoMany posters even here, however, seem to be unaware of climate cahnge. Providing a summary of current scientific results and a discussion of how it applies to your area of specialty is a valuable goal.
- tjic 14y ago> Many posters even here, however, seem to be unaware of climate cahnge. Based on what? I grant you that many posters - even here - think that the science is uncertain or that the economics of trying to prevent it as opposed to deal with it are other than the press suggests. ...but I find it utterly wrong to say that people are not aware of the topic.
- scarmig 14y agoWell, thinking that the science is uncertain or split 50/50 or even cuts against climate change is a pretty sure sign that they aren't aware of the science. It's akin to someone saying they don't like GMO foods because they're radioactive. They well know about the concepts of radioactivity and genetics, but that doesn't mean that they know the science. Even if it's a learned and purposeful disregard for scientific evidence, its still fair to say they're not well-acquainted with it.
- skylan_q 14y agoThe logic is as follows: 1. Believe that human-caused increases in CO2 cause catastrophic climate change. 2. Therefore, anyone who doesn't agree doesn't know about climate change.
- scarmig 14y ago1) No one in this thread has mentioned even anything approaching "catastrophic climate change"--you're attributing a position to others that they, especially me, do not hold. It's a matter of mitigation, prevention, and adaption, and the correct balance of those. 2) Having read a bunch of blog posts does not mean knowing about climate change. Herbal supplement and alternative medicine believers also have a vibrant community of email newsletters and advertorial magazines.